| jasguild |
I have seen this discussion go back and forth on several acura websites about whether using regular gas will damage your acura. I am just curious to know which grade of gas members on this board are using.
Interestingly enough, when I bought my acura 9 months ago, I asked the dealer about this and they said to me that acuras are tuned to perform whereas honda's are tuned to provide all-around general performance. They noted that if I expect to get the highly touted performance on Acuras, then the premium gas is required to meet those performance standards. According to the dealer however if I am not using your acura as a performance car, regular gas is perfectly fine and there is no reason to think I will get better life out of the engine or that the engine will be damaged with regular gas. They pulled my manual and quoted me the section which stated that premium gas is recommended NOT required.
At the time I ignored the suggesion and have been using premium gas. However with gas prices where they are, I am rethinking about what the dealer said. I posed the same question to my new acura dealer and they basically said the same thing. In fact the first question they asked is how I use my mdx. My answer was that my wife uses it to haul aroulnd the kids. She is no speed demon nor does she ever get the rpm higher than 3500. They told me point blank to NOT waste my money on preimum gas. They did note that there may be a slight drop in MPG when using regular gas but they didnt think this drop would be enough to offset the difference between premium and regular prices. They also suggested if I am towing, that I should fill up with premium.
What are your thoughts and what grade of gas do you use??
thanks
jasguild |
|
|
| kaiserseal |
| I tried the cheap stuff and noticed no difference, no pinging. I had the opposite idea when fuel went up to 4$ a gallon. Paying 20 cents more when gas was $1.50 seemed like a lot, but now, not so much. An extra 3$ on a 70 dollar gas bill is no big deal. |
|
|
| revere84 |
| I checked the sales brochure and owner's manual for my 2004 MDX and both mention that they recommend premium octane of 91 or above. I did not see any warnings for using lower octane other than it would impact engine performance but nothing more. I am also attaching a website that helps you search for the lowest gas prices in your region. The site is www.gasbuddy.com. You can search the site and get the benefit of members who report the lowest prices from their locations. I have been using gas with an octane rating of 89 since I purchased my MDX 4 months ago with no issues. Based on your comments and other information I may even try 87 octane. |
|
|
| BlackMDXRider |
I stick with 91 Octane, reasons are:
1) Only $0.20 over regular, that is 5.7% premium which is less than the drop of MPG due to use of the regular gas.
2) No risk for pinging.
3) No loss of performance. |
|
|
| jasguild |
quote:
Originally posted by BlackMDXRider
I stick with 91 Octane, reasons are:
1) Only $0.20 over regular, that is 5.7% premium which is less than the drop of MPG due to use of the regular gas.
I will be honest, I have not even seen a drop in MPG when I changed from 91 to 87. I have tested it on 3 different occasions!
jasguild |
|
|
| jasguild |
quote:
Originally posted by BlackMDXRider
I stick with 91 Octane, reasons are:
2) No risk for pinging.
I forgot to mention. I asked the dealer about this too. They said that pinging can occur for a variety of reasons including some other than the gas octane. for this reason, all acuras (and indeed most cars made) since the mid 90's have pinging sensor which prevents pinging.
jasguild |
|
|
| jasguild |
quote:
Originally posted by BlackMDXRider
I stick with 91 Octane, reasons are:
1) Only $0.20 over regular, that is 5.7% premium which is less than the drop of MPG due to use of the regular gas.
.
Maybe its my location, but here premium is $0.30 per gallon more than regular. The mid grade is $0.20 more.
