Highest octane gas available?

[420]

I *think* this is the right forum for this...

What is the highest octane fuel availabel today? Is there anything out there with a motor octane rating higher than VP Import:

VP Import
Maximum power and torque in small displacement, high RPM, all motor, turbocharged or nitrous sport compact applications. Makes 5% more power than C16 and similar nonoxygenated fuels. Works well under high temperatures due to mechanical heat.

• Color: Clear
• Motor Octane: 120+
• Specific Gravity: .744 at 60° F


VP Racing Fuels


Anyone know of anything better?

 

[strikeeagle]

The highest possible octane rating, mathematically, is 120.3. So no, nothing would have a higher rating than Import...

strike

 

[Westside500]

We are running 120 in our Mustang in the 1 gallon stand alone cell for the nitrous...

 

[Ormand]

The highest possible octane rating, mathematically, is 120.3

Why do you say that? Here's a link to a fairly well written discussion of fuels, and you might note that a number of them, including xylene, have octanes substantially above 120.3:Gasoline FAQ - Part 2 of 4

 

[420]

Ok, so GASOLINE with a higher rating than 120.3 can exist? Where do I fill up?

 

[strikeeagle]

Why do you say that? Here's a link to a fairly well written discussion of fuels, and you might note that a number of them, including xylene, have octanes substantially above 120.3:Gasoline FAQ - Part 2 of 4

Per VP:

"What is the highest octane rating a gasoline can have?

For research and motor octane ratings the ASTM methods No. D2699-81 for the operation of the octane engine gives a scale up to 120.3."

VP Fuels FAQ - Frequently Asked Questions and Answers

strike

 

[Beast_TR]

Just wondering why most of us run C16 as opposed to this import stuff? Is that due to lack of availability or is there something about c16 that is better for our cars?

 

[420]

Just wondering why most of us run C16 as opposed to this import stuff? Is that due to lack of availability or is there something about c16 that is better for our cars?

I can answer this one.

C16 around here is roughly $10/gallon

Import, IF YOU CAN GET IT, is $25/gallon

 

[SVORay]

At what point would you even need something more than 114 octane?

 

[420]

At what point would you even need something more than 114 octane?

The same reason that people run Alky, or Nitro... More power

 

[Razor]

More octane if not used equals less power.

If you detonate on C16.. then you should address why

 

[420]

More octane if not used equals less power.

If you detonate on C16.. then you should address why

Agreed. But I fully plan on pushing the limits past the threshold of c16 on the new project.

Don't worry, Julio... I already have an alky kit on the Syclone for the daily driver tune, complete with a custom fuel cell you made for me

 

[SVORay]

More octane if not used equals less power.

If you detonate on C16.. then you should address why

That is what I'm thinking.

I can't imagine anything we do needing more than 114 octane.

 

[strikeeagle]

At what point would you even need something more than 114 octane?

The point at which 114 detonates?

It bears mention that octane is not the sole consideration in choosing a particular gasoline. That is, some gasolines having octane ratings equal to or greater than C16 would not perform as well in our cars, because they are not formulated for turbocharged applications. See the VP site...

It's fine to say 114 should suffice, but better to rely on the highly skilled chemists and engineers who formulate the myriad fuels for myriad applications.

strike

 

[420]

One would think that indeed, a rational man would not need anything beyond 114 octane.

However, I am not that rational man. I'm F'n nuts

 

[Ormand]

As I mentioned in my previous post, fuels can go significantly higher than 120.3. I provided a link to a tecnical document which provides a actual numbers, and it is NOT a vendor web site. The fact that one specific ASTM procedure does not run the scale up past that point is totally irrelevant. My car can only go 85 mph, because the speedometer won't register any higher? That's pretty silly. But maybe since VP provided the info about 120.3, there may be some built in bias. Higher octane allows for higher compression and/or higher boost. Since xylene is a common component of pump gas, I see no reason to exclude it from the discussion on semantic grounds.

 

[TurboDave]

I've been told by more than one fuels expert, that in cars like ours (not terribly high reving). The need to go beyond C16 is going to hit a point of diminishing returns. The higher octane fuels (118 and above) are primarilly designed for really high reving engines (pro stock and the like) and as such are quite fast buring fuels.

