Well said, bro. Too many InterNerd mechanics with WikiPhD scrolls embedded in their flash - based HDD lolz. I'm very sorry but I don't understand why many people complaining about lack of power when they use RO95. Power for what? Overtaking? Just downshift the gearbox will give you the thrust for overtaking, either manual or automatic cars. Other than that, personally for me, just gradually raising the speed to 80 - 90kph, then maintain it enough already. AES sudah start mahhh, and I'm still trying to find a way to beat it lol, which is only possible if one drives at the speed limit and lower kekekeh.

Using RON95 for my Proton FLX 15mth old (13k KM). Enging sound is getting louder. Even can hear it from 10 car away these day.
For slow driver just want to move from 1 place to another place, RON95 is good enough.
For driver dont want to spent more time on the road or efficiency drive. RON97.
Quality is different. RON95 need to step harder on fuel paddle which in return will stress you engine which causing the loud engine sound.
Lots of my friend using RON95 but friendly speaking, they prefer RON97 but due to the COST, no choice.

i prefer driving GTR .. but due to cost .. no choice

Same here.. my Lambo just sits there & not being used

we desperately need a local mythbusters team to settle this & other myths once & for all. oh & btw, I put 95, 97, even 92 & gasohol 95 while riding in Thailand, so far the engine still runs great. I do feel the engine was very hot when stopping at the traffic lights though. That time the bike was using 97.

I did a little experiment and filled up with RON95 instead of my usual 98 a while back.

Except for a little hesitation at the start when the ECU tried to control the knock levels, there was no difference after I went for a long WOT run.

As I always say, the ECU will compensate by retarding the timing. If you aren't knocking, you're fine.

settle long time ago already.. dunno how many pages back.

Now all here for TKSS session... i.e Talk Kok Sing Song...

I would love to do this. But it would be quite redundant and expensive.

Most modern cars these days need time for the ECU to adjust to the octane differences. Pump in RON95 and give it a day or 2 to adapt. Go dyno.

Then when almost empty fill with RON97 and drive around until it's almost empty then fill up with RON97 again. Go dyno.

That way the ECU will have plenty of time to adapt and it'll be close to fair depending on the conditions you go for the dyno.

These days people think the ECU adapts instantaneously... it doesn't unless you reset it and force it to relearn there and then or program it (if possible) to utilize the octane differences.

thats what i heard also ... but then again , true or not is up for debate ...

Found this article on the web and we should be thankful that we are not residing in the US.
http://autos.yahoo.com/news/regular-cars-t...e.html?page=all

Actually the ECU will adapt very quick based on the feedback from knock sensor. To simplify, this is how it works: the ECU will take a step forward towards the knocking point in every combustion cycle until the knock sensor detects a knocking then it will take a few steps back in a cycle. After that it will take a step forward again for every cumbustion cycle until knock is detected again. This process will be repeating again and again.

How it adapts to a lower RON: it detects a knock and take a few steps back, then when the knock is still detected, it takes another few steps back until knock is no longer detected. After that it will take a step forward again in every cycle until knock is detected again and it takes a few steps back.

If I am not mistaken, bro Iskandar tested 95 and 97 for his ride plus dyno chart too

no need dyno already can easily feel differences between RON97 and RON95.
btw, if u must pump RON95, try to avoid Shell. its crap

Forget about your GTR. It likes to stick close to a tree.

no problem using ron95 for all my cars.

I wish I have a car which can only accept ron97 or else that car will have problem. But... I can't afford that kind of car...

If I live in Thailand, surely I will use Ron97... Ron95 around rm3.60. Ron97 should be around rm3.80.. 20sen for more performance, no problem. But in Msia... no way i will use 97...

This post has been edited by bzz: Oct 22 2012, 01:25 PM

not this again

This issue has been discussed many times. Let me share some points for you guys.

Alot of that so called 'difference' that ppl experience between Ron 95 fuel and Ron 97 is actually psychological. You may see some minor difference but no where worth the price ure paying for Ron 97 currently. The slightly better mileage (if any) will be easily obscured by the much higher cost of the Ron 97 fuel. Please be reminded that Shell Ron 97 is not Shell V Power Racing.

Using a higher octane fuel will not make much difference to internal carbon formation. Its actually a waste to use high octane fuel when your car only needs a lower grade. You wont get much difference in mileage or engine performance. The truth is that every grade of fuel has cleaning agents. Too much cleaning agents, some say, can actually damage your car.

Octane is a measure of how much the fuel can be compressed before it spontaneously ignites. Only engines with higher compression ratios take advantage of higher octane gas.

http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/consumer/autos/aut12.shtm

Another interesting article:

http://www.fraudguides.com/tips/june2.asp

So guys, please stop using Ron97 fuel. Its a complete waste. If u really insist on using, then limit yourself to 1 full tank every 6 months just for a 'clean-up'. Again, i dont think its neccessary

Btw, i did tests before between the Ron 95 and V Power Racing (not V Power 97) and there was a slight increase in acceleration. But with V POwer 97, there was no such noticeble difference. But V Power Racing is RM 3.30 right?

The car manufacturer would be the best advisor in this case. We can assume the compression increases but again it will be the car manufacturer who will specify a suitable fuel that maximises the performance benefit by using a higher octane fuel. If the car manufacturer has only specified Ron95 as the required fuel, then using Ron 97 is a waste. Like i said earlier, any slight difference (if any) will be insignificant compared to the much higher cost of Ron 97 fuel. Is it worth paying RM66 extra per full tank for this 'slight difference'? Thats RM 1,584 extra per year assuming you fill 2 tanks per month. So instead of spending RM 2,736 per annum, ure gonna spend RM4,320.

The problem with most ppl is that they think the performance increase (if any) will be significant and most of the time its just quantified by word of mouth rather than any hard facts

From experience, Ron97 gives me around 4-5whp more when I did my dyno runs at GT Auto in my old ride. Not worth the extra amount for Ron97. So rather have a tweaked ECU map to run on Ron95 instead for the power hungry.

But nowadays very poor, just pay RM1.80 for diesel

Big difference between RON95 and RON97. My engine is noisy when using the RON95 and very much smoother on RON97. Use the RON97 for twice a month, hopefully it'll lesser the damages done by RON95.

Although the octane reading may be same (Ron 95) but the additives from each manufacturer could be different thus creating such scenarios. Some say Shell 95 creates such problems while others claim Petronas also has similar issues. But there are others who say both these fuels are ok. So i guess it differs. Ive tested Caltex, Mobil and Shell and ive not noticed any difference. I only noticed a difference when using Shell V Power Racing but not V Power 97.

Plus we also gotta take the age of the car into consideration.

But in terms of power and acceleration, there would only be very marginal differences (if any) using Ron97 for a car designed for Ron 95. Either way, i dont think its worth the extra RM 1.00 per litre ure paying.

Either way, i think the new BHP Ron 95 Infinity Advance 2X would be a better choice at a cheaper price. Im just trying my first full tank this week.

This post has been edited by cybermaster98: Oct 23 2012, 11:01 AM

i experience this too on 2 of my cars. both EFi so its not the tuning.

car engines ignition timing will be retarded when knocking happens due to highly combustible low octane fuel, such as RON92 or RON95. retardation of ignition causes less power. this is why racers usually advance the ignition timing to get more power. also too much retardation on the ignition timing indeed DOES cause harm to certain engine parts, commonly is burnt exhaust valves.

so its true as some earlier posts say, save gas money, possibly increase engine wear

This post has been edited by masao343: Oct 23 2012, 11:12 AM