So I decided to do a little experiment last night - test 87 vs 93 octane in my completely stock beater maxima the results were identical just as I thought they would be based upon how both feel on the street. I've always put 93 in my maximas, my 96 NA car throughout it's lifespan, my turbo car (duh) and my completely stock beater 95.

I met a couple .org members I'd never met before as well... Scott (Boosted Maxima) was there with his bad *** Camaro with a GN motor in it and a big snail. brian (kzoosho) I met as well, he was getting some baseline 1/4 mile numbers before starting his turbo install later this week, unfortunately his clutch was slipping all night. Good to meet both of you guys.

Background of the car in question is this - it's got about 210k miles on it. I've never messed around with the knock sensor or anything like that. I bought it or $1100 back in december of 2004.

I went 14.51 @ 94.5 in this car back in June of 2005. This car is bone stock and up until that point had been run exclusively on 93 by me, but I have no idea what previous owners had done, gas wise...

So on to the interesting part. I had bunch of 87 in the tank so I drove around for about an hour friday before heading to the track to burn it down some (sucked wasting gas like that, but whatever). I got it down to about 4.5 gallons by the time I hit the track, on the way there I purchased 1.5 gallons of 110 octane Torco race gas for $4.75/gal to test with. I got to the track, teched in, and the got in the lanes. It was pretty busy, I averaged about one run per hour except for my very last run.

Weather conditions were pretty good, VERY good when you consider it's august - I'll put the approximate DA on each run as recorded at the nearest airport with weather reporting equipment. Race weight of my car was 3006lbs - only thing I did to remove the weight was remove the spare tire. All runs were done with 25psi in the front tires - Goodyear all season 215-60-15s. Suspension is stock.

Keep in mind these were the first time I've drag raced since Nov, 2006.

87 octane runs

Run 1
8:38pm
DA 1340'
RT .535
60' 2.244
1/8 9.473 @ 75.12mph
1/4 14.696 @ 93.71


Run2
9:26pm
DA 1234'
RT .866 (zzzzzz, sleepy)
60' 2.169
1/8 9.360 @ 75.37mph
1/4 14.570 @ 93.89mph


Run 3
10:48pm
DA 987'
RT .594
60' 2.276 (bleh)
1/8 9.412 @ 75.86mph
1/4 14.587 @ 94.37mph (highest trap of the night, I attribute that to the 1.5 hour wait between passes and the DA dropping 300')


93 octane runs (87 + 110 mix)


Run 4
11:42pm
DA 778'
RT .468
60' 2.195
1/8 9.357 @ 75.63mph
1/4 14.551 @ 94.09 (quickest pass of the night)


Run 5
12:53am
DA 629'
RT .510
60' 2.241
1/8 9.412 @ 75.50mph
1/4 14.619 @ 94.14mph


Run 6
1:11am
DA 648'
RT .613
60' 2.235
1/8 9.412 @ 75.25mph
1/4 14.636 @ 93.56mph
Lost to a Grand Prix GTP on this run - never happy about losing to those He ran 13.24 @ 104.4 on DRs.


So there it is - as you can see 87 vs 93 octane made absolutely no difference in this particular case. I'm not advocating the use of 87 octane by any means, do what you feel is best. Don't go pinging all around town and then blame it on me. If this car had any mods on it, I'd definitely be using 93 in it just because of the added assurance that pinging wouldn't occur.

 

hmm interesting result, there was a thread showing a dyno result of the two different gases.
but the times are amazing as usual, good job!

 

Since your car is completely stock wouldnt this make it the fastest stock 4th gen on the board? I think veetec had the previous fastest stock time right?

I know it isnt a max but I did a similar test with my stock Z. I always run my car on 93 and tryed 110 the last time I was there and nothing changed.

 

He had the record back before June 2005 when I ran this car to a 14.51. Previous to that, he had the record at 14.71. Any day now he'll probably get another max and come beat me again Actually no, I'm sure he's having much more fun with his 350z.

 

awesome times neal, especially on the beater, lol your running better times then id say 50% of the bolt on 5mt 4th gens lol.

Nice 60fts, especially on the all seasons. 2.1 60ft are tough, i know my best to dte is 2.20 60 with my bfg all seasons.

