93 vs 91 octane - AcuraZine - Acura Enthusiast Community

Notices

93 vs 91 octane

Old 03-07-2018, 06:59 AM
  #1  
RLX Hybrid #053
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 83
Thanked 58 Times in 24 Posts
93 vs 91 octane

From previous experience with turbo charged high compression engines using 93 octane verses 91 will increase the power by 5% and torque by 10% (APR AudiRS7 dyno test). Is it reasonable to expect same results with the NSX?
with 500 hp, 406 ft-lbs engine is it reasonable to expect another 25 hp and 40 ft-lbs using the higher octane?
i do believe so. I think the total power on the new NSX with high octane should be around 600 with torque around 520 ft-lbs. I know it's very hard to dyno the NSX, still I do think such gains are attainable. The one thing that may bring doubt is at what octane was the NSX originally tested with? Which means, following the same logic, we need the higher octane just to get the quoted numbers.
Food for thought.

for reference I own a 2017 NSX but I only feed it 94 octane which is available in Canada and owned an RS7 before.
timmins is offline  
Old 03-07-2018, 07:20 AM
  #2  
Registered Member
iTrader: (2)
 
horseshoez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Southern New Hampshire
Age: 62
Posts: 3,694
Thanked 654 Times in 494 Posts
Do you have any data which suggests Acura tuned the NSX engine to take advantage of the extra detonation resistance of fuel with an AKI of anything greater than 91? If they didn't, then there will be zero difference in power.
horseshoez is online now  
Old 03-07-2018, 10:12 AM
  #3  
RLX Hybrid #053
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 83
Thanked 58 Times in 24 Posts
Originally Posted by horseshoez View Post
Do you have any data which suggests Acura tuned the NSX engine to take advantage of the extra detonation resistance of fuel with an AKI of anything greater than 91? If they didn't, then there will be zero difference in power.

NO!
Do you have any data to the contrary?
I only based my assumption on another car with high compression engine and twin turbos. Didn't mean to open a scientific debate and will not exert any more effort on the subject.
God Bless
timmins is offline  
Old 03-07-2018, 10:17 AM
  #4  
Registered Member
iTrader: (2)
 
horseshoez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Southern New Hampshire
Age: 62
Posts: 3,694
Thanked 654 Times in 494 Posts
The thing is, unless the programming allows more aggressive boost and/or timing levels beyond what would be expected with 91 AKI fuel, then any additional detonation resistance is useless. That said, aftermarket tuners make a lot of their living from retuning cars with forced induction to take advantage of higher AKI fuels. Many Audis for instance, cannot do diddly with better fuel unless they are tuned.
horseshoez is online now  
The Following User Says Thank You to horseshoez For This Useful Post:
nist7 (03-07-2018)
Old 03-07-2018, 10:23 AM
  #5  
Registered Member
 
TacoBello's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: In an igloo
Posts: 30,496
Thanked 4,397 Times in 3,308 Posts
Originally Posted by timmins View Post



NO!
Do you have any data to the contrary?
I only based my assumption on another car with high compression engine and twin turbos. Didn't mean to open a scientific debate and will not exert any more effort on the subject.
God Bless
You're asking a scientific based question, but don't want a scientific debate

Horseshoez is right, though. The ECU needs to be tuned to make use of that additional octane level. We never know which engines are tuned to use higher octane levels... I remember hearing rumors back when I had my 03 V6 Accord, many moons ago... apparently a Honda engineer stated that the car is intended to run on regular fuel, but if you used premium, you would gain about 10 hp and 10lbft of torque. Was it true? No one actually knew (nobody wanted to pay for dynoing a stock car either, I guess).

It could be true for the NSX... but we really won't know unless someone ponies up the cash to throw an NSX on a few dyno runs. Honda hasn't suggested anything themselves (they rarely, if ever would).
TacoBello is offline  
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to TacoBello For This Useful Post:
horseshoez (03-07-2018), nist7 (03-07-2018)
Old 03-07-2018, 12:29 PM
  #6  
2006 RRP TL "The Comrade"
 
nist7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Honolulu
Age: 32
Posts: 2,876
Thanked 503 Times in 336 Posts
Originally Posted by TacoBello View Post
It could be true for the NSX... but we really won't know unless someone ponies up the cash to throw an NSX on a few dyno runs. Honda hasn't suggested anything themselves (they rarely, if ever would).
If someone can afford a 2nd gen NSX, and are curious/interested, and is scientific minded....I'd think they can easily afford a little experiment with 91 vs 93 and dynoing the results....
nist7 is offline  
Old 03-08-2018, 12:25 AM
  #7  
Registered Member
 
WheelMcCoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Northeast
Posts: 726
Thanked 142 Times in 110 Posts
The electric motors on the NSX-2 could also affect and cloud the final result. Acura advertises the V-6 engine has having 500 HP and 406 lb-ft of torque. After adding in the power of the electric motors, the numbers become 573 HP and 476 lb-ft. Now go from 91 octane to 93 octane fuel, and
WheelMcCoy is online now  
Old 03-22-2018, 12:10 PM
  #8  
New Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Vancouver BC
Age: 71
Posts: 2
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
93 vs 91 octane

Originally Posted by nist7 View Post
If someone can afford a 2nd gen NSX, and are curious/interested, and is scientific minded....I'd think they can easily afford a little experiment with 91 vs 93 and dynoing the results....
As an owner of a 2017 NSX I can tell you it's irrelevant what the difference may or may not be on 91 vs. 93 octane.
There is so much more to the NSX (and other cars in this segment) that a few extra hp (or not) is not meaningful.
However carry on with the speculation.
JD Cross is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to JD Cross For This Useful Post:
musty hustla (03-31-2018)
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Habu
1G RDX Performance Parts & Modifications
8
05-23-2011 10:33 AM
alfadoctor
Second Generation RL (2005-2012)
15
02-20-2011 01:44 PM
twinkieB25
First Generation RDX (2007-2012)
7
02-12-2010 06:41 AM
rajunwild
3G TL Performance Parts & Modifications
5
02-29-2008 06:59 AM
mbeebe
Second Generation TL (1999-2003)
5
03-23-2002 09:47 AM


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: 93 vs 91 octane


Contact Us Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

© 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.