At $0.30 per gallon more, that would be more like an 8.5% difference
at current $3.57 per gallon. I dont think I have suffered an 8.5% loss of mpg using regular.
jasguild |
|
|
| revere84 |
| I face similar price differences of 30 and 20 cents for the leap from 87 to 91 and 87 to 89 respectively. There are also 10 to 12 cent differences in the same grade gasoline from station to station so going to 87 octane for me could potentially be a greater than 40 cents per gallon savings. I also have been doing a lot of driving lately and filling up about 5 to 6 times a month. At a potential of 40 cents per gallon (that equates to 7.60 per fill up) times 6 fill ups that adds up to $45.60 per month. |
|
|
| BlackMDXRider |
here are the MDX engine specs:
2004 Acura MDX Base Sport Utility Performance & Efficiency Standard Features
-
3,474 cc 3.5 liters V 6 front engine with 89 mm bore, 93 mm stroke, 10 compression ratio, overhead cam, variable valve timing/camshaft and four valves per cylinder
-
Premium unleaded fuel 91
-
Fuel economy EPA highway (mpg): 23 and EPA city (mpg): 17
-
Multi-point injection fuel system
-
19.2 gallon main premium unleaded fuel tank
-
Power: 198 kW , 265 HP SAE @ 5,800 rpm; 253 ft lb , 343 Nm @ 3,500 rpm
at 10:0 compression ration, Premium gas might be required, Aura said Premium is recommended as not scare the the buyer. |
|
|
| jasguild |
quote:
Originally posted by BlackMDXRider
at 10:0 compression ration, Premium gas might be required, Aura said Premium is recommended as not scare the the buyer.
BlackMDXRider
I am not sure about the comment I am going to make but I am still going to put it out there. I am an attorney and have been involved in representing several large fortune 500 corporations in civil litigation matters.
Its been my experience that corporations tend to err on the side of being conservative to avoid law suits especially the class action variety. In my lay opinion, it would seem more plausible for acura to say that premium is "required" if it is truly required to avoid any financial consequences of a mass failure.
I could be wrong but from this perspective it would seem to me that Acura would be exposing themselves to litigaiton by stating that premium gas is recommended if it is required. Plus I dont see how they would benefit by saying that premium gas is recommended if it is required. But like I said, this is just conjecture on my part.
jasguild |
|
|
| jasguild |
Another thing that caught my attention is that the engine of the pilot and mdx are virtually the same except the acura is tuned for performance.
BlackMDXRider, here are the specs for the pilot. Note that like the MDX it has a 10:0 compression.
2004 PILOT LX EX
ENGINE
Type: SOHC 24-Valve, VTEC V-6 n n
Displacement (liters) 3.5 3.5
Displacement (liters) 3.5 3.5
Horsepower @ rpm (SAE net) 240 @ 5400 240 @ 5400
Torque (lb.-ft. @ rpm) 242 @ 4500 242 @ 4500
Compression Ratio 10.0:1 10.0:1
Valve Train: SOHC 24-Valve 3-Rocker VTEC™ n n
Fuel System: Multi-Point Fuel Injection n n
Ignition System: Electronic w/Immobilizer n n
The pilot manual clearly states that regular gas is perfectly fine and only recommends premium if the pilot is being used for towing.
What my dealers told me is beginning to make a lot of sense
jasguild |
|
|
| polyian |
I bought my 2002 a month ago filled with Premium according to the saleman. First fill I did was with 89. Next fill was with 87. I have not seen any change in fuel consumption between the grades and there is no noticeable loss of power or pinging. Elsewhere on this board there are tests that were published with factual evidence that there is no difference except at WOT...which is rare for me. I believe the spark advance electronic tests were run on a 2002 by Mogur. Subsequent years with higher horsepower may have different results. I'll save my money and run 87 unless I'm towing.
Here is Mogur's original post:
Definitive gas octane requirements study results.
I have aquired one of the Davis CarChips and ran it in my MDX for over a month through 4 tanks of gas, two regular and two premium. I was able to monitor the spark advance using the CarChip (which is the true measure of whether or not higher octane is of any value in a given OBDII engine with detonation sensors). The result? Except at full throttle or very near to it, the spark advance was the same with both Premium and Regular. This indicates that Premium was doing absolutely no good and was not improving performance and that, conversely, Regular was not hindering it. If you were towing a heavy load and spending a lot of time near or at WOT, then it appears that there is a slight improvement in performance with Premium (the spark advance was about 2 to 3 degrees greater) but otherwise, it is buying you nothing and costing you money.
