| ilovetocamp |
With the price of gas getting so high I am wondering if anyone knows if the MDX has to use premium fuel.
We have only used premium but I wonder if it would hurt to mix a tank of regular now and then. I'm not trying to be cheap but don't won't to pay 20 cents a gallon more if not necessary.
Thanks in advance. |
|
|
| nightguy |
quote:
Originally posted by ilovetocamp
With the price of gas getting so high I am wondering if anyone knows if the MDX has to use premium fuel.
We have only used premium but I wonder if it would hurt to mix a tank of regular now and then. I'm not trying to be cheap but don't won't to pay 20 cents a gallon more if not necessary.
Thanks in advance.
Short answer, yes you can use 87 octane, the manual clearly says you can use less than 91. But you really must read this...have fun !
http://www.acuramdx.org/forums/show...&threadid=10194 |
|
|
| anjan |
quote:
Originally posted by nightguy
Short answer, yes you can use 87 octane, the manual clearly says you can use less than 91. But you really must read this...have fun !
http://www.acuramdx.org/forums/show...&threadid=10194
Ugh! beat me to it! :2:
Let me mention that while 87 can be used, you take a performance and mileage hit for minimal savings. |
|
|
| 01MBMDX76 |
ilovetocamp
If you like to read the 20 pages of posts its a great read. If you want a summary of yes/no then read pages 19/20. Manual recommends 91, Anjan's post say you will lose performance and mileage, others will say no problem with 87, I used the comparison to help me with mine. Try it! By the way Supreme here for us is ave. $2.59 and rising:4: Good luck |
|
|
| phins2rt |
quote:
Originally posted by 01MBMDX76
By the way Supreme here for us is ave. $2.59 and rising:4: Good luck
:eek: Holy crap!!! Hopefully that is not the shape of things to come!! I think it was around $2.11 here and that is the highest I have ever seen it! |
|
|
| ilovetocamp |
quote:
Originally posted by 01MBMDX76
ilovetocamp
If you like to read the 20 pages of posts its a great read. If you want a summary of yes/no then read pages 19/20. Manual recommends 91, Anjan's post say you will lose performance and mileage, others will say no problem with 87, I used the comparison to help me with mine. Try it! By the way Supreme here for us is ave. $2.59 and rising:4: Good luck
Thanks, I did read several pages and wasn't sure I was coming to any conclusion. I don't mind spending the money if necessary but don't want to waste money.
Thanks again |
|
|
| nightguy |
quote:
Originally posted by ilovetocamp
Thanks, I did read several pages and wasn't sure I was coming to any conclusion. I don't mind spending the money if necessary but don't want to waste money.
Thanks again
There isn't one and never will be. You're gonna have to decide for yourself. |
|
|
| frostyra |
quote:
Originally posted by anjan
Let me mention that while 87 can be used, you take a performance and mileage hit for minimal savings.
Hate to get in your face, but -- BULL! My mileage is the same for 93, 89, or 87. The only known change in performance is at wide-open throttle -- and if you do that very often, your mileage sucks anyway. Do a search for an old thread by member Mogur on octane tests that he did. |
|
|
| Echo2625 |
| Oh boy....here we go again! |
|
|
| anjan |
quote:
Originally posted by frostyra
Hate to get in your face, but -- BULL! My mileage is the same for 93, 89, or 87. The only known change in performance is at wide-open throttle -- and if you do that very often, your mileage sucks anyway. Do a search for an old thread by member Mogur on octane tests that he did.
To each his own. I read the octane tests and I can quote numerous similar tests with conflicting results but let's not get into that. I'm really happy 87 is working for you. On my 2005, even with 89, I get about 3 miles per gallon less. Haven't measured the horsepower.
Bull or not here's where I stand -
1. Not doubting Acura that the engine is designed to take advantage of higher octane.
2. If I couldn't spend another $150 per year, $12.50 a month extra on gas, I'd bought a Kia.
In conclusion, yes it might be BULL to you because someone ran a test but I'm not a Penny Wise Pound Foolish club member. As long as it works for you, I'm happy.... |
|
|
| ScoobyT |
quote:
Originally posted by anjan
To each his own. I read the octane tests and I can quote numerous similar tests with conflicting results but let's not get into that. I'm really happy 87 is working for you. On my 2005, even with 89, I get about 3 miles per gallon less. Haven't measured the horsepower.