Was the 3006lbs with you in it?

 

yes that was with me in it and 1/4 tank of gas. I weigh 150.

 

Stop rubbing it in!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Nice times as always.

 

Factory timing maps do that I suppose


Come to fl and our heat and humidity will show the difference between 87 and 93ish

 

So you have the record for fastest Maxima in the world and now the record for fastest "Stock" 4th Gen in the world too??


4th Gen
Manual
Typical Stock: low-15's
Best Stock: 14.7 (VeeTec, 2.1 60', a good 5-10 others have run high-14's stock also)
a mod or two: high-14's (many)


5th Gen VQ35

Manual
Typical Stock: mid-14's
Best Stock: 14.1-14.3 (a bunch)
a mod or two: high-13's


And on top of it all you running almost as quick as a 5th gen with a VQ35..........

 

I believe Jime holds the fastest Maxima record, does he not? 11.5ish in the quarter.

 

Taken from the timeslip database. I dont know who mr-beast is but I'm sure his time is fake.

1 Mr-Beast Bahrain S/C + Nitrous 653.0 1.799 7.424@102.00 11.306@130.00 Details
2 MardiGrasMax 98 Maxima GXE Turbo + Nitrous 1.762 7.400@98.65 11.408@123.09 Details
3 TILLEYS99 99 Maxima SE Turbo 354.0 1.817 7.540@98.15 11.550@120.13 Details
4 Nealoc187 95 Maxima SE Turbo 365.0 1.820 7.666@92.40 11.761@121.30 Details
5 Jime 95 Maxima GXE N/A 260.0 1.851 7.996@87.14 12.489@109.34 Details

 

Yea, here's the only post he's ever made:

11sec NA max...sure.

 

Look at the dates of the post....

 

heh - stick around a while and you might learn something by the way, there were 3 people from this board there that night who witnessed all those runs, two of whom I've never even met before. I've never lied on this board, I've got no reason to start now. I don't have the quickest maxima on this board though... to whoever asked, mardigras has the quickest maxima, tilleys99 has the second quickest. Jime's is 4th quickest. 12.1.

mr. beast is oviously roadbeast, same country and similar name, the guy who introduced us to the MEVI and then scammed about $10,000 off of trusting .org members who sent him money for MEVIs that he never delivered. he's been banned a number of times before and he's going to get banned again I'm sure.

 

I know that he ran 14's all night as i was there running 15's with a slipping clutch. itll all be better soon.

 

Wanna race Neil?

 

So what you trying to say, Kevlo??

That the stock numbers are off because they were posted in 2004?


http://forums.maxima.org/showthread.php?t=289125


lol

Completely foolish on your part.



I suggest you go back to hittin those books .......you obviously need it....

 

What I've learned on this board is there are alot of bull****ters in this place, that have tendencies of "not telling the whole story".

 

Things have changed since then, i.e. new stock #'s have been established.



Anyone think/have any data to prove that the timing map would be any different if 93+ was run in the tank for few hundred miles or so?

 

octane can only help you if you are tuned for it. The added octane can help reduce knock with more advanced timing, if you are not adjusting the timing, you will not see differences.

 

Welcome to the choir.


I was asking and leaning more for data to back said gains. Does the ECU run a slightly conservative map w/ 87, Does anyone have data to back this up? I'm guessing 'no'

 

Bah, after that last thread, I dont know what to believe anymore; taking into account driver error, density altitudes, and weather conditions....

But I do know one thing.....I believe Neal now, and that his times are legit

 

Just to clarify - the reason I did this comparison was in response to the many people on here that say that 87 octane will cause the stock ECU to pull timing and cause your car to be significantly slower than with 93 in it, etc. I've been running 87 octane in this car for a year and a half now and never believed that to be the case, but never had #s to back that belief up. Now I do. (I don't know why I put that I've always used 93 in my beater because I have not, I haven't put 93 in this car in a long, long time). There may be certain circumstances when the car will pull timing based on the use of 87 octane but I have never experienced any that I have been able to discern.

 

Your right about a 4th gen running the same but tell this to a 5th gen lol. My freinds 01 I30 pings all day long with anything but premium. It even trips the CEL.