Tom
Update: I have since also run a few tanks of midgrade (89 octane)
through under the same conditions and noted the spark advance results. With midgrade, the spark advance was identical to Premium (91 octane). This tells me that under even the most heavily loaded WOT conditions, there is no advantage to premium over mid-grade under any circumstances. Note: In all cases I used the same brand of gasoline (Shell with Ethanol) from the same station. The altitude of this test was approximately 800 feet, the vehicle had 23,000 miles on it, the average temperature was approximately 80 degrees, the average humidity was approximately 25 percent, and I am in the Los Angeles area. Also, this is applicable to a 2001 and 2002 MDX and the results may be different for the 2003 260hp engine. |
|
|
| midnightMDX |
| I put 93 in my ride. I push my X to the limit when needed and its never let me down. |
|
|
| kaiserseal |
quote:
Originally posted by jasguild
BlackMDXRider
I am not sure about the comment I am going to make but I am still going to put it out there. I am an attorney and have been involved in representing several large fortune 500 corporations in civil litigation matters.
Its been my experience that corporations tend to err on the side of being conservative to avoid law suits especially the class action variety. In my lay opinion, it would seem more plausible for acura to say that premium is "required" if it is truly required to avoid any financial consequences of a mass failure.
I could be wrong but from this perspective it would seem to me that Acura would be exposing themselves to litigaiton by stating that premium gas is recommended if it is required. Plus I dont see how they would benefit by saying that premium gas is recommended if it is required. But like I said, this is just conjecture on my part.
jasguild
Another attorney here, but also an owner of a gas station. The reason they do not say required is premium fuel is only available in a few markets. It is pretty easy to find in the US and Europe, but take a drive through South and Central America, Eastern Europe, all of China, and Most of Africa and you will find two options, Regular or diesel. No automaker would be willing to give up all of those markets. The tougher question is why the pilot with the same engine recommends the cheap stuff as pointed out above. This is even more relevant for those of us who have the early models with only 240HP. You guys got me convinced as of next week I use 87 octane, drink skim milk, and light beer. |
|
|
| jasguild |
quote:
Originally posted by kaiserseal
Another attorney here, but also an owner of a gas station. The reason they do not say required is premium fuel is only available in a few markets. It is pretty easy to find in the US and Europe, but take a drive through South and Central America, Eastern Europe, all of China, and Most of Africa and you will find two options, Regular or diesel. .
Agreed, but it is very easy for Acura to have different manuals for north america than the ones for the rest of the world. Dont you agree that if Premium was truly "REQUIRED" it would expose acura to a greater risk of liabilibty? If you give the wrong instruction on the use of your product, you are likely to lose any civill product liability case brought against you. That is negligence per se.
In addition, in my limited international travel the equivalent vehicles sold in other markets are similar but still different. For eg I saw a Lexus Rx 330 in Japan. Except is was not named Lexus RX 330. It was named the Toyota Harrier. The harrier is offered with 2.4 L 4 cyl or 3.0L 6 cyl. The Rx 330 in the US is only offered in 6 cyl but as a 3.3L NOT 3.0 L.
In summary, these manufacturers seem to vary the design of these vehicles for different markets. Its not a one design in every regards. Plus to me its would seem easier and less costly to just change the manuals for non north american market, if they were truly concerned about losing these markets.
Following your logic no car company would ever state that "premium gas is required" because doing so would cost them in the international market. But in fact some do state that premium is required for some of their cars.
AGain this is pure speculattion but to me the fact that Acura has stuck with the "Recommended" language in the litigious north american market speaks volume
jasguild |
|
|
| kaiserseal |
quote:
Originally posted by jasguild
Following your logic no car company would ever state that "premium gas is required" because doing so would cost them in the international market.
jasguild
Now my turn to speculate, who let two lawyers on this board. I would guess the reason premium would be required is so they could accurately advertise the specs and performance. A few years back Mazda had to offer to buy back the RX8 becuause the HP figures were off. Since this sounds like more your area of law, how do you think this would hold up, as defined by the UCC. For the car, a good to be fit for the intended purpose, is it reasonable for the manufaturer to assume that low octane gas might be used. If so, could you exclude from warranty repairs due to a disclaimer that premium gas is required.
