Fg Xr6 Ultimate 98 Versus E10.

[gtfpv]

WELL YESTERDAY i filled the xr6 with premium ultimate 98 petrol . i have been using E10 for 5 fills and now have 2800kms on the clock.
i have gotten pretty much the same consumption per fill . at 575kms for 59-60 litres per fill.

1st reaction to ultimate in a stock car which can run on 91 RON is "what's all the fuss about" i can barely tell the differance, the engine sounds and runs the same , the car runs so well and performs so well on sh ity E10 , that seat of pants feel is hardly any differant .
i'll do a economy test and see if it is any better .
i can actually feel the differance in the GT between 95RON and 98RON
more power and perfect running .
this is a big statement
but the fgxr6 may just be blowing $$$ out of the exhaust running premium .
I guess the big picture may be engine longevity , however E10 hasnt been out long enough to compare cars being designed to run on it .

[Smoke Pursuit]

I notice a big difference on mine when running 91 or 98.. The smoothness of the motor when running 98 is very noticable.

[UNR8D]

wait for it to use a qtr of a tank, as you will find the knock sensors will only adjust once they realise the higher grade fuel is being used, seat of the pants feel feel will be noticeable after that.

[mik]

i tried that stuff for a while(a few months), initially it seemed no noticeable difference, after a while it started to stumble a bit on start up and was`nt idleing as good, i found on my au, i went back to premium and it came good again, perhaps haveing 170 kliks up might have something to do with it, i don`t know.

[geckoGT]

Can't say about 91 as I can not run my 290 on it but I notice no difference in any way between 95 and 98 on our stock SP.

Actually, it might be faster on 98 as my wallet is lighter.

[charles_wif_xf]

I'm gonna stick with BP 98 as a minimum in the XR6T.

[gtfpv]

YEAH IT MIGHT TAKE SOME TIME TO ADJUST . the fg is capable of tuning itself to all 3 fuels . 91 95 98 . . i dont thin previous models are so no point comparing other models .
mine runs fine on E10 . i'll have to use a tank or 2 of 98 . to see any differance i suppose .

bfiipursuit i'm not doubting my car will run excellent on 98 but if it runs excellent on E10 which is somewhat asurprise . i'll have to find something to make me use/prefer 98 .
remember we are talking stock base 6cyl engine in FG guise here , not FPV performance .

[Fev]

Drove 1200km on 98ron from Sydney to Melb last weekend in my Escort. Bit the bullet on the way home and used E10 and noticed NO difference in idle quality and no noticable difference in fuel consumption. I was using 98ron because it was pinging a bit after i tuned it and cbf re-tuning it.

This is of couse mixed with lead subsitute. There is still a slight amount of pinging (at high rpm heavy load) just like the 98 but at 20c/lt cheaper who cares! E10 shall be my Eskies brew of choice from now on!.

I'll see how it goes with the Twin 40's which are going on very soon

[geckoGT]

He is interested in hearing about cars designed to run all three grades as stated.

I guess I could try 91 in the Mini, BMW have stated clearly that it will run fine on it, don't know how it will perform though. I have run both 95 and 98 in the Mini and can not see any difference here either. The Mini is designed for all three and actually has more technology than the FG I6, direct injection for a start.

[Smoke Pursuit]

Originally Posted by gtfpv

YEAH IT MIGHT TAKE SOME TIME TO ADJUST . the fg is capable of tuning itself to all 3 fuels . 91 95 98 . . i dont thin previous models are so no point comparing other models .
mine runs fine on E10 . i'll have to use a tank or 2 of 98 . to see any differance i suppose .

bfiipursuit i'm not doubting my car will run excellent on 98 but if it runs excellent on E10 which is somewhat asurprise . i'll have to find something to make me use/prefer 98 .
remember we are talking stock base 6cyl engine in FG guise here , not FPV performance .

My XR6 is the same as yours.. except a ute.. and i can definately notice the difference between 91 and 98.. Ford claim the standard XR6s produce over 200 kw on 98 apposed to the 195 on 91...

[Fev]

Fair enough then.

When my father was travelling about 120km a day for work and back on the highway in his BA XR6T he swapped to using E10. Fuel consumption mildy lower then the usual 98oc (not lower then 95oc) but performance he said he did notice a larger difference over using 98oc.
He continued using E10 over the time he worked there though as it wasn't a big issue and it never effected the driveablility of the car.

[XR6_661]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but...Isn't it recommended on the FG 6s to run no less than 95? N/A I'm talking about too..