Bull or not here's where I stand -
1. Not doubting Acura that the engine is designed to take advantage of higher octane.
2. If I couldn't spend another $150 per year, $12.50 a month extra on gas, I'd bought a Kia.
In conclusion, yes it might be BULL to you because someone ran a test but I'm not a Penny Wise Pound Foolish club member. As long as it works for you, I'm happy....
I like the Kia reference. BTW, the mileage stays THE SAME. |
|
|
| DaleB |
quote:
Originally posted by Echo2625
Oh boy....here we go again!
:lurk: |
|
|
| mgmdx |
This argument will never end. :headshake I do not see why this is even an issue. :rolleyes:
Regardless whether you get better performance and mileage with premium vs. mid-grade vs. regular, the fact remains that the long-term effect of using lower octane gas in the MDX is not known. Moreover, the performance difference may not be apparent for most normal day-to-day driving, but becomes much more obvious when MDX is operated under more demanding conditions (such as at higher altitude, towing, etc.)
In my opinion, the savings of less than $100 per year are negligible compared to the $40,000+ that we paid for our MDXs, and therefore it is very easy to justify the use of premium gas. Would saving additional $8 every month really make a big dent in your budget? If anyone answers "yes" than they should not be driving an MDX in the first place and stick with something like KIA, as suggested by anjan. |
|
|
| iceman1331 |
My recommendation is while your X is still under the original Acura Manufacturer warranty, it makes sense to use the premium fuel as suggested in the owner's manual.
Otherwsie, when something goes wrong with your X, the dealer may blame on you using the cheaper fuel in violation of the manufacturer's recommendation in the manual.
For the peace of mind to secure full warranty of your X, use supreme fuel for the 1st 4 years, after which, your X is out of warranty, and you can decide at your own risk and affordability. :4: |
|
|
| nightguy |
quote:
Originally posted by iceman1331
Otherwsie, when something goes wrong with your X, the dealer may blame on you using the cheaper fuel in violation of the manufacturer's recommendation in the manual. :4:
Nope. :headshake Manual still says you can use octane less than 91. |
|
|
| Acura4 |
quote:
Originally posted by nightguy
Nope. :headshake Manual still says you can use octane less than 91.
I've always thought the manual says "91 or higher". Maybe I'm wrong but I'll have to go read again as I'm curious, and my X will always get the highest grade as it has always been. |
|
|
| CTPYHA |
I'd like to see dealer making determination on what gas you have in your tank...
:rolleyes: |
|
|
| nightguy |
quote:
Originally posted by Acura4
I've always thought the manual says "91 or higher". Maybe I'm wrong but I'll have to go read again as I'm curious, and my X will always get the highest grade as it has always been.
Better to find gas that doesn't have ethanol. It's easier on the fuel delivery components and gives you better mileage. On occasion the one grade that didn't have it was premium. That would be an excellent reason to use it. |
|
|
| CTPYHA |
Ok, and for folks who are too lazy to read the manual here it goes:
"Your Acura is designed to operate on premium unleaded gasoline with a pump octane number of 91 or higher. Use of lower octane gasoline can cause occasional metallic knocking noises in the engine and will result in decreased performance."
Now, that I wrote all that... I use 87 and my X works just fine. No "metallic knocking" and no noticeable decrease in performance. As far as MPG, it seems to be about the same, but I am waiting for warmer weather to do real test. |
|
|
| Rhythmicity |
Another option is to use the gas pumps at BJs warehouse. Most regular around Cary and Raleigh is now around $2.05 and premium is around $2.25. I used by BJ card and the premium was only $2.17. Not a huge difference, but some savings over the long run.
Right now I am so happy with my new MDX that I don't mind putting the premium in, especially during the break-in period. My focus over the past week has been just learning to use all the voice commands. Having that woman under the hood answer my every command is a nice change,,,ahhh,,eerrr, well almost every command. ;-) |
|
|
| anjan |
quote:
Originally posted by CTPYHA
Ok, and for folks who are too lazy to read the manual here it goes:
"Your Acura is designed to operate on premium unleaded gasoline with a pump octane number of 91 or higher. Use of lower octane gasoline can cause occasional metallic knocking noises in the engine and will result in decreased performance."