I may be wrong on this, but I believe modern cars all have computer controls that adjust for octane and prevent detonation. Either way you make good points, but right now there is a cheese burger with my name on it... |
|
|
| BlackMDXRider |
| To summarize, I guess the use of regular gas is fine since the PCU (power control module) will adjust time for the lower octane. It could be safe but there should a bit a cost for that. High compression ratio means, hi-performance (Engine Torque and HP) with 91+ Octane. You may get less performance (and may be less MPG) with regular gas. If you drive like a grand mom and you would like to save $0.20 x 600 Gal, that is $120 a year or $10 a month. That will save you the cost of the 2 Starbucks coffee per month!!! |
|
|
| jasguild |
quote:
Originally posted by kaiserseal
I may be wrong on this, but I believe modern cars all have computer controls that adjust for octane and prevent detonation.
I think you are correct which proves the point that premium is not truly REQUIRED.
quote:
Originally posted by kaiserseal
For the car, a good to be fit for the intended purpose, is it reasonable for the manufaturer to assume that low octane gas might be used. If so, could you exclude from warranty repairs due to a disclaimer that premium gas is required.
Either way you make good points, but right now there is a cheese burger with my name on it...
That is an excellent question. Of course acura may argue that you could not have reasonably developed an intended purpose to achieve the maximum performance of an acura because it would violate most speeding and driving laws. In short, I dont know the answer.
What I do know however, is the idea of a cheese burger sounds for lunch sounds great!!!
jasguild |
|
|
| jasguild |
quote:
Originally posted by BlackMDXRider
To summarize, I guess the use of regular gas is fine since the PCU (power control module) will adjust time for the lower octane. It could be safe but there should a bit a cost for that. High compression ratio means, hi-performance (Engine Torque and HP) with 91+ Octane. You may get less performance (and may be less MPG) with regular gas. If you drive like a grand mom and you would like to save $0.20 x 600 Gal, that is $120 a year or $10 a month. That will save you the cost of the 2 Starbucks coffee per month!!!
My math is a bit different. I used about 60 gallons a month and the difference between premium and regular in my area is $0.30. So my additional cost per month is $18. Not a lot of money I agree but if there are no benefit why spend $18 more dollars??
Besides that the only reason I kinda disagree with your statement that about high compression is that the HOnda Pilot compression ratio is also 10:0 just like the MDX and honda recommends regular gas for the Pilot. I know very little about car technology so maybe you can elaborate on this
jasguild |
|
|
| jasguild |
One thing that caught my attention on the poll so far is that there are some users who are using 89, 92 and 93 octane. I am trying to figure what is their reasoning.
I can see some people using 91 just because that is what Acura recommends and I can see some people using 87 just because Acura did not say 91 is required and to save money
But whats the benefit of using 89? Its still not meeting acura's recommendation. Even more interesting are those who use 92 and 93. I have no idea what the justification is for that.
Maybe one of the users of 89, 92 or 93 octane gas can shed some light on this for me
jasguild |
|
|
| BlackMDXRider |
| some place, like North East, 93 is only available and called premium gas. Other place like here in DFW only 91 is available as premium. |
|
|
| revere84 |
| I was an 89 octane user until this thread started. I filled up with 87 on the way home from work today and will see what happens. The reasoning for using 89 (although no scientific evidence to back it up) was two fold. one, I believed the "recommended" position from Acura and was experimenting to see if there were any pinging or performance issues from using (in my area at least) the next available lower grade octane. The second reason was price. |
|
|
| polyian |
revere84
Agreed...If you read Mogar's test results you will see that 89 will give the same spark advance at WOT as 91...Mogar's test showed that there is absolutely no value in paying for anything higher than 89. And if you are not pushing the vehicle at WOT or towing there is no value in paying for gas over 87.
