I'm currently running c16 and was told to switch to q16....is there a considerable power gain?.

 

So people will say yes, and some will say no...

Honestly, it probably depends on your setup, but both fuel carry the same Octane Rating so you would be best to just try and see.

 

So by setup u mean...its more for like a high compression motor or just depends on power level?

 

Q16 is just more resistant to detonation that C16 cause of the added oxygen in the fuel, on boosted setups, prolly not gonna pick up too much power from switching....like if you were making 975 and wanted 1000whp might get it out of switching. At least thats what ive taken from running Q in my buddies 805whp automatic AWD DSM.

 

I dont agree with this statement, the Octane Rating of a Fuel is that fuel's resistance to detonation.

From VP's site:
http://www.vpracingfuels.com/vp-drag-racing.html

Q16 TYPICAL VALUES
• Color: Yellow
• Motor Octane 116
• Research Octane: 120+
• Specific Gravity: .716 at 60° F

C16 TYPICAL VALUES
• Color: Blue
• Motor Octane 117
• Specific Gravity: .735 at 60° F

Seems the "Motor" Octane is higher on the C16, but the "Researched Octane" is higher on the Q16

Whatever the differences in those are...LOL

 

It also says on Vps site that u should richen up 6%. With Q.

 

I agree you will have mixed opinions on the fuel, I personally do not like Q16 or any corrosive fuels, but I do like the way it smells lol. I first used c16, switched to Q16 and then to c23. I will more then likely stay with c23.

 

q16 is oxygenated and that is where the extra hp comes in to play. The MTBE used to add oxygen to the fuel makes it corrosive this chemical is also very hard on most rubber and plastic so not only is it corrosive but it will slowly take its toll on injectors and fuel pumps/regulators. IMO not worth running

 

I have seen 3%.

 

Thank you for answering the question. Seriously

 

I like the new Signature Miller.

 

I can only tell u this we used it on a low hp car (600) one car was 467 on c16 and same set up sam psi 536 so dont know O and i like the way it smells bur.

 

You gained 15% simply by changing the fuel? You'd have to have some serious data to back up that claim...

 

Q16 will work well in any drag racing application -- naturally aspirated, nitrous or blowers. Q16 is highly oxygenated, requiring a 4-6% increase in fuel flow, which will make 3-5% more power than competitive 116 octane fuels. Q16's oxygenation will significantly expand the range of air/fuel ratio acceptability, so performance WILL BE MORE CONSISTENT AND WONT VARY AS DRAMATICALLY WITH ALTITUDE OR DENSITY CHANGES.For bracket racers, variations in ET from run to run will be substantially reduced. This added fuel flow also effectively increases its octane by 6-8 numbers above its standard ASTM octane rating.

 

e85 for the win

 

I don't buy this AT ALL. Anyone who's run Q16 knows it runs like **** if it's not lean. The 'window' of what works well on Q16 is much smaller than that of C16.

 

What about alcohol and it's octane ratings?

 

Sorry i was wrong we also changed inj. at the same time. I forgot about that untill my friend told me.

 

The mix in my set up is 10.4 and run excellent with Q16

 

Lean it out a few points and it'll run more excellenter.

 

lol

 

hahaha thats awesome.


they tell you to richen it up 6% to get the same AFR, but they forget to tell you to lean it out 36% so that it actually works.

i did a single cam car with c16, we switched to q16 and it picked up a bunch of power-- most of the other set ups dont make enough difference to put up with the extra maintenance involved. its scary how lean that fuel likes to be ran

 

How much did the single cam car pick up Joe? If it's 'a bunch', i'd bet money there was something else contributing.

 

i dont remember the numbers.....but we did the runs on c16, drained everything, poured in q16 and the numbers were up a good bit. i told the customer something didnt seem right, as i had to add a boat load of fuel to get it to the "lean - target afr"

ive seen q16 wipe out numerous sets of injetors over time. this was a pretty drastic change, that immediately happened once the fuel was poured in. they were some old school rc injectors that shouldnt be affected by the fuel but something was up. once the map was adjusted to get to the desired afr, it was still up on power...but had to do too much to get it there if that makes sense. something didnt seem right for sure.

i saved both maps and i suggested he go back to the c16. that particular car has been on the dyno ton of times. one of those customers that changes a very small part on the car and wants to retune it. its back on c16 now.

i have a car on the dyno right now with q16. the stuff just smells like cancer. we have already had the talk of ditching the 1600's and going to 2000's and c16. think its going to be a winter project.

 

We have seen consistent gains when switching from C to Q. I havent had any issues with it destroying fuel systems other then non coated sumped stock tanks.

Q def loves to be run lean, thats for sure.

That few percent might be what you are missing on the backhalf Tony!! Should try making the switch.