Pre-Ignition = a manic Pyrokinetic
Detonation = Pyrokinetic with Touret's
I do research stuff on my own. Naturally, given that the internet (and even published references) is horribly prone to the proliferation of rumors and "accepted fact" it is difficult to avoid completely. I've double checked the burn speed thing a number of times, I've found books, web articles and articles published by race fuel companies (yup, could be nothing but marketing behind them). Many had charts comparing the differences of burn speeds and most recommend pulling timing if knocking if you were already running the highest octane you could and the knocking was not detonation related.... I've even watched my friend's drag team pull timing to get rid of a knock when they had to use a lower octane than usual... so it's hard for me to accept there isn't a difference. It may be less common these days and it may be so small as to not really count with pump gas, but there does appear to be a lot of backing behind it. OR is this essentially a misunderstanding between the cause and the effect, the flame takes so much longer to reach a self sustaining combustion (and as such to actually create power) and as such you end up with the same result as if the fuel were burning slower? Same effect in the end but a different cause.
I find it unlikely that even if all the various octane fuels and all the various fuel formulations out there had the same burn duration from flame front to end gas that the distribution of power throughout would be identical. In which case, when compared across two identical engines there would be no difference in power output. However, in two identical engines running different octane fuels the one running the lower octane does often produce more power (regardless of how small the increase it's often there and I'm not going off of any one persons results nor am I just going off of tests published by diyers or by manufacturers. The tests that I've read I only consider if they're using the same base parameters for each batch of tests, this includes the base timing.)... now is it simply because more of the critical expansion is occurring closer to the crank's critical position whereas with the higher octane fuel the critical expansion is occurring late and as such power has already been lost? (I'm referring to peak cylinder pressure at ~20ºATDC)
If general posts of what works for others isn't enough and you feel the need to step up and clarify... fine. They're oversimplifying, go ahead and provide more info. But don't step up spit out that everyone's wrong and add enough information as to add nothing (but seem really cool in doing so).
I know dick about fuel compared to many people. I do know a bit more than most and admittedly, as we all know, there's a point where you know just enough to get into even more trouble than those who don't know a thing... with fuel... it seems I'm right there. It seems to me that there are a TON of factors which you seem to like avoiding in this, in which case perhaps it would just be better to shut up and let people discuss what works for them, under what conditions and what they've found when they've strayed from that setup. They're really not much worse off than you telling me I need to be running 92 octane based on nothing other than my engine's static CR.
