Drag Racing Drag Racing (legal) & Associated Topics

C16 vs. Q16 vs. VP Import?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Aug 30, 2009 | 06:12 AM
  #1  
YZFR6's Avatar
Thread Starter
Honda-Tech Member
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,467
Likes: 0
From: Mississauga, ON, Canada
Default C16 vs. Q16 vs. VP Import?

Has anybody used Q16 and saw any difference with VP import or C16? What's your experience?
Reply
Old Aug 30, 2009 | 06:25 AM
  #2  
Turbo-charged's Avatar
Honda-Tech Member
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 6,939
Likes: 2
From: Maryland, USA
Default Re: C16 vs. Q16 vs. VP Import?

i love import, but who can afford it.

q16 seems to make a difference in some cars, and not in others. seems to be pretty corrosive in some applications. for a long time there was no warning labels on the containers, but now they have a warning label that tells you to drain it out of the car like you would with methanol.

C16 is tried and proven. ever since Q16 came out, i dont think ive had a single car come to the dyno that had C16, everybody has switched to Q.
Reply
Old Aug 30, 2009 | 06:26 AM
  #3  
fukenricen's Avatar
Honda-Tech Member
 
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 660
Likes: 0
From: toronto, ont, canada
Default Re: C16 vs. Q16 vs. VP Import?

mark 5 and never had an issue also street legal 114octaine reading and also unleaded
Reply
Old Aug 30, 2009 | 06:31 AM
  #4  
85mmek9's Avatar
Honda-Tech Member
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,017
Likes: 0
From: wichita, ks, usa
Default Re: C16 vs. Q16 vs. VP Import?

Originally Posted by Turbo-charged
i love import, but who can afford it.

q16 seems to make a difference in some cars, and not in others. seems to be pretty corrosive in some applications. for a long time there was no warning labels on the containers, but now they have a warning label that tells you to drain it out of the car like you would with methanol.

C16 is tried and proven. ever since Q16 came out, i dont think ive had a single car come to the dyno that had C16, everybody has switched to Q.
+1 on import, I have ran Q this season and have liked it alot, im not the tuner but I believe Q wants quite a bit more timing then C?
Reply
Old Aug 30, 2009 | 06:31 AM
  #5  
cteg6's Avatar
Honda-Tech Member
 
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 338
Likes: 0
From: bridgeport, ct, america
Default Re: C16 vs. Q16 vs. VP Import?

Originally Posted by Turbo-charged
i love import, but who can afford it.

q16 seems to make a difference in some cars, and not in others. seems to be pretty corrosive in some applications. for a long time there was no warning labels on the containers, but now they have a warning label that tells you to drain it out of the car like you would with methanol.

C16 is tried and proven. ever since Q16 came out, i dont think ive had a single car come to the dyno that had C16, everybody has switched to Q.
what happens if you dont drain your tank of q16?
Reply
Old Aug 30, 2009 | 06:35 AM
  #6  
85mmek9's Avatar
Honda-Tech Member
 
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,017
Likes: 0
From: wichita, ks, usa
Default Re: C16 vs. Q16 vs. VP Import?

Originally Posted by cteg6
what happens if you dont drain your tank of q16?
Q16 is oxygenated, I drained a tank that sits over a month, but if its only couple of gallons I just add some fresh and go driving.
Reply
Old Aug 30, 2009 | 07:20 AM
  #7  
Enzo-Racing's Avatar
Honda-Tech Member
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 1,337
Likes: 0
From: Deer Park, NY, USA
Default Re: C16 vs. Q16 vs. VP Import?

Originally Posted by Turbo-charged
i love import, but who can afford it.

q16 seems to make a difference in some cars, and not in others. seems to be pretty corrosive in some applications. for a long time there was no warning labels on the containers, but now they have a warning label that tells you to drain it out of the car like you would with methanol.

C16 is tried and proven. ever since Q16 came out, i dont think ive had a single car come to the dyno that had C16, everybody has switched to Q.
Agreed. Import is corrosive too.
I've found Import makes more power then q but too expensive
there's some other fuels out there that claim they make more then
Import. One of these days I'll test them
Reply
Old Aug 30, 2009 | 07:44 AM
  #8  
Turbo-charged's Avatar
Honda-Tech Member
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 6,939
Likes: 2
From: Maryland, USA
Default Re: C16 vs. Q16 vs. VP Import?

found this amusing.






