I think this is only partially true. I base this on experience racing Nationals, the Runoffs specifically (like Nationals, many think the stakes are high enough to justify $40+/gallon fuel), discussions with a number of top drivers, and many years of dyno testing.
If a motor is very limited/restricted on modifications, then high octane, and most additives that are considered illegal, won't do much, if anything, to increase power at the wheels. However quite a number of available additives that I know for a fact were used before fuel testing will produce anywhere from 3% to 18% more power on less restrictive motors. So if someone with a heavily modified motor used some of these additives while claiming they were using "street" fuel, they could quite possibly get away with it because of the wider allowances. They probably would fail the "race gas" testing.
So much of the point of the different testing is to protect us from ourselves. The additives used are almost always very toxic (if you've ever been next to a car using some of this stuff on the grid, you wouldn't question this - as you try to breath and wipe the tears from your eyes at the 1 minute warning). If a heavily restricted motor won't benefit from the additives, then why bother? And if these same motors run an O2 sensor, street fuel is preferrable. If a motor is modified, as even "limited prep" motors are allowed to be, higher octane is required, and in most cases the valve seats also require leaded fuels. Many additives that shouldn't be unleashed on the public will produce beneficial results in these types of motors. These additives can mostly be detected with the restrictive race fuel testing, but they have too great a risk of passing the less restrictive street fuel tests.
[/b]
Bookmarks