[Smoke Pursuit]

Originally Posted by XR6_661

Correct me if I'm wrong, but...Isn't it recommended on the FG 6s to run no less than 95? N/A I'm talking about too..

Wrong.. I could just imagine fleets jumping up and down if Ford said XTs and XR6s had to be run on 95... it makes no sense.

[UNR8D]

FG is tuned to run all 3 fuels, albit at different outputs, hence my comment about the duel knock sensors in my first reply

[XR6_661]

Well there ya go!!

Not sure where I picked up my bogus fact from then.

But yeah, makes sense with the cars being used for fleets.

[UNR8D]

Ill try and find the link but with the set up its 195kw on 91, 200kw on 95 and a claimed 204kw on 98.

[kinksta]

g6et: i run it on 91, and sometimes 95, no difference...

[XR6_661]

You run a G6E-T on 91 octane?

[kinksta]

yea, and runs well...

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by UNR8D

Ill try and find the link but with the set up its 195kw on 91, 200kw on 95 and a claimed 204kw on 98.

You would be lucky to actually feel 204 compared to 195 in daily driving. 204 and 200, not a chance of feeling that, what you are feeling is the power of advertising and the assumption of it cost more it must be better.

[UNR8D]

would have more to do with simply the advance/retarding of the timing giving it the extra HP, very true about perhaps not noticing it under 'normal' driving conditions..

having said that, ive seen the head on 2 AU's one using 98 its entire life and one using E91, forget marketing the carbon build up on the lower grade fuel's head was sizeable in comparison.

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by UNR8D

would have more to do with simply the advance/retarding of the timing giving it the extra HP, very true about perhaps not noticing it under 'normal' driving conditions..

having said that, ive seen the head on 2 AU's one using 98 its entire life and one using E91, forget marketing the carbon build up on the lower grade fuel's head was sizeable in comparison.

That is very true and a very good point, which is the reason I do not use 91 even though the Mini can take it (the FPV can't). I doubt that 98 has this advantage over 95 though as 95 is still supposed to be a cleaner fuel than 91.

I have to ask though, was the cylinder head that used 91 run on 91 E10 or the old 91? E10 is supposed to be cleaner.

[prydey]

Originally Posted by gtfpv

Y the fg is capable of tuning itself to all 3 fuels . 91 95 98 . . i dont thin previous models are

falcon has been running knock sensors since ef. later models may have a little more scope in how much the ecu will adjust the ignition timing but the earlier models would still adjust to suit whatever octane you were running.

[Lightning Strike XR6]

If i run 91 i get a shocking idle. Car shakes. However 98 its fine.

[UNR8D]

duel knock sensor's since BF I believe, hence ability to run E10 or up to 98.

Gecko, it would have been the old 91 to be honnest, as this was when I had my NL but with AU head...2004 I believe? and my uncles AU XR6hp when he had the head redone/new cam etc, both when heads were pulled off had about 100,000 on them.

[jasjul]

In the owners manual for my '08 FG XR6T, it says turbos should be run on a minimum of 95ron.

[kinksta]

Originally Posted by Lightning Strike XR6

If i run 91 i get a shocking idle. Car shakes. However 98 its fine.

g6et runs fine on it. that's strange cos my old BA ran fine on 91...95 doesn't seem any different and I drive alot. Plus the 98 and over are a little too expensive at the moment.

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by UNR8D

Gecko, it would have been the old 91 to be honnest, as this was when I had my NL but with AU head...2004 I believe? and my uncles AU XR6hp when he had the head redone/new cam etc, both when heads were pulled off had about 100,000 on them.

I thought so. So although a good point that you made regarding 91 it may be a bit early to tell with 91 E10. Remember a lot of the fuel companies list up to 5% ethanol in their premium fuels as a cleaning agent, so perhaps E10 does run cleaner than the old 91.

[You Yangs]

What we have to establish here is what brand of E10 you are using because the octane rating varies between brands.
Caltex and BP are 91 Shell is 93 to 94 and United is 95 not sure about Mobil or any others.

[DMXR6T]

FG XR6T - runs fine on 94/95 E10, 95 and 98. No noticable difference in power, idling, tractability, etc. E10 does result in more l/100km. As noted in one of the posts, ther are differnces in the E10 fuels from different suppliers. Also Shell Optimax 100 has 5% (I think) ethanol. Ethanol does inprove RON and power but has less energy per litre. Many fuel suppliers are slipping ethanol in to meet government rules. BP for one are not taking advantage of the RON boost, probably by reducing the RON of the base petrol.