Mogar's test results only apply to the 2001 / 02 engine with the 240 HP. Later years with engine HP increases may have different results.
I am running 87 octane in my 02 with no pinging or power loss...but I do drive with a light foot. I average 19.2 MPG (12.2 L/100KM) in the Victoria BC area. I have not done a distance highway drive yet to get those numbers. |
|
|
| midnightMDX |
| We only have 87 89 and 93 octane available. The ECU will usually retard the timing if detonation occurs. Usually goes into safe mode and results in less hp. It all depends on how you drive it. |
|
|
| jasguild |
quote:
Originally posted by midnightMDX
The ECU will usually retard the timing if detonation occurs. Usually goes into safe mode and results in less hp. It all depends on how you drive it.
The impression I am getting is that this is only likely to happen at WOT. Is this your understanding? Do you agree?
jasguild |
|
|
| pianoman41 |
quote:
Originally posted by BlackMDXRider
some place, like North East, 93 is only available and called premium gas. Other place like here in DFW only 91 is available as premium.
Exactly. Here in MA you can only get 87, 89 or 93 at most places (sometimes you can find 92). I've never seen 91 available. So we have to get 93. |
|
|
| midnightMDX |
quote:
Originally posted by jasguild
The impression I am getting is that this is only likely to happen at WOT. Is this your understanding? Do you agree?
jasguild
Yea I agree. But it could happen below that. |
|
|
| polyian |
| Here's another thought. All the various octanes come out of the same hose so it's likely that the hose is full of whatever the last guy bought. How much volume is between the nozzle trigger and wherever the actual switching of the fuel is done? Is the switching in the pump or underground. You may end up some volume of the last guys low test or if you are lucky, some of the last guys premium. Anyone know how this pump actually works when you select your grade?:) |
|
|
| jasguild |
quote:
Originally posted by polyian
Here's another thought. All the various octanes come out of the same hose so it's likely that the hose is full of whatever the last guy bought. How much volume is between the nozzle trigger and wherever the actual switching of the fuel is done? Is the switching in the pump or underground. You may end up some volume of the last guys low test or if you are lucky, some of the last guys premium. Anyone know how this pump actually works when you select your grade?:)
Well some gas stations have a hose for each octane but you are right, there are some with one hose.
I dont know the answer to that question.
jasguild |
|
|
| Darkmaker |
I came to the MDX from a C5 vette and a turbo Audi TT, oh and a Navigator -- that was a baot.
Family was on the way and I couldn't bear not to have some measure of performance. The MDX seemed the best price/performace option for putting the "sport" into SUV. I have an 04 and an 06 and always run 91 octane.
I would love to know if Mogar has done a revised study on something newer than 2001/02 engine.
Lots of talk about WOT, but honestly, how else would one drive an MDX? I subscribe to the binary school of driving I guess, and love the feeling of acceleration forces, fuel economy be damned :)
If I wanted to get good mpg I wouldn't have bought a performance SUV and I'd tootle around at or below the speed limit playing the maximize mileage game, like my friend who drives an Insight. 65mpg is great, but for me at least, not terribly fun.
In my area 91 is 20 cents more than 87, so under $4/fillup price difference. I use our grocery store's gas savings card and usually get 80 cents/gallon to $2/gallon off at every fill up, sometimes even free tanks if we bought a lot of groceries and gift cards.
Sure saving that extra $4 or so would be okay I guess, but I'm honestly not going to notice the money either way, and would think that most people buying a > $42,000 vehicle wouldn't either, though it is certianly fun to b*#%h about :)
I would like to know difinitively though, if there is a difference using 91 over 87 when you drive almost always with WOT (is there any other way to accelerate?). Both short term and long term. |
|
|
| jasguild |
quote:
Originally posted by Darkmaker
ILots of talk about WOT, but honestly, how else would one drive an MDX? I subscribe to the binary school of driving I guess, and love the feeling of acceleration forces, fuel economy be damned :)
If I wanted to get good mpg I wouldn't have bought a performance SUV and I'd tootle around at or below the speed limit playing the maximize mileage game, like my friend who drives an Insight. 65mpg is great, but for me at least, not terribly fun
I may be wrong on this but I think I remember reading somewhere that most drivers of mdx are women. Not to sound sexist but that would suggest to me that many MDX drivers are not driving WOT.
