| toocool4skool |
I just got a 2007 MDX with Tech, and have been reading the owners manual this morning and read the strong recommendation to use high octane fuel (91 or higher) and to use regular fuel for rare situations or when premium is not available. And that regular fuel can cause engine damage.
The dealer said it was fine to use regular fuel in the 2007, which I did with my 2006 MDX without problems (but i only had it for 3 mos!!) and it too had the same dire warning.
Does anyone else with the 2007 planning on using regular, and if so are the warnings unfounded??
Thanks.
PS I really liked my 2006 MDX (base), very practical and cheap (30900). But I really LOVE my 2007 MDX tech, the suspension, nav, key fob and stereo are worth the extra 10gs. I had planned to put in a 6k aftermarket nav/sound/ent system in the the 06 b/c the factory stereo stunk, so i only have to justify the other 4k! |
|
|
| dj-mdx2 |
| I've been using regular on my 01, but plan on using premium on my 07. If I'm going to maximize driving a 300 HP 50K vehicle, I might as well. :) |
|
|
| toocool4skool |
| Thanks DJ. Yes thats what my gut is telling me to do. It will be a big sock at the pump but, I need to treat this car like one of my own children! |
|
|
| crazymjb |
My general thought is if a car recommends premium, and it has an 11:1 compression ratio, you spent 40-50K on the vehicle, bite the bullet.
Mike |
|
|
| s2k000L |
do your research: there is plenty of scientific data that proves 87 octane is more than sufficient with today's vehicles. furthermore, the premium gasolines are just the oil companies making their purses even bigger by making us believe we need higher octanes. now, if you plan on racing cars, that's a different story. but, i'm sure most of us will not see our cars/SUVs on the track.
that being said, i've been using regular gasoline on all my vehicles (even those that 'recommend' 91 octane or higher) since 1999--from honda civic's, S2000's, saab 9-3's, and even this, my fouth MDX! i haven't had any issues. :p |
|
|
| kiwi |
the reason they want 91 or better octane, is because your vehicle has a knock sensor, if you use crap fuel, then you motor will knock.
i dont understand some buyers, they drop the 40+k for a vehicle, then treat it like crap, poor fuel will also do other things, such as foul plugs sooner, and at like 35 bucks each, its a no brainer.
you also get better mileage with 91+ |
|
|
| toocool4skool |
Thanks all for the different perspectives. Seems like the majority reccommends following the manual. s2K, can you point me to the research?
Thanks. |
|
|
| SilveradoMDX |
Hmmm, don't get it for spending $$$+ for an MDX.
Prolong eating junk food such as McD, bound to have negative effect instead of eating healthy food.
As newer vehicles gets more sophisticated, so does the engine requiring higher premium fuels. Hydrogen and or hybrid will be the future for all vehicles.
For the newer MDX, take the premium road when such time is no longer needed, go lower. |
|
|
| carguy1234 |
| My '05 knocks with 87 so I use 92. This will depend on driving style, terrain, wind, etc. |
|
|
| crazymjb |
Octane is hardly a conspiracy at all. Using more than the RECOMMENDED octane won't do anything, but using less does have negative effects.
While it is possible if you never really get on the gas you may not knock, but if you knock, the sound you are hearing is the cylinder slamming against the cylinder walls, and in order for the computer to correct it, timing is retarded. By retarding timing you lose potential engine power as well as efficiency. Over time knocking can and will damage your engine.
In a vehicle with an 11:1 compression ratio it is flat out stupid to use anything lesser than premium unless you are really in a bind (can't find a pumping station).
Do what Honda/Acura says and use premium for chrissake.
Mike |
|
|
| jurincie |
| Mine runs just fine on regular unleaded just like my 03 did. The purpose of the knock sensor is to retard the timing when it encounters the slightest knock to keep it from doing any damage to the engine. This will reduce the horsepower slightly under some conditions. This is the same as I have done in every other car I have ever owned that requested premium. The one exception is my 2004 Corvette. If I do not feed it premium, there is a very noticeable knock which could damage the engine over time. |
|
|
| toocool4skool |
| Thanks Jurincie. Now the score is about even between pro-premium and going regular. |
|
|
| crazymjb |
In order to detect knock the engine has to knock in the first place. Even those occasional knocks can cause damage over time.
