Don't start trolling that old argument in this thread too. You know it has been done to death elswhere.

I did not use Boost Cutout Override in my tests, it does not work, see attached.

Farber, there is an explanation in the .doc file in the zip file in my OP. Its basically chart building from the output data using Excel or OpenOffice. Let me know if there's anything that isn't clear or needs expanding.

EDIT: I just updated my OP as I saw I had not attached the zip file and then I replaced it with a few corrections to the instructions.

I would also like to see ME-109 climb and performance tests. I bet it's borked too

Thanks for posting Klem

Hurricane MkI 87 octane vs 100 octane
 

Just did a quick comparison of Hurricane Mk I 87 Octane vs 100 octane at 1000, 5000 and 10000 feet.

Seems the old 87 octane is faster than the 100 octane :(

Would appreciate it if anyone else would like to check that.

[/QUOTE]Merlin II and III got 12lb boost in WEP settings with 100oct fuel...

Spitfire IIa ALL them got 100oct engines (Merlin III or Merlin XII), so... hurricanes too

We will test all them again =) its no problem ok?

cya

Your figures are without boost. The difference was AIUI (which may or may not be correct :confused:) that 100 octane allowed more boost at low level. So figures without boost shouldn't show a difference, and with boost only up to FTH.

I think that's precisely the point (or problem) that there shouldn't be a difference ingame between the 87 and 100 octane without boost but there is. All I hope is that the devs had said that the FM were still WOP and so data like this is good as it can highlight problems with the current ingame FMs.

There will be variations between runs at exactly the same settings (unless they are flown by utterly flawless autopilots). If the variation between runs with different settings is in about the same range as the difference between runs with the same settings, then that's the best that can be expected, and that graph looks as if it might be the case. If more tests show similar variations between runs at the same settings, it's probably alright, if with the same settings you come up with identical numbers time after time, and there is a significant (in the technical statistical sense) difference between settings, then there might be a cause for concern.

I shan't bother to do any testing myself.