in my home, my wife drives my the mdx most of the time mainly because she is with the baby most of the time. I drive a T L. I dont think she has ever put the rpm higher than 3500.
you are right that we are not talking big amounts of money but I am not in the habit of throwing away money ESPECIALLY to the oil companies
In other words if there is no justifiable benefit in putting in the 91 octane, I wont!! Maybe if I was driving my mdx more often I would, cause I do have a heavy foot too.
:2:
jasguild |
|
|
| polyian |
Here in Victoria BC we are looking at a13 cent per litre difference between regular (87) and premium (91). That works out to over .49 cents a US gallon difference. So on a 16 gallon tank that would be about 8 bucks...double what you guys pay south of the border between the 2 grades.
Since my 02 has absolutely no difference in performance except at WOT, no driveability difference and no difference at all in L/100KM (MPG)...I'll keep the 8 bucks in my pocket. Fuel has already gone up over 30% this year alone and the new Carbon tax in BC is going to push it higher.
It's a no-brainer decision for me...87 unless I'm doing a lot of towing in the mountains where I might want that extra WOT power. |
|
|
| midnightMDX |
| ^^^ So, what does it feel like at WOT with 87? No high end kick in Vtec? Any bogging? |
|
|
| polyian |
To be honest I don't notice any power difference. But I don't go WOT often. Mogur's test showed a couple of degrees spark advance at WOT which likely kicks in a couple of extra ponies or a pound or two of extra torque...not anything I can measure without putting it on a dyno.
Vtec works normally as that is valve timing and not ignition timing.
I tried premium, mid-grade and regular and I saw zero difference the way I drive the vehicle...not even when towing 5 miles to the boat ramp though I usually take the back road and stay off the highway.
On the Island most of my driving is under 55 MPH. |
|
|
| csmeance |
the first gen MDX has a compression ratio of 10 to 1, with this lower ratio, 87 will be fine for the motor and will not cause pinging or knocking at low RPM's. It may cause light knocking at WOT, but the timing should be retarded enough to stop any permanent damage from occurring.
On the second gen MDX, with a compression ratio thats higher (11 to 1), it will make a larger difference, it will cause knocking at mid-range RPM's and more at higher ranges. But this is the first gen section, so it doesn't matter.
Also acura likes that premium be used in their motors as it keeps the ULEV II standards then with emmisions. If you notice, the MDX 01-06 will start easily using 93 vs. 87, this is because the emmisions system (ULEV) is trying to keep them down. |
|
|
| polyian |
I agree the 01-02 have only 10:1 compression, basically the same as the pilot introduced in 03 that recommends regular. Mogur's test was only for the 01-02 1st gen engine. And the Pilot has some subtle engine tuning differences so the MDX will gain some performance at WOT.
As far as starting quicker with 93 vs 87, you raise an interesting point, however I never noticed any change. I would likely need a stopwatch with millisecond accuracy to measure any difference. It's not clear to me how the engine would detect the premium fuel qualities at idle (starting) when it doesn't do any ignition advance/retard reaction until WOT.
Perhaps if I was driving in an area where I had to use a freeway and did a lot of acceleration I might see a performance difference. But for me, here on sleepy Vancouver Island I'll save my money. |
|
|
| Darkmaker |
quote:
Originally posted by jasguild
I may be wrong on this but I think I remember reading somewhere that most drivers of mdx are women. Not to sound sexist but that would suggest to me that many MDX drivers are not driving WOT.
in my home, my wife drives my the mdx most of the time mainly because she is with the baby most of the time. I drive a T L. I dont think she has ever put the rpm higher than 3500.
you are right that we are not talking big amounts of money but I am not in the habit of throwing away money ESPECIALLY to the oil companies
In other words if there is no justifiable benefit in putting in the 91 octane, I wont!! Maybe if I was driving my mdx more often I would, cause I do have a heavy foot too.