Now, that I wrote all that... I use 87 and my X works just fine. No "metallic knocking" and no noticeable decrease in performance. As far as MPG, it seems to be about the same, but I am waiting for warmer weather to do real test.
My personal opinion only -
o Read the thread in Fuels on this and you'll see my lengthy explanation that there will be NO knocking because this is (again) not a Kia. The onboard computer will retard the ignition timing to adjust to lower octane.
o My contention is NOT AT ALL whether lower octane can be used. Of course it can be. However, the difference between the prices is so miniscule that it seems sophomoric. If there was a huge difference between the grades, it would make sense. I'd save more money by using newspapers instead of Charmin Ultra.
Honestly guys, as Acura owners we have to keep a brand image :) You will not see this discussion on BMW, Audi, and Porsche Cayenne forums. |
|
|
| CTPYHA |
Just a thought: if I was getting a dollar every time a see BMW or Lexus fueling with 87, I could retire by now...
:2: |
|
|
| DaleB |
quote:
Originally posted by CTPYHA
Just a thought: if I was getting a dollar every time a see BMW or Lexus fueling with 87, I could retire by now...
:2:
I hear that. If this was a Cayenne, etc. primo fuel would likely be a requirement not a recommendation. High performance has it's costs.
While the VTEC is a marvelous engine, the MDX is not a road burner.
The width of the tire rims alone should tell you that. It's a swift, nice handling mid-sized luxury SUV.
Of course, if you do performance mods, drive like Jackie Stewart, do towing, or otherwise put it under heavy loads, or run with WOT a good portion of the time, you would be wise to use premium fuel to get the most out of it. |
|
|
| frostyra |
quote:
Originally posted by nightguy
Better to find gas that doesn't have ethanol. It's easier on the fuel delivery components and gives you better mileage. On occasion the one grade that didn't have it was premium. That would be an excellent reason to use it.
I believe that was true maybe 25-30 years ago, but the synthetic rubbers in the fuel system supposedly were re-formulated so that ethanol won't harm them anymore. I had two 318V8 '78 Volare's (I must be a glutton for punishment!) that ran MUCH better on gasohol (10% ethanol) than on plain gasoline -- but the mpg was slightly less, as you say. |
|
|
| nightguy |
quote:
Originally posted by frostyra
I believe that was true maybe 25-30 years ago, but the synthetic rubbers in the fuel system supposedly were re-formulated so that ethanol won't harm them anymore. I had two 318V8 '78 Volare's (I must be a glutton for punishment!) that ran MUCH better on gasohol (10% ethanol) than on plain gasoline -- but the mpg was slightly less, as you say.
The manual for my dad's Accord (or is it the Camry) said it's bad for the neoprene seals. Manufacturers have probably as you say caught up but I just have a preference to steer away. |
|
|
| nightguy |
quote:
Originally posted by anjan
However, the difference between the prices is so miniscule that it seems sophomoric. If there was a huge difference between the grades, it would make sense. I'd save more money by using newspapers instead of Charmin Ultra.
So there isn't a huge difference ? Why bother then. Ah, maybe you mean price difference.
To make a final decision for yourself, it might help to view it as a premium percentage rather than actual price. Here there's usually about 16 cents difference between 87 and 91. I haven't priced 92 or 93. So, at current prices it's giving away an additional 7.4%. If the price goes down it will be of course be greater; if it (likely) goes up the percentage will be less. That's assuming the price difference is constant.
7.4% is nothing to a lot of people. For me, the 7.4% is a lot relative to inflation and what the bank pays me so that I can keep free checking and bill pay. I may not be getting 265 horsepower but I've never had my MDX at 5600 rpm either. |
|
|
| chas22 |
| I own a 2004 Honda Pilot and have had no problem with regular gas, as for my 2004 Acura TL I use mid-grade with no problems. Whatever you run don't switch every other tank full, Let your computer and engine get use to that grade of gas. Why do I run mid-grade in the Acura, the engines are almost the same? It's because of the 270 Hp. and the higher compression ratio. |
|
|
| Dick at Incline |
I switched between 87 and 91 for the first few thousand miles, and noticed no difference in mileage or performance. Since the Acura and Honda Pilot engines are basically identical (except for intake or exhaust mods, which give slightly more HP at WOT for the MDX), the engines are the same--therefore I chose to use 87, since the performance is the same for me.
BTW, a comment on the post above, towing a trailer certainly puts more strain on the car--HOWEVER, high elevation is just the opposite. At 6,500 feet where I live, I only get about 80% of my Sea-level HP. Why is that? Because the atmospheric pressure is less and therefore the pressure in my cylinders is less, permitting a lower octane gas to be used. My rule of thumb is that you can drop 1-octane point for every 1,200 feet of altitude--so for me that's about 5-points. In the higher elevation mountain states, such as Wyoming and Montana, they actually sell regular that is 85 octane.
Bottom line is, I always use 87 octane and find no difference in Mileage--at a constant 70mph, I average between 22-23mpg--not bad for a big '03 SUV me thinks. |
|
|
| tfe691 |
I just whipped out my 04 manual for the X- it says that the recommended fuel is 91 octane or above.
Maybe the 04 is ifferent-which year says 87 or 89 is ok? |
|
|
| Dick at Incline |
quote:
Originally posted by tfe691
I just whipped out my 04 manual for the X- it says that the recommended fuel is 91 octane or above.
Maybe the 04 is ifferent-which year says 87 or 89 is ok?
No MDX manual for any year says 87 or 89 is OK, but those of that use 87, know there is no noticable difference in performance or mpg. Here at Lake Tahoe, 87-octane is 25-30 cents/gal cheaper than 91. That's about 5-bucks per tankful. |
|
|
| perk |
I've been reading the back and forth on this issue for two years. It seems some members think that 87 gives same mileage as 91+ and some others say that 91+ gives better mileage. Because no one has actually gone out and tested their theories, clearly it all comes down to conjecture, which is ultimately decided by personal preference. But, if you're the analytical type, like me, and want actual data, I've got some for you.
While I was traveling across the USA last summer , I decided to test these theories on 87 vs. 91+ octane. My biggest question was whether you'd get more or less gas mileage. In short, there was precisely zero difference in gas mileage. I did the test several times. When I was traveling across particularly flat areas for long distance, (Kansas, Arizona, Texas, Florida) I filled up with premium on one tank, then regular on the next. I observed no difference whatsoever.
So those of you who want to use premium, more power to you. But those of you using it based on incorrect assumptions, now you know. The only reason Acura recommends 91+ octane is so that it can maintain the brand differentiation Premium image (more hp) of Acura over Honda, as explained in my previous post. |
|
|
| phild_mason |
This is taken from Acura's compare feature. First listing is MDX, second Pilot. I expected everything to be the same except HP, but the difference in final drive ratio threw me. Anyone know why that is?
Engine Name 3.5L V6 3.5L V6
Cylinders 6 6
Valves 24 24
Valves Configuration SOHC SOHC
Displacement CC 3471 3471
Bore X Stroke 3.50 X 3.66 3.50 X 3.66
Compression Ratio 10.0:1 10.0:1
Horsepower @ RPM 265@5800 255@5600
Torque @ RPM 253@3500 250@4500
Fuel System Multi-Point Fuel Injected Multi-Point Fuel Injected
Engine Location Front Front
Driveline All Wheel Drive All Wheel Drive
Transmission Speeds 5 5
Transmission Auto/Manual Automatic Automatic
Transmission Overdrive Y Y
Final Drive Ratio 4.38 4.43
Anyway, back to mileage, the best mileage I have gotten in some time came from a tank of 87. I think there are differences by brand, which is a crapshoot. Depending on where you fill up, the same brand may come from different jobbers. I tend to agree that Acura's premium requirement is largely snob appeal. I am happy if I get 23 on the highway. |
|
|
| nightguy |
| Ugh ! It's still "Gasoline with an octane number lower than 91 may be used, with reduced performance".:16: |
|
|
| Dick at Incline |
quote:
Originally posted by nightguy
Ugh ! It's still "Gasoline with an octane number lower than 91 may be used, with reduced performance".:16:
We had a member of this site who used a Delta Drive-right Car chip, to measure and log Engine Ignition timing under a variety of conditions. The only difference he found between using 87 and 91 Octane was at WOT when the timing with the 87 was a few degrees retarded from when he was using 91 octane. But, except for WOT, timing was the same for both Octanes. So, I don't understand the comment about "reduced performance" except at WOT--and there certainly seems to be no "Reduced Gas Mileage". |
|
|
| DaleB |
If you feel the MDX is 'on the fence' with regards to octane needs, consider this.