In addition, your mileage goes down. Yes you end up saving about 100 bucks(when you figure mileage), and thats not figuring the engineering that went into these engines to provide the higher power band.
Mike |
|
|
| DaleB |
It seems there are different categories of owners when it comes to reading the Owner's Manual:
1) Those who read it thoroughly, following recommendations as noted.
2) Those who don't read it all.
3) Those who read it and generally follow it, but if it says premium fuel is recommended then it must be a conspiracy.
To further muddy the waters there are those who think octane grade is a quality issue. When there are luxury vehicles with regular fuel recommendations.
I guess in the past one could use the 'more detergent' argument, but I can not remember seeing any economy cars left as rusting hulks on the side of the road because of inferior fuel.
In fact I can't remember the last car I had that actually had a fuel problem of any sort, at least not in the last 10 to 15 years. That included several that I ran on regular all the time.
No better advice than just following the owner's manual IMO if you want to have it perform as intended by the manufacturer. |
|
|
| BLEXV6 |
quote:
Originally posted by crazymjb
My general thought is if a car recommends premium, and it has an 11:1 compression ratio, you spent 40-50K on the vehicle, bite the bullet.
Mike
Exactly. If you didn't want to pay for the Premium, should have bought a Pilot. You are paying more for the X for such upgrades more power, and part of that power upgrade comes from the premiom fuel used. |
|
|
| s2k000L |
quote:
Exactly. If you didn't want to pay for the Premium, should have bought a Pilot. You are paying more for the X for such upgrades more power, and part of that power upgrade comes from the premiom fuel used.
you know, this debate will and can go on without resolution. it's just like 'when should i do the first oil change', or 'how often should an oil change be done?'
i know that all my vehicles (which is about 8-10 in the past 10 years) all run well, with no engine knocking or lack of power. and, i know they're still fine because i still have contact with some of their current owners.
what is the moral of the story: put whatever you want into the car--so long as you understand the consequences/long term effects.
i utilize my $funds$ in a way that suits my needs, and that's all that matters :D ;) :p Peace, Love, and Happy Holidays |
|
|
| crazymjb |
I can't imagine you haven't seen any differences, unless that is all you run from day 1. I know from talking to MANY people there is a definite difference in the performance of the TL under lower octane. Since it is essentially the same engine, same compression, etc, the difference should be noticeable on the MDX.
This is not a debate. It is a fact that it is best to use 91 or greater octane on the 2007 MDX.
Go to cartalk.com and do a search for octane. BOTH of them went to MIT. Ask any automotive engineer and mention your compression ratio. Ask any chemist, etc. I am sorry, but this is an argument you can't win.
Mike |
|
|
| fatass |
| It's a good idea to use whatever fuel the car says it should use... but real world exp is also useful. If you don't experience knocking or pinging, and as s2k has said he's used whatever he wanted long term without experiencing side effects then go for it! |
|
|
| crazymjb |
If it hasn't happened yet than do it isn't the best mentality to go about things with.
Mike |
|
|
| fatass |
Here's a link to an article talking about octane and exactly what it means
http://www.leeric.lsu.edu/bgbb/7/ecep/trans/b/b.htm
Here's an extract of it:
Fuel octane requirements for gasoline engines vary with the compression ratio of the engine; diesel cetane requirements also vary with the compression ratio. Engine compression ratio is the relative volume of a cylinder from the bottom most position of the piston's stroke to the top most position of the piston's stroke. The higher an engine's compression ratio, the greater the amount of heat generated in the cylinder during the compression stroke.
Posted octane numbers on gasoline pumps are a result of testing fuel performance under laboratory and actual operating conditions. The higher the octane rating on fuel the less volatile (evaporative qualities) and the slower the fuel burns. Higher octane fuel contains more POTENTIAL energy but requires the higher heat generated by higher compression ratio engines to properly condition the fuel to RELEASE that higher potential energy. In the refining process, fewer gallons of higher octane fuels are yielded from a barrel of raw crude.
If fuel octane is too low for a given compression ratio, the fuel prematurely and spontaneously ignites too early and the fuel charge EXPLODES rather than BURNS resulting in incomplete combustion. The net effect is a loss in power and possible engine damage. The operator hears an audible "knock" or "ping", referred to as detonation. Detonation may vary from a faint noise on light acceleration to a constant, deep hammering noise while driving at a constant speed. Improper timing adjustments, vacuum leaks, or excessively lean fuel mixtures may also cause detonation.
