bradykp

So yesterday I was driving home from Stroudsberg, PA to Hoboken NJ when i stopped at a Citgo. They had 87, 89, and 93. Not that i did it for price, but 89 was $2.53/gallon and 93 was $2.66/gallon.

i was just curious, since i'd be driving all highway miles, what kind of performance/mileage i'd get out of 89 (as i already had a run-in with 87 because of a mistake by the attendant - bad mileage but not a noticeable difference in performance to me, though there was a slight lag).

Anyways, over an 80 mile strecth of mostly highway, partially state routes, and about 2 miles of local driving, i averaged 33.4 mpg according to the MID on my 2006 AT TSX with cruise set mostly at 72mph and occasionally 78mph.

I'd have to say i'm pretty satisfied with the performance of the 89 in that stretch. i'll see how it does over the course of the rest of the tank. I'm not saying I'd switch to 89, but I was just satisfied to see that if i ever want to pinch pennies or just give less profits to the oil companies, I can get away with it from time to time!

I know, start the flaming of me for being cheap and insane for putting anything less than 91 in the tank on purpose....

mrgold35

The only way you can give less profits to the oil companies is to drive a solar car or walk/bike to work. Using 89 octane or taking the bus/taxi/train/plane is still making the oil companies fat and happy. They can drop pump prices to .75 Cents a gallon and still make a profit from us.

I had to use a lower octane because I had no choice, it is nice to know the car will perform in those situations.

LuvMyTSX

It's your choice to put whatever gas you want into your car, but I'd advise against Citgo.

Here's an email I received a few days ago:


Venezuela Dictator Vows To Bring Down U.S. Government

Venezuela government is sole owner of Citgo gasoline company.

Venezuela Dictator Hugo Chavez has vowed to bring down the U.S.
government.

Chavez, president of Venezuela, told a TV audience : "Enough of
imperialist aggression; we must tell the world: down with the U.S.
empire. We have to bury imperialism this century." Chavez recently had Harry Belafonte as his television guest, and called President Bush "the greatest terrorist in the world." Chavez is pushing a socialist revolution and has a close alliance with Cuban dictator Fidel Castro.

Regardless of your feelings about the war in Iraq, the issue here is that we have a socialist dictator vowing to bring down the government of the U.S. And he is using our money to achieve his goal! The Venezuela government, run by dictator Chavez, is the sole owner of Citgo gas ompany. Sales of products at Citgo stations send money back to Chavez to help him in his vow to bring down our government.

Take Action

Please decide that you will not be shopping at a Citgo station. Why
should U.S. citizens who love freedom be financing a dictator who has vowed to
take down our government?

Very important. Please forward this to your friends and family. Most of
them don't know that Citgo is owned by the Venezuela government.

YOU CAN VERIFY THIS ON THE CITGO WEB PAGE.
http://www.citgo.com/Abo utCITGO.jsp

iamhomin

Nice, but putting in lower octane doesn't mean the oil companies are seeing less profit.

There was a thread like this a year back, I believe, and that user (member) was so convinced by his experiment that he never went back to 91/93.

bradykp

yes, but the higher octanes are more profitable for them than the lower octanes from my understanding. they make mucho profit on those "detergants and additives" that are in there.

bradykp

yes you are correct (http://www.citgo.com/AboutCITGO/PDVSAprofile.jsp)
but if you think that the oil coming from other companies is from nice, peaceful governments, you're smoking some crack.
i generally buy sunoco or vallero depending on what's closest. i've given up on the fight against "evil" oil companies. i do my part by using less gas whenever possible. if i'm on E and Citgo is there, ima gