I have always heard that higher octane burns slower. Now, does that mean, slower as in milliseconds or microseconds slower? Or tenths of seconds?
And, as we do know, there is still crankshaft rotation in ever microsecond, how much DOES this actually make a difference? If the fuel @ 87 octane is completely consumed with the A/F present in say (an arbitrary number) 0.1 seconds. And in 0.10 seconds that crankshaft has moved and the piston is now say 1/4" down in the chamber (a guess here, just numbers). Now we introduce in 93 octane. And it is consumed in 0.15 seconds, and the crank has moved, and the piston is now down 3/8" down in the cyl.
How much does this matter? Is it more efficient to burn longer or shorter? We can get a higher spike of pressure if it burns faster. This theory says it will create a higher force to start moving the piston down and the crankshaft earlier or quicker, but at a weak point for leverage.
But if the design of the engine is short rod/long rod/long stroke/short stroke, etc, which ends up being better for power or efficiency, or even economy?
In theory, it seems that higher octane might be a little easy on the bottom end of the engine. And in theory, might the slower burn allow a long flame to reach more cracks and crevices in the chamber to reach every atom of fuel molocule, thereby reducing emissions and increasing fuel economy due to more BTU's of fuel being burned and exhausted. The longer burn might take more advantage of an increased lever of the crankshaft being moved farther before the burn stops.
Ok, yes, I am sick, I think WAAAYYYY to much on these things.