If you aren't using the right fuel, you'll realize it pretty quick. |
|
|
| btgamble |
Let's look at the additional expense from another angle:
1) Let's say you average 15k@ year driving.
2) 91 octane fuel is $.20 more per gallon.
3) You paid upwards of $50K for the vehicle.
At 18 MPG you pay about $166 more per year for 91 octane
At 16 MPG you pay about $187 more per year for 91 octane
After investing $45-$50k, the additional investment for potential future damage is not that much.
You decide.....:hmmm: |
|
|
| jurincie |
This thread is so much fun to read.
Every one can relax now and go back to using whatever gas they used before the thread started and feel good to know they are doing the right thing. They will also know that the people using the other grade are very wrong and will either be wasting money or severely damage their engine. |
|
|
| crazymjb |
You don't notice it very quick. It does not sound like a backfire, and minor knocking isn't always noticeable with as little as the radio on. Yes these engines can compensate... Sort of. Again, in order to compensate there has to be knocking first, and even with compensation it is not perfect and one will likely get the occasional knock.
Also, as I will say again, their is a noticeable power cut running 87 vs. 91, ESPECIALLY on the MDX where the engine was designed to squeeze every last bit of power out of the 6.
Have fun with it: 
Mike |
|
|
| s2k000L |
quote:
Every one can relax now and go back to using whatever gas they used before the thread started and feel good to know they are doing the right thing. They will also know that the people using the other grade are very wrong and will either be wasting money or severely damage their engine.
Amen! now off i go to damage my engine at the gas pumps, followed by confrontation in the shopping mall parking lots along with the thousands of other holiday shoppers. hopefully i won't come back with some door dings to complement my engine failure :D |
|
|
| JeffK |
There are so many threads on this subject.
IMHO, here are the facts:
1) Octane is a measure of the fuels ability to avoid predetonation.
2) Knocking is the predetonation of the fuel before the exhaust valve has opened. It is not the sound of the piston banging against the cylinder wall.
3) 91 octane does not burn cleaner than 87. Using 91 vs. 87 will not extend the life of your spark plugs or engine. The additives in both 87 and 91 will keep your engine clean.
4) Using 87 vs. 91, will result in a retardation of the the spark. This is done to prevent predetonation, which is knocking.
5) Using 87 vs. 91 octane will result in a slight, but 99.5% of the time, indistinguishable loss of horsepower. Under extreme conditions, this may result in a loss of up to 7%. In a 2007 MDX this means maximum horsepower will drop from 300 to 279.
6) When you are cruising at 70 mph you are using only a fraction of the available horsepower, usually less than 15% of the available horsepower.
7) Regardless of what you may think, study after study has shown than except in extreme conditions, using 91 vs. 87 will not improve your gas mileage.
8) As outside temperature rises, the air to fuel ration is less dense. This may cause predetonation. Engines that run perfectly in the winter on 87 may require a higher octane fuel in the summer.
9) At altitude less octane is required. In Denver high test is only 89 octane!
10) At altitude, regardless of octane, an engine produces less power than at sea level.
11) Extreme conditions that may require premium include racing, pulling a heavy load, driving at above 100 MPH, drag racing from a stoplight, pull any load at altitude.
In all the cars I have owned (see below) I have used regular with no ill effects.
However, if you own stock in an oil company, or just want to waste money, use only premium.
A better solution is to use regular, and if the engine does not ping, enjoy your savings. If the engine pings go up a grade and if that fails then go up an additional grade.
As to savings: Assuming 12,000 miles per year and 18 miles per gallon and regular at $2.60 and premium at $3.00 (which is where most experts calculate gas will be), your savings are:
12,000 divided by 18 mpg = 666 gallons per year. At $.40 your savings are $266 per year. That is over $1,000 for 4 years!
Of course your savings will be less if you average more than 18 mpg and the difference between regular and premium is less than 40 cents per gallon. But if you average less than 18 mpg (which I do - my average is closer to 15 mpg) than your savings will be more.
As to those who say, "If you can afford $40,000 plus for a car, you should be able to afford the extra $.40 per cent per gallon for premium".
To this I answer:
Unless you inherited your money, the fact that you can afford a $40,000 car, means you worked hard for it and in all likelihood did not throw money away needlessly.