We really shouldn't need any thing higher than 114 or 116 (assuming high quality brands).

Some cars are also fussier than others. I'll give you my example. In race trim my car really doesn't run well on C16. As a matter of fact it will detonate at X level of boost and X level of timing, whereas I can pump it out, put in 114 and go run quicker and faster (and NO detonation) on it.

Ya just gotta find the right combination of stuff.

But I really rather doubt anything higher than 116 is needed in our cars.

 

[strikeeagle]

As I mentioned in my previous post, fuels can go significantly higher than 120.3. I provided a link to a tecnical document which provides a actual numbers, and it is NOT a vendor web site. The fact that one specific ASTM procedure does not run the scale up past that point is totally irrelevant. My car can only go 85 mph, because the speedometer won't register any higher? That's pretty silly. But maybe since VP provided the info about 120.3, there may be some built in bias. Higher octane allows for higher compression and/or higher boost. Since xylene is a common component of pump gas, I see no reason to exclude it from the discussion on semantic grounds.

It so happens that the "one specific ASTM procedure" VP cites is the accepted procedure by which octane is established for gasolines. Do you know of something better?

At a glance, the document you cite provides octanes for components of gasolines, not gasolines proper. Also, the procedures for arriving at these ratings are (obviously) not the same as that for gasolines (as they exceed 120.3), and said to be subject to interpretation. (Did you read the document?)

I don't know you, which is to say I don't know what specific expertise you bring to the discussion. As such, however risky, I choose to believe VP, which produces and distributes the very gasolines many of us trust to race with. Semantically speaking, that is...

Whatever, George... Feel better now?

strike

 

[Ormand]

It so happens that the "one specific ASTM procedure" VP cites is the accepted procedure by which octane is established for gasolines.

Semantically incorrect. The procedure is AN accepted procedure, not THE accepted prodedure. The fact that it has limited range would make it pretty useless for testing any fuels which might not fall within that range.
I read both the document I referenced and the ASTM procedure. It is quite clear that the ASTM document is intended for commercial fuels- for pump gas. When choosing who to believe, it might be prudent to consider the motives. VP is a commercial vendor of fuels, and not one of the "big" providers like Exxon or BP. They are selling high octane gasoline, but they have no motivation to measure anything higher than their own product. There might even be some slight tendency to quote sources which favor their product. The references I cited are neutral- and they further cite 137 additional references which are primarily textbooks or other peer-reviewed publications.
So, Strikeagle, you can choose to believe what you wish. I prefer to deal in facts, when possible, and it is factual that fuels can exceed 120 octane.

 

[strikeeagle]

Semantically incorrect. The procedure is AN accepted procedure, not THE accepted prodedure. The fact that it has limited range would make it pretty useless for testing any fuels which might not fall within that range.
I read both the document I referenced and the ASTM procedure. It is quite clear that the ASTM document is intended for commercial fuels- for pump gas. When choosing who to believe, it might be prudent to consider the motives. VP is a commercial vendor of fuels, and not one of the "big" providers like Exxon or BP. They are selling high octane gasoline, but they have no motivation to measure anything higher than their own product. There might even be some slight tendency to quote sources which favor their product. The references I cited are neutral- and they further cite 137 additional references which are primarily textbooks or other peer-reviewed publications.
So, Strikeagle, you can choose to believe what you wish. I prefer to deal in facts, when possible, and it is factual that fuels can exceed 120 octane.

George, here's where I'm at with this...

A guy comes on the board and asks if there's anything having a motor octane rating higher than VP Import. I respond in so many words that Import is pretty much the top of the scale. Now, given circumstances, you have to assume this guy is a drag racer and is looking for gasoline, huh?

Then, in an effort to prove me wrong, you surf the net and find an article that cites higher octanes in components of gasolines that I suppose constitute a piss in the ocean, in and of themselves are not motor fuels, and are commercially unavailable.

I know it's important to you to be perceived as an expert on all matters, but you're really not making a good case for yourself in this instance - your data are irrelevant to the original question, your attack is personal, and your motives are questionable (and a little sad, huh?). Hell, you even go so far as to call VP liars to make your point? WTF?

Anyway, I'm out on this one. Peace.

strike