:2:
jasguild
Oh aye, I've seen that stat too before. My wife drives the 06 and she's got a heavy foot but doesn't do WOT as often as me. :) I break 110mph on the freeway regulary and push it to 130 whenever I can :) Even on non-freeway roads, I hammer it pretty hard. I eat tires and breaks :)
I'm a sports car guy stuck in an SUV for the time being, but the MDX is a great SUV to be stuck in, which is why we have 2. )
I seem to end up in "women driven" cars.... back last century I had an AWD Turbo Eclipse and the Eclipse in general was more driven by women than the Talon or the Laser. Go figure.
I've never been good at "legal driving speeds". The MDX first came to my awarness when I was driving the TT at about 90mph on I-270. An SUV passed me like I was bolted to the concrete, did a 4 lane cut and hit the exit ramp without breaking. I was impressed, caught up to it and saw it was an Acura MDX and decided to look into them.
I guess I should try lower octane and see if I notice any differences, or "gasp" change the way I drive....nah... :) |
|
|
| jasguild |
INterestingly enough, I was at my dealership today to get service on my mdx and asked one of the mechanics (not the sales or CS rep) about the Acura "premium recommended gas" language and he said boldly, SAVE YOUR MONEY. I pushed and asked him if there is a greater risk of damage for using regular. He emphatically said there is no more risk of using regular than using premium gas!
He pointed out that all of their loaner cars even some of the older loaner cars have never seen premium gas in them.
In addition he said he has worked on acura engines for over 12 years and has never seen or heard of damage attributable to regular gas. Neither has the issue been discussed or addressed in any of his Acura training.
jasguild |
|
|
| Darkmaker |
quote:
Originally posted by jasguild
INterestingly enough, I was at my dealership today to get service on my mdx and asked one of the mechanics (not the sales or CS rep) about the Acura "premium recommended gas" language and he said boldly, SAVE YOUR MONEY. I pushed and asked him if there is a greater risk of damage for using regular. He emphatically said there is no more risk of using regular than using premium gas!
He pointed out that all of their loaner cars even some of the older loaner cars have never seen premium gas in them.
In addition he said he has worked on acura engines for over 12 years and has never seen or heard of damage attributable to regular gas. Neither has the issue been discussed or addressed in any of his Acura training.
jasguild
I've started running 87 once prices broke through the $4/gallon barrier. No differences so far. |
|
|
| highmath |
quote:
Originally posted by Darkmaker
I've started running 87 once prices broke through the $4/gallon barrier. No differences so far.
ditto! :4: |
|
|
| carguy1234 |
Proof that you don't need to run premium in the 1st Gen:
1) the owners manual says 87 is required, and premium is "recommended" (at least that's what my '05 manual says)
2) CR says to only use premium is it is "required", otherwise use regular
3) there is no "I blew up my engine since I ran 87 gas" thread on here
I mean if it really was an issue, wouldn't we be seeing lots of posts by now of 1st gen owners with 100,000++ miles and >7 years on the clock with trashed engines? |
|
|
| polyian |
The proof for me was in Mogur's test results with the Davis Chip:
Mogur's Definitive gas octane requirements study results.
"I have aquired one of the Davis CarChips and ran it in my MDX for over a month through 4 tanks of gas, two regular and two premium. I was able to monitor the spark advance using the CarChip (which is the true measure of whether or not higher octane is of any value in a given OBDII engine with detonation sensors). The result? Except at full throttle or very near to it, the spark advance was the same with both Premium and Regular. This indicates that Premium was doing absolutely no good and was not improving performance and that, conversely, Regular was not hindering it. If you were towing a heavy load and spending a lot of time near or at WOT, then it appears that there is a slight improvement in performance with Premium (the spark advance was about 2 to 3 degrees greater) but otherwise, it is buying you nothing and costing you money." |
|
|
|