Octane requirements increase with higher temperatures, less air density, and greater loads.
Octane requirements decrease with colder denser air and higher altitudes.
I select 87 or 89 based on driving conditions. I rarely fill with 91 unless the situation demands it. I feel this is totally safe, since the electronic controls will also adjust iginition timing as needed. |
|
|
| nightguy |
I don't have the manual here cuz the wife has the car so I'm quoting out of the '04 and '05 brochures. But that's the dealio.
The reduced performance is from the reduced horsepower using lower octane gas. There is slightly more heptane (87/13 as opposed to 91/9 or whatever the actual mixture of your gas is) thrown into the mix. Heptane can't handle the compression quite as well so lower octane gas can't handle quite as much compression before igniting. Even though the horsepower is less you wouldn't notice it except under high rpm conditions so it's really a moot point. Note that the 265 horsepower is at 5600 or 5800 rpm depending on your model year. The engine adjusts for the lower compression by retarding the timing slightly and all is good. This is a benefit of computer controlled engines. |
|
|
| anjan |
Let me say at the outset that I am ONLY commenting on two points mentioned here, and not going into the octane rating, horsepower, etc.
Saying that the MDX and Pilot engines are "same" is aking to saying two houses are same because they have the same furnace. Just because a engine has the same displacement and design DOES NOT mean its the same engine. This same 3.5 Liter V6 engine is also used in Honda's CART and Formula One cars. So you think the requirements will be the same? Using the same argument, they should be able to use 87 octane on the 1200hp F1 car :D What makes the "engine" is a whole lot components managing it that can make a world of difference.
The adjustment done by the onboard computer will register noticeably on your second tank of gas of the same grade. And make sure you reset the counter between fills. Doing the same test gave me 12.3 mpg on 87 and currently I'm getting 15.5 filling up with Premium. If the quality of the gas makes no difference at all in mileage then the members here who have noticed a jump with Top Tier Gasoline (approved by companies like BMW, Honda, Toyota, and GM) must be high - http://www.acuramdx.org/forums/show...threadid=20407.
Whether I care about the differences (in any area) is a personal issue and everyone is right. For many the difference in price towards an MDX is not justified and they stick with the Pilot. And that's fine. However, that DOES NOT mean that MDX and Pilot are same in quality and otherwise. From everything from fuel to pants, there is a difference in quality in everything. I cannot afford a Ralph Lauren Purple Label trouser but for me to claim that as similar to the regular RLs will be asinine.
My 2 pennies... |
|
|
| DaleB |
quote:
Originally posted by anjan
I cannot afford a Ralph Lauren Purple Label trouser but for me to claim that as similar to the regular RLs will be asinine.
My 2 pennies...
Plus they will charge you more to clean the Ralph Lauren if you spill gasoline on it. :D |
|
|
| anjan |
quote:
Originally posted by DaleB
Plus they will charge you more to clean the Ralph Lauren if you spill gasoline on it. :D
True :2: |
|
|
| phild_mason |
"If the quality of the gas makes no difference at all in mileage then the members here who have noticed a jump with Top Tier Gasoline must be high"
Just so happens the good mileage I got with 87 was Quik Trip gas. I kind of blew off the Top Tier stuff, but perhaps there is something there.... |
|
|
| anjan |
quote:
Originally posted by phild_mason
Just so happens the good mileage I got with 87 was Quik Trip gas. I kind of blew off the Top Tier stuff, but perhaps there is something there....
I'm pissed that there's no Top Tier Gasoline station in Western NY. But its safe to say that ExxonMobil has the worst quality gas. Delta Sonic and Hess seem to give me more miles. |
|
|
| Dr. Ken |
| If the price of a fill-up of premium bothers you, just do what I do: fill the tank when ever it is half empty (or half full for left brainers). That way the $ spent does not seem to be so bad. Of course you will need to stop at a gas station twice as often. |
|
|
| nightguy |
quote:
Originally posted by anjan
Saying that the MDX and Pilot engines are "same" is aking to saying two houses are same because they have the same furnace. Just because a engine has the same displacement and design DOES NOT mean its the same engine.