This is right from the VP website!!!
Q. Is Q16 appropriate for superchargers or turbo applications?

A. This fuel is the nuts for intercooled applications. We're seeing huge increases in these applications. I haven't seen any issues with detonation when they follow the 6% rule. This is richen your fuel system 6% over C16 (which is the fuel 90% of these applications are using now) and you should be close to the air fuel ratio you were at before the Q16. This is where Steve Petty (Dyno master) picked up 107Hp to the tire on a twin turbo 588 ci application. The Q16 isn't responding as well in non-intercooled applications. I recommend that in these few instances, you should stay on C16. Heck, most of these applications have enough HP as it is.
Reply
Old Aug 30, 2009 | 08:24 AM
  #9  
jnv255's Avatar
B*a*n*n*e*d
 
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,108
Likes: 0
From: Georgia
Default Re: C16 vs. Q16 vs. VP Import?

I run a mix of Q16 and import, half/half.
Reply
Old Aug 30, 2009 | 08:33 AM
  #10  
NativeSon's Avatar
Honda-Tech Member
 
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 654
Likes: 0
From: Chicago, IL, USA
Default Re: C16 vs. Q16 vs. VP Import?

I've tuned three completely different turbo cars, (before and after) that switched over to Q16, and using the recommendations from VP, picked up a lot of power. So now, all the locals that I hang with, use Q16. Also to note, on the 2.0L engine, I noticed quicker spooling as well. I can only guess that the increased exhaust volume made the turbo spool up quicker. The bigger engines and turbos had no noticeable decrease in spool times. The two V8 engines had remote mounted A/W intercoolers, and the 2.0L engine had a typical air/air front-mount intercooler.

Anyone know if I can throw the unused Q16 in my street car, mixed with 93 octane?
Reply
Old Aug 30, 2009 | 09:08 AM
  #11  
evilone's Avatar
Honda-Tech Member
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,106
Likes: 0
From: naugatuck, ct, us
Default Re: C16 vs. Q16 vs. VP Import?

Originally Posted by Turbo-charged
found this amusing.






This is right from the VP website!!!
Q. Is Q16 appropriate for superchargers or turbo applications?

A. This fuel is the nuts for intercooled applications. We're seeing huge increases in these applications. I haven't seen any issues with detonation when they follow the 6% rule. This is richen your fuel system 6% over C16 (which is the fuel 90% of these applications are using now) and you should be close to the air fuel ratio you were at before the Q16. This is where Steve Petty (Dyno master) picked up 107Hp to the tire on a twin turbo 588 ci application. The Q16 isn't responding as well in non-intercooled applications. I recommend that in these few instances, you should stay on C16. Heck, most of these applications have enough HP as it is.
i was told to run Q16 leaner, or does it just show up leaner on the wideband because its an oxyfuel
Reply
Old Aug 30, 2009 | 09:12 AM
  #12  
nonvtecallmotor's Avatar
Honda-Tech Member
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,862
Likes: 1
From: MOBTOWN,MD
Default Re: C16 vs. Q16 vs. VP Import?

I dont like Q-16 and will never use it again
Reply
Old Aug 30, 2009 | 10:23 AM
  #13  
locash's Avatar
Honda-Tech Member
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,708
Likes: 1
From: Phoenix, AZ, USA
Default Re: C16 vs. Q16 vs. VP Import?

Care to elaborate on why don't you like Q16? We're not mind readers here, lol.. We run Q16 on all the high hp turbo cars. It's THE NUTS!
Reply
Old Aug 30, 2009 | 10:50 AM
  #14  
SPOOLINmatt's Avatar
Honda-Tech Member
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 7,913
Likes: 0
From: North Georgia/Atlanta
Default Re: C16 vs. Q16 vs. VP Import?

lol,i like my 9$ a gallon sunoco 110 ive been running for 2 years with Plenty of power.
Reply
Old Aug 30, 2009 | 02:20 PM
  #15  
evilone's Avatar
Honda-Tech Member
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,106
Likes: 0
From: naugatuck, ct, us
Default Re: C16 vs. Q16 vs. VP Import?

what af's are you guys running on Q16?
Reply
Old Aug 30, 2009 | 03:54 PM
  #16  
miller's Avatar
Honda-Tech Member
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 12,822
Likes: 0
From: long island, ny, united states
Default Re: C16 vs. Q16 vs. VP Import?