My mother who is 89 and well off, still checks her super market bill against the items in the shopping bag. Every once in a while she finds an error. She says: "Better in my pocket than the supermarket!"
Even at 89 she refuses to waste money. Who can disagree???
JeffK |
|
|
| dj-mdx2 |
| Again, this is another thread that will go nowhere. To each his own, and Happy Holidays to everybody, penny-pinchers or not! |
|
|
| DaleB |
The only reason modern engines are not likely to be damaged on regular fuel is the computer is smart enough to retard the advance.
When timing is retarded it also means the engine is not running at full efficiency at that time.
All the money saving suggestions will not change that.
Granted this may not matter if you are cruising shopping malls, and could matter if you are passing on a grade or pulling a load.
Again, it only matters on vehicles 'engineered' to run on premium fuel.
To run premium in lower compression engines is certainly throwing money away.
A test recently done by Nissan Sport magazine on an Nissan Murano V6 found only a 1 mpg loss running this stock vehicle on regular grade fuel. But comparison runs on a dyno found a 10% reduction in wheel horsepower.
Unless you do the homework for your specific vehicle you are only p%%ing in the wind as far as knowing what is really happening.
Ignorance can be bliss, but in the case of modern engines, a smart computer is also on your side.
Again, here are the specifics why MDXs are designed to run on premium, and why Pilots are not.
When it came to the engine, the Pilot team's job was to replace some of the premium elements of the MDX's excellent 3.5-l V6 and tune the powerplant for fuel economy and smoothness as opposed to off-the-line performance. The three-rocker setup for the variable valve timing system was replaced with one based on two rockers per cylinder, and the dual stage intake system was jettisoned. In its place a new intake and exhaust system was developed by Honda R&D Americas (Raymond, OH) to optimize the power characteristics of the modified engine. (Though Honda has stated in the past that it has no intention of moving fundamental engine development outside of Japan, this project clearly shows that the powertrain staff in Ohio is increasing its capabilities.) According to Frank Paluch, the Pilot's chief engineer, "The low- and mid-range rpm are completely different than the MDX, which has a flat, broad torque curve. The Pilot's torque curve is more gradual but it peaks out in the same area." Knock sensors were also adjusted so the new SUV could avoid the premium fuel diktat of its upscale predecessor. The result: the Pilot achieves fuel economy of 17 mpg in city driving and 22 mpg on the highway, peaks out at 240 hp and runs on regular fuel. |
|
|
| crazymjb |
I still insist it is a bad idea. Also, based of my experience with our other Acura, lower octane equals a noticeable decrease in power, and audible knocks. Same compression, similar power band.
Again, ask a chemist, physicist or mechanic, even the cheap ones will recommend going with what the manufacturer tells you to use, especially on a high compression engine.
If the cylinder isn't at TDC when the mixture is ignited it will wobble back and fourth in the sleeve.
On top of that, the car price does come into effect. You were willing to spend XXX on the vehicle and are not willing to take preventative damage measures as well as are willing to take a cut to power(mainly used under acceleration, I understand that) to save a penny. My grandparents, since it was brought up, also live very very frugally, and are worth a LOT.
Mike |
|
|
| rsnaider |
The manuals all state 91 or higher which translates in Premium fuel.
As others have stated above, you spend 45k plus and skimp on fuel?
My wifes 2001 Accord was tested in Car and Drivers years ago and that car worked best on 87 which is what I run. My new truck requires 91 or higher and that is what it will get.
Not worth saving what amounts to about $2 more on a fill-up for problems down the road. |
|
|
| JeffK |
A couple of things:
Ignition is not at TDC, but somewhere before that. When you retard the ignition, the spark come earlier in the cycle - for example 14 degrees BTDC.
I would agree with you. if in fact there was any danger to the engine by using regular instead of premium - but there is none - that is the beauty of electronic (variable) ignition.
Todays engines and electronics are completely different from the mechanical ones we grew up.
I remember setting timing with a timing light and then having a friend step on the accelerator and hold the RPM at 2500. I then fined tuned the ignition to pick up a few extra RPM using a tach dwell - a few free extra RPM.
But that method is ancient history!
Today the ignition is no longer mechanical but electronic - so that the ignition will vary depending on a host of variables, including load, temperature and fuel used - all done to achieve maximum efficiency.