What exactly is different about them then, other than the dual exhaust on the Acura - which technically isn't a real dual exhaust ?
quote:
Originally posted by anjan
This same 3.5 Liter V6 engine is also used in Honda's CART and Formula One cars. So you think the requirements will be the same?
I'm not a big racing guy, but I thought they used a 3.0 L V-8 ? I can sit through some of the bigger NASCAR events, but I've just never been into Formula 1. I will defer to your wisdom.
quote:
Originally posted by anjan
The adjustment done by the onboard computer will register noticeably on your second tank of gas of the same grade. And make sure you reset the counter between fills. Doing the same test gave me 12.3 mpg on 87 and currently I'm getting 15.5 filling up with Premium.
I thought I was getting better mileage until I realized I forgot to account for much colder weather. I've been using 87 for 6 months and am now finally seeing a 2-3 mpg jump in economy and it's not that warm out yet. Of course results may vary from car to car. :)
BTW, on my Sunday drive back from Kennedy Space Center to Miami the gas station had 5 grades. Something like 87, 89, 90, 91, 93. What the hell ? |
|
|
| markn |
| In Wisconsin I use 87 octane reformulated (10% alcohol) (Amaco, BP) in my 04 X from October to April 1st and get 18 mpg (winter) with a 80/20 mix of 55 mph and small town driving. During the remaining months I use 93 octane because I'm pulling a large trailer 7,000 miles that weighs 2,500 lbs. Because of the warmer weather I average 21 mpg on the same 80/20mix of driving. Unless you're demanding a great deal of power from the X (4th gear all the time on the highway) my opinion is that premium is a waste of money and not necessary. Most drivers (including myself) couldn’t tell if the X was filled with 93 octane or 87 octane if you left it up to someone else to fill your tank switching blends at random |
|
|
| ghost |
MDX MPG/MPH graphs
Man I feel old! Should bump this thread every couple years, just because... :cool: |
|
|
| Dr. Ken |
| After reading many of the comments on 87 vs 91, I have come to the conclusion that, yes, I would save money initially by getting the 87, but I will stick with the 91. Mainly, because the manual calls for it, or at least strongly suggests it, and the sticker on the fuel door says "premium fuel only". Besides, I think that the car is happier with the good stuff in its belly. |
|
|
| superdave |
| As a side note to all of the people that comment on the cost differential. Here in the frozen north, the price differential is 11 cents per LITRE!! That is 41.635 cents per US Gallon. On a 73 Litre tank (given that I gas up usually once per week min), that is a $417.56 difference per year assuming that I can keep it to only 1 tank per week. So it's not that small of a difference here in Canada. Also given that it does not get into the 90's here, the need for premium decreases (unless u happen to be towing stuff all of the time). Just some more info |
|
|
| 01MBMDX76 |
superdave,
Thanks for the info from up north.
Just fyi just saw a supreme price of $2.97/ regular $2.77. Hmmm not even summer and it's pushing $3. Also SUV sales dipped.
Guess its a good time to buy that newer X sooner than later :eek: As for the continuing debate of to 91 or not to 91, that's the question, whether it be nobler to go cheap with 87 or 89 or 91 or 93 is entirely up to you. :4: And of course YMMV(your mileage may vary) :2: Cheers! |
|
|
| Dick at Incline |
| Wow, it wont be long and gas will cost more than Water--Crystal Geyser, or Evian. Anyway, you can keep track of where the price will go by looking at Crude prices. Gas will go up about 1.4cents/gallon for every dollar crude oil goes up. Right now crude is about $57/barrel. |
|
|
| DaleB |
quote:
Originally posted by Dick at Incline
Wow, it wont be long and gas will cost more than Water--Crystal Geyser, or Evian. Anyway, you can keep track of where the price will go by looking at Crude prices. Gas will go up about 1.4cents/gallon for every dollar crude oil goes up. Right now crude is about $57/barrel.
See the latest reviews of the Toyota Highlander hybrid? Quite impressive. Close to 30 mpg open road and not much less around town. Of course the prices approaches the MDX and RX, etc. but it's a noble goal. Power is 268 hp and it does the 0-60 sprint in 7.3.
Isn't technology wonderful?
As far as water prices go, let's be glad we are not driving steam engines because of the demand for Evian over the store brand would just be too much to take. :cool: |
|
|
|
