Highly oxygenated and non-oxygenated gasolines were compared on the dyno for several years. We spent a lot of time to select the optimum spark advance settings and jetting for each mixture. The oxygenated fuels provided no benefits. Is there a reason for this?
Well, I really don't know why you have seen that. But, this is what I really do know.
I often use my Nitrous Hayabusa for fuel test. It has a relatively low static compression, but has a LOT of engine modifications. I've tested the following VP fuels C12, C16, Q16, MRX02, MR12 over a couple days along with 89 octane pump (8% ethanol) and pump E85 (80% ethanol), PLUS Ignite Race Fuel 114 (90%) ethanol. For reference, the bike makes ~185 wHP on 89 Pump.
The non-oxygenated fuels produce less power while MR12 will pickup almost 10 wHP over pump with MRX02 in a close second. Ignite Race Fuel is also very close with a timing bump. Fueling has to be adjusted as much as +10% with oxygenated gasolines and while I did adjust timing, it really didn't make a HUGE difference except with Ignite. And of course the ethanol based fuels require about 30% more fuel.
x2!
This is my opinion, based on my experiences. YMMV, so, for what it's worth . . . . .
I have supervised many fuel comparison dyno tests. Often, it is difficult to perform a direct 'A' Vs 'B' test, for various reasons, but fuel "chemistry" is usually the reason.
A/ It is unusual to gain power by changing the fuel hose from one container to another,
unless, the fuels are quite "different", or, one fuel has some sort of "power additive" . . . and that is
NOT a valid 'A' Vs 'B' test
2/ Very different fuel chemistry is going to require a serious change to the "tune specs". S/plugs, timing, fuel amount, injection timing, etc, etc. You give away "potential power" if this is not explored on the dyno.
d/ Even straight "hydrocarbon" gasolines can vary greatly by "properties". Use only enough octane rating as your engine requires. More is just a waste of your budget, and the fuel's potential.
MIGHT cost you power.
z/ Be prepared to supply a knowledgeable fuel engineer your engine specs. The answer: "I don't know." to their questions, earns you their pity, or scorn, depending on your attitude . . . . .
AGAIN, this is a complex interaction, and deserves to be "thoroughly" tested,
on the engine dyno, where conditions can be closely monitored.Your mileage might vary, based on how thoroughly you test.
If you don't think a dyno testing budget is worthwhile and you decide to "skip it", it can be done successfully,
BUT, it is rare to get a "good result" without engine damage . . . . You have my best wishes for success. I also suggest that you speak with a member of this forum who has done it "both ways", to see what they think. You already have my opinion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Dynotestboy