The bottom line is that using premium in a MDX will achieve greater horsepower and performance under certain circumstances instead of using regular - whereas using premium in the Pilot for example will not achieve a performance gain over regular.
What I am suggesting is that 99.5% of us, will never use that extra performance - so why bother paying for it?
(Sorta of like paying thousands of dollars extra for a 450 HP engine in a Corvette vs. the stock engine with only 375 HP!)
I have never taken my MDX to a track; put pedal to the metal at a stop light; towed 3000 lbs in the Rockies etc. where that extra 7% of horsepower comes in when using premium.
Finally, if driving moderately, as I do and I suspect most of us do, then there never is any pinging, so no damage is done to the engine by using regular instead of premium.
JeffK |
|
|
| My07MDX |
| Actually what I don't understand is that the manual says to use 91 octane but the premium sold here is 93 and the mid-grade 89 ~ does it mean then I could alternate between using premium and mid-grade, as long as I always fill it up with half a tank? Just curious! |
|
|
| crazymjb |
Having an electronic ignition does not cure knock in the real world. As I said you will probably be ok, especially if you never go high into the RPMS, but based off what I know and have experienced only the recommended fuels will be used in our vehicles.
Mike |
|
|
| DaleB |
quote:
Originally posted by My07MDX
Actually what I don't understand is that the manual says to use 91 octane but the premium sold here is 93 and the mid-grade 89 ~ does it mean then I could alternate between using premium and mid-grade, as long as I always fill it up with half a tank? Just curious!
All it means it 91 is considered the minimum octane of premium fuel. Some states like CA have few very stations with more than 91.
It's not uncommon to mix fuel grades, and you will generally end up with something in between. Doing the 89/93 bit will probably save you a little money besides.
crazymjb: I'm with you. The recommendations are there for a reason.
Maybe it is a conspiracy, but at least that's a reason. :D |
|
|
| JL_SS |
quote:
Originally posted by crazymjb
Having an electronic ignition does not cure knock in the real world. As I said you will probably be ok, especially if you never go high into the RPMS, but based off what I know and have experienced only the recommended fuels will be used in our vehicles.
Mike
I am not picking sides here but I tend to lean towards empirical data. If you go through all the premium vs regular threads you will find a fairly large number of MDX owners who use regular. Yet in 7 model years there have been no "my MDX engine is toast and I used regular gas" threads. Most have posted that they feel no difference with regular given their driving habits. As Jeff noted, a majority of MDXs are used as family haulers where they are not driven anywhere near the limits (at least my wife claims she doesn't). Those who tow and/or drive aggressively usually do use premium. The forces behind predetonation are destructive but the results depend on the responsiveness of the knock sensor and the robustness of the engine design. The decision to use regular or premium also can depend on how long you typically keep vehicles. Someone who keeps their vehicle for 200K (tranny life aside) will want to do all things possible to extend engine life, where someone who trades every few years may not. But it has been proven that arguing the subject in internet forums does not change anyone's mind once they decide what is best for themselves. |
|
|
| dj-mdx2 |
quote:
Originally posted by JL_SS
But it has been proven that arguing the subject in internet forums does not change anyone's mind once they decide what is best for themselves.
That is so true. What I don't get is, why a thread on fuel generates at least 3 pages worth of fluff, and nobody has started a bikini thread in God-knows-how-long. :D |
|
|
| JL_SS |
quote:
Originally posted by dj-mdx2
That is so true. What I don't get is, why a thread on fuel generates at least 3 pages worth of fluff, and nobody has started a bikini thread in God-knows-how-long. :D
The bikini threads were banned to leave server space for the 3 billion threads on premium vs regular and synth vs dino.....I know which I'd rather view. :D How come nobody has mentioned that Honda/Acura recommends top tier gas yet...... |
|
|
| DaleB |
quote:
Originally posted by JL_SS
The bikini threads were banned to leave server space for the 3 billion threads on premium vs regular and synth vs dino.....I know which I'd rather view. :D How come nobody has mentioned that Honda/Acura recommends top tier gas yet......
I believe it has been covered on other threads. Of course, top-tier refers more to brand than octane grade. |
|
|
| JL_SS |
quote:
Originally posted by DaleB
I believe it has been covered on other threads. Of course, top-tier refers more to brand than octane grade.