I still run 93 in my 98 b/c the luck my dad had with his 96. He ran 87 and replaced O2 sensors left and right (pun intended) thankfully under warranty. I have no concrete evidence to back me up other than he didnt have to replace O2's for many years when running 93. When the price of a gallon went up he went back to 87 or 89 and I had to replace an O2 again.

 

Nealoc: Why not try an actual batch of 93 next time and drive around on it for a day or two, to give the ECU to adjust to it or something? I personally don't think the car had adjusted to the new octane.

 

.


Umm did you ever think that JUST MAYBE, since 2004 someone could have broken the stock record? No I guess that is TOO CRAZY of an idea

 

we need to get neal in a 5.5 6spd to manage a 13.9 stock...

 

The stock times are a COMPILATION of times from around the world, not just a record of who is the best.........

What is so hard to understand?







EDITED FOR THE POST BELOW: (Since I'll respect Neal's wishes )
V
V
V
As you see, the list is standarized, and not just held to one, Das :P

 

mmmhmmm

 

OK guys chill on that business - we've hammered that out in another thread and we are on the same page now.

NYPDArnold - I can try that at some point, the problem is that the weather conditions were unlikely to be seen again for a long time, so a run on 93 octane in the same type of conditions is unlikely. Personally I don't subscribe to the theory that ECUs learn, at WOT they run preprogrammed timing maps that are based upon the level of knock that the KS is sensing. But I'm perfectly willing to try it out. I don't think the car will go any quicker than it already has though.

 

Way off base here. The A32 ECU isn't even close to being that adaptive. There is a set ignition timing BTDC for a given engine speed and load during open loop conditions. If the ECU senses knock, it retards timing. That's about the extent of it.

 

I don't think he's saying the ECU has an 87 map and a 93 map. He's saying that neal couldn't have gotten away with running 87 octane in florida's climate.

 

for that thought. ONE TIME, I tried 89oct on my 3.0. Normal driving felt the same, but the moment you went to accelerate... BOG BOG BOG car shaking and all. This week temps have been in the low 90s, with humidity factored in it feels in the low 100s. Running 87oct down here on our motors (especially some of our more modified members) is suicide.

 

It gets up to mid 90s througout the summer up here and we have a few days of low 100s every summer. Not as often as it does in FLA, but quite often. I've noticed absolutely no change in hotter weather with my car. I can't explain it but it doesn't seem to affect my car.

 

I've been letting my mom drive my max alot lately and I know my car so well I can tell if she put 89 or premium. My car really gets up and goes with 93 and when she puts 89 in it it feels totally different. So far every time I've asked her if she has put 89 in I've been right. I dont have any hardcore data but I do know it feels different.

 

Sorta,and I know you know that I know that you know this as per a conversation along time ago, but the above statement almost makes it sound still somewhat "adaptive", but here's the real deal like holyfield.....

if the knock sensor goes out of the specified ohm range (due to knock, 87 induced knock, melted/cracked ks, etc etc) then the ecu does two things......... retards timing, and throws a knock sensor ghost code. It's as simple as that, and often misunderstood if you spend to much time on the .org OR fsm.........

So... ftr, nealoc, are you positive you didn't have a P0325/0304?

 

no, i haven't checked codes in this car in like 2 years.

 

Wow, I'm glad I came back and decided to check out some forums over here to kill some time.

Just recently, I've been using 89 octane after having put at least 91 in my Maxima since I've owned her, before I was modded and after. Idk, maybe it's just me, but after I looked into going the ka-t route in my 240, and realizing how great the tune I'll have to make will be, I realized that if I'm safe running 93 octane on a ka-t that's tuned/tc'd custom, I really don't need 93 octane on an n/a car with an exhaust. Plus, I don't drive my Maxima all too hard anymore. Knowing I have the lower octane in makes me think twice about doing small pulls for no reason.

Good data Neal, but just to make sure I read this right, you didn't mix in the 110 octane gas before you raced, right? That was a just in case situation, right? And the numbers you posted were on 87?

Good job holding down the 4G stock record for so long, I can't believe how long ago that first was. Damn, I was still in high school when I read that first thread...and I still brag about your stock time.lol

 

No physical timeslips no care!!

 

http://forums.maxima.org/showpost.ph...90&postcount=1

Happy now?