I run q16 and run a target .91 lambda (which is 13.3.)
Reply
Old Aug 30, 2009 | 04:58 PM
  #17  
locash's Avatar
Honda-Tech Member
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 2,708
Likes: 1
From: Phoenix, AZ, USA
Default Re: C16 vs. Q16 vs. VP Import?

I run the cars in the mid 12's because we have slower cars than Miller's..
Reply
Old Aug 30, 2009 | 05:09 PM
  #18  
Turbo-charged's Avatar
Honda-Tech Member
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 6,939
Likes: 2
From: Maryland, USA
Default Re: C16 vs. Q16 vs. VP Import?

my car doest really make any more power above 11.5:1 run it at 11.5 and 12.5 and it will be with in 5whp on the dyno. every car/motor/set up is different though
Reply
Old Aug 30, 2009 | 05:12 PM
  #19  
evilone's Avatar
Honda-Tech Member
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,106
Likes: 0
From: naugatuck, ct, us
Default Re: C16 vs. Q16 vs. VP Import?

my question i guess is if you were to tune to 13.0 on Q16 then leave it alone and run C16 what would the af's be without changing the map? my guess would be according to the 6% they say it takes to run the q16 would mean the same map on c16 would be too rich? like in the 10.50 range??
Reply
Old Aug 30, 2009 | 05:16 PM
  #20  
miller's Avatar
Honda-Tech Member
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 12,822
Likes: 0
From: long island, ny, united states
Default Re: C16 vs. Q16 vs. VP Import?

Originally Posted by evilone
my question i guess is if you were to tune to 13.0 on Q16 then leave it alone and run C16 what would the af's be without changing the map? my guess would be according to the 6% they say it takes to run the q16 would mean the same map on c16 would be too rich? like in the 10.50 range??

Run what you are tuned on, remember timing values will change with different gas also. Its not all about the 6%.
Reply
Old Aug 30, 2009 | 05:17 PM
  #21  
evilone's Avatar
Honda-Tech Member
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,106
Likes: 0
From: naugatuck, ct, us
Default Re: C16 vs. Q16 vs. VP Import?

Originally Posted by Turbo-charged
my car doest really make any more power above 11.5:1 run it at 11.5 and 12.5 and it will be with in 5whp on the dyno. every car/motor/set up is different though
i just did an evo and it seemed to run the best at about 11.8 to 12.0 but the owner was told to run at 13.0. we ended up running about 12.2, a bit leaner than i felt needed for optimum power. now if i run c16 in the same setup will it be too rich?
Reply
Old Aug 30, 2009 | 05:18 PM
  #22  
evilone's Avatar
Honda-Tech Member
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,106
Likes: 0
From: naugatuck, ct, us
Default Re: C16 vs. Q16 vs. VP Import?

Originally Posted by miller
Its not all about the 6%.
very true, i see what you are saying
Reply
Old Aug 30, 2009 | 05:28 PM
  #23  
1320Mikey's Avatar
Honda-Tech Member
 
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 183
Likes: 0
From: in the middle somewhere
Default Re: C16 vs. Q16 vs. VP Import?

I run my car at 12.5 afr's on q16. I dont tune my car but I see the logs.
Reply
Old Aug 30, 2009 | 06:36 PM
  #24  
littlebluecrx's Avatar
Honda-Tech Member
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,459
Likes: 0
From: Crofton, Md, USA
Default Re: C16 vs. Q16 vs. VP Import?

Originally Posted by miller
I run q16 and run a target .91 lambda (which is 13.3.)
what are your egt's like ? I agree q16 is not happy running mid 11 afr's..... I like c16 for most customers cars, you can make good power and for a lot of people that dont pay attention to maintance of there fuel system it is safer . But import smells the best....
Reply
Old Aug 30, 2009 | 06:39 PM
  #25  
miller's Avatar
Honda-Tech Member
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 12,822
Likes: 0
From: long island, ny, united states
Default Re: C16 vs. Q16 vs. VP Import?

My egt's are pinned at 1745 (max on the racepak sensors) as soon as I click into 3rd gear. I am still being a little girl with the timing. That is part of it but I scared to go too fast. lol
Reply



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:56 AM.