I was being sarcastic.........:) . |
|
|
| DaleB |
quote:
Originally posted by JL_SS
I was being sarcastic.........:) .
Gotcha! I guess we have come full circle on this topic.. fortunately there are still the pluses and minuses of Full Size spares, Side Steps or Running Boards, or the lousy foot rest to discuss. |
|
|
| gurneyeagle |
quote:
Originally posted by crazymjb
My general thought is if a car recommends premium, and it has an 11:1 compression ratio, you spent 40-50K on the vehicle, bite the bullet.
Mike
Do the math -
Annual mileage - 20K
Avg gas mileage - 15 mpg
Gallons per year = 1,333
Price differential Premium vs. Regular - $0.30
Additional fuel cost = $400.00
If someone can't afford $400.00, what are they doing driving a $45K vehicle?
gurney |
|
|
| dj-mdx2 |
quote:
Originally posted by DaleB
Gotcha! I guess we have come full circle on this topic.. fortunately there are still the pluses and minuses of Full Size spares, Side Steps or Running Boards, or the lousy foot rest to discuss.
BTW, the spare on an 07 is, you guessed it, a lousy donut. I guess Acura doesn't pay too close attention to this board.:mad: |
|
|
| DaleB |
quote:
Originally posted by dj-mdx2
BTW, the spare on an 07 is, you guessed it, a lousy donut. I guess Acura doesn't pay too close attention to this board.:mad:
No surprise there. |
|
|
| JeffK |
Dear gurneyeagle
You do the math: 4 years $1,600!
As I posted: If you earned it you would not waste it!
JeffK |
|
|
| fatass |
quote:
Originally posted by JeffK
Dear gurneyeagle
You do the math: 4 years $1,600!
As I posted: If you earned it you would not waste it!
JeffK
Agreed!
The arguement that if you bought a $40k vehicle you should be able to afford the premium gas is like telling someone if you bought the 07 MDX you better have gotten it fully loaded. |
|
|
| gurneyeagle |
quote:
Originally posted by fatass
Agreed!
The arguement that if you bought a $40k vehicle you should be able to afford the premium gas is like telling someone if you bought the 07 MDX you better have gotten it fully loaded.
I disagree!
The argument is not one of waste, it's one of trying to pinch pennies. The manufacturer recommends premium.
Keep the car 10 years and "waste" $4,000. Where do you want the calculation to stop?
My original point is that $400/year, assuming the factors given, is immaterial in light of a $45K purchase price.
Better yet, do you want to go against the directions of the manufacturer of your new $45K car to save $1.10 per day?
Twist it, turn it any way you want, I think it's a ridiculous argument concern.
gurney |
|
|
| JeffK |
As I posted and now repost:
If you earned it you would not waste it!
JeffK |
|
|
| DaleB |
quote:
Originally posted by JeffK
If you earned it you would not waste it!
JeffK
Why is someone here NOT earning it?
Let's see, I've had about 5 different cars since 1997.
vs.
2006 MDX Starlight Silver/Ebony
2006 BMW Z4 White/tan interior
2004 A8L Beige/Tan interior
Recently off Lease:
2003 MDX Starlight Silver/Ebony
2003 Porsche Boxster Tiptronic
White/Grey top and interior
2001 Audi Avant A6 Quattro
Silver/Grey interior
2001 Chevrolet Trailblazer
2000 Porsche Boxster Tiptronic Silver/Grey top and Interior
1997 BMW 740il White/Tan interior
No wonder I can afford premium! :) |
|
|
| gurneyeagle |
quote:
Originally posted by DaleB
Why is someone here NOT earning it?
.
Yea, I don't get that comment either. It is irrelevent to the discussion at hand.
Again, I restate:
It's penny pinching. The manufacturer recommends premium. The additonal cost is immaterial when you consider the purchase price of the car.
You want to talk about wasting money? Why purchase a 300 hp car, and then fuel it with a lower octane gasoline that inhibits its performance? The waste of monet here is the purchase of an MDX.
Someone else said it best - if you want to use regular, buy a Pilot.
Someone else also said this is a dead end thread. The same topic pops up once a week on the TL board. Penny pinching on a $35K+ car is just as ridiculous. Asking a legitimate question as to whether or not using premium is fine, justifying the use of regular is simply short-sighted.
I guess we can argue this thing forever. I'm finished with my rant.
Happy Holidays to all.
gurney |
|
|
| DaleB |
quote:
Originally posted by gurneyeagle
.
Someone else said it best - if you want to use regular, buy a Pilot.
gurney
Exactly! I thought I was helping referencing engineering detail as to why one runs regular and the other premium is recommended. Oh, well, you can lead a horse to water...but if he wants to put it in his tank.. lol
Happy Holidays to all & your families! |
|
|
| Autonomy |
Let step back and look at something else. Let say it is not about what you drive, it is what you put in.. the GAS!!
Okay, here is my point.
There are 2 gas station up were I live. Both are ESSO brand (Exxon in the US). I fill up my wife's 04 Honda Civic at both places, using regular gas (Octane 87). For 1 month, I have tested both places. Noticed that at one gas station, I was getting better mileage. Almost 20-50 more kilometer when it hits the halfway mark.
Every week, I put excalty the same mileage on the car (M-F) not counting weekends. I usually hit the half way mark on Thurs.
I know that weather condition and the way I drive plays a factor in gas consumption. I already took that in consideration.
Tell me this:
1 - why is one gas station better than the other in terms of gas consumption?
2 - Is the gas from these stations coming from the same refinery?
3 - are the using different additives?
4 - I wounder sometimes if these gas stations order cheap gas, maybe it will cut down delivery cost if all gas station within 2Km receive the same gas from the same tanker.... ??
Although this might not have to do with any of the discussion mentioned above, maybe the type of gas you are using plays factor in how the vehicle perform... |
|
|
| kunB |
I too agree with this. When I fill up a full tank from one gas station - my putor would show 323 miles to empty, whereas when I fill up from another gas station nearby or in the same town , the putor would show 289 miles to empty.
Again, I dont fill up gas at any other place other than Exxon or Shell or maybe premium fuel at Costco.
quote:
1 - why is one gas station better than the other in terms of gas consumption?
|
|
|
| DaleB |
It's difficult to say. Do you overfill? I never do. As soon as it clicks off, that's it.
But even doing that, I am not sure it is that precise with regards to cutoff.
You have the sensitivity of the particular nozzle to overflow. There's bound to be some slop.
Costco claims they typically buy gas from Phillips, 76, or Shell. Depending on availability and pricing.
Stock fuel is pretty much the same I believe, different mfrs. use different additives. Not sure how much that effects mpg.
I've read one lube engineer's suggestion to change brands every few weeks. Because some additives do a better job of cleaning specific contamination better than another. Interesting theory anyway. |
|
|
| kunB |
quote:
Originally posted by DaleB
It's difficult to say. Do you overfill? I never do. As soon as it clicks off, that's it.
But even doing that, I am not sure it is that precise with regards to cutoff.
You have the sensitivity of the particular nozzle to overflow. There's bound to be some slop.
Costco claims they typically buy gas from Phillips, 76, or Shell. Depending on availability and pricing.
Stock fuel is pretty much the same I believe, different mfrs. use different additives. Not sure how much that effects mpg.
I've read one lube engineer's suggestion to change brands every few weeks. Because some additives do a better job of cleaning specific contamination better than another. Interesting theory anyway.
I do not overfill. |
|
|
| gurneyeagle |
As a former employee of an independent oil and gas company that operated a refinery, I can tell you that most gasoline refined in the US is the same. Where it differs is in the additives.
Exxon, Texaco, and Shell, as well as independents, all purchased gasoline from my company. The big three each maintained a small tank of additives at the truck rack where a metered amount of their "secret formula" was blended in the truck (splash blending).
A friend operates a Chevron station, and his jobber regularly delivers his gas in a Shell or Murphy oil truck.
I think it is safe to say that the gasoline sold by the majors is better in quality than Race Trac, and other "no name" retailers. However the difference among the majors may be minimal and a personal preference.
Me, I stick with either Exxon (love the Speedpass) or Texaco because of logitical convenience.
gurney |
|
|
| mdxx3 |
^^^
I can confirm the "secret formula" additive shows up as a separate line item in the billing/account. Please don't ask me how I know, but I do. The base gas is the same for different brands, and the additives get dumped into the trucks the same time as the base gas like what gurneyeagle said. Also, the agriculture (farm equipment) and aviation places (airports) get their other types of fuel delivered from this same company here. |
|
|
|
