Godfather | Jay

First off, I want to say that for some reason I've noticed that AMS takes forever to regulate the RPMs when I first turn on the car. They hang around 1300 and the car will drive itself in 2nd gear - no need to hit the gas - until it warms up. APR brings the RPMs down very quickly. Weird.

Now to the data. I filled up with a full tank of Sunoco 100 ($4.29/gallon). I didn't give either one much time to adapt - just drove long enough to warm up, then did a couple WOT runs before logging. APR's timing was impressive across the rev range as you'd expect from the octane specific program. AMS seemed to be learning and might have closed the gap a tad more given time. AMS had to deal with higher humidity.

What I've learned from this is just how much of a difference ambient conditions make. In colder, dryer air, I pulled better FATS numbers on 93 (4.7x on AMS). FATS runs always need to be taken with a grain of salt - dry air, low pressure, etc are huge.

<img src="http://pictureposter.audiworld.com/99226/octane100.jpg">

B5QShip

gives such sh!tty #'s. Something doesn't seem quite right to me...

Godfather | Jay

4.7ish runs - data in picposter.

Godfather | Jay

I think a-boxes (Bosch) reads lower, too...

Swank4

1. My AMS idles just fine. 30 seconds after startup it settles down from 1300 rpm to just below 1000. You must have a glitch in the ECU or your elevation is causing issues (I'm at sea level). My MAF hits 270 g/s.

2. In my experience AMS runs WORSE on 100 than it does on 96-97. DarinS4 showed WAY back that AMS adapts up to about 97 but not well beyond that. I ran FATS with 100 octane and it was slower than 96 octane (I chose 96 because it was an even mix of 100/91). With 96 I would get timing to hit 20 degrees. APR might adapt better to the 100...but comparative speed might be the same.

3. FATS for me was 4.7 at sea level, 60F, 50% humidity, 96 octane.