I was using a 5-month-old tablet with an Atom CPU and running Windows 8. I’ll try it with my work laptop. It’s a Core-i5 HP EliteBook. It should have more than enough processing power assuming the full hard drive encryption software doesn’t slow it down too much. The solid state drive kind of negates that though.
I have long wanted to test a Stock car with 93 or 94 vs the various 91 tuned options on 91. I bet it’s maybe a tenth or two or one car length in a pull.
I would ssy even with east coast 91 it sill is a bigger gap then that. The na cars fair better on 91. The FI cars struggle more. The only good example I have is on a turbo colbolt we built several years ago. It was a pump tuned car only made 307whp 347wtq here on 93. The crew took the car on a road trip to Francisco ca. Once they put a full tank of California 91 in. They couldn’t get more then 9lbs of boost before the car got pissed. They actually thought at one time they had bad gas so they emptied the tank and put more California 91 in it. Same results the car only ran good when they found 100 at the pump.
Not every station has 100. It was a big iasue to drive the car on 91. They poped a turbo hose off but thought they killed the turbo…they shipped the car back to detroit…
The car came back with California 91 in the tank. For shits sake they tried to retune it for the California 91. Best figgures were down 36whp and 44wtq…that is one of several stories I have heard on just how bad it is over there for fuel.
Interested as well as I’m sure most here would be. Been told by many trusted enthusiasts that CA91 is in another league with regard to performance and tunability results.
I can look. Dyno sheets and general information from guys ive worked with over the years on the ls forums. Remember tho im not talking abouf just 91 but California 91…its mule piss bad…
For a na car I dont see the impact being so great. For small boost cars with low low intake femps its not great but its still no east coast 91.
This is one point I think is good…the California emmisons board put out a statment talking about the new California emmisions laws. The laws reauire any fuel sold in California needs to pass fuel emmisions quality. This means even california race gas has additives added to it. The standard 91 is full of additives to help it burn cleaner the additives remove the ron factor down and make the fuel burn faster…
One of the big laws of race fuel and higher octane fuels is the ability to remove heat. 91 octane removes little heat… if you have a big intercooler and full 3.5 inch exhaust on a turbo a4 or s4 then its not go8ng to be as bad if you have too small an intercooler and too small of am exhaust. …
Same thing on the na cars… the na cars require less heat removal. This is why waterM kits dont work on na cars…
Here…tuned cars running 91 vs stock cars running 93
I developed this theory when stasis only sold a 91 tune and guys out here were buying it. I said it would be a poor decision to buy a $1700 tune, kill your Audi warranty, when you could just have run 93-94 octane pump gas on the stock tune and been pretty close to the same performance . Close enough that the cost and downside of td1 were nowhere near worth it.
When you are in California, I guess running stock + cali 91 sucks and tuned + cali 91 is a bit better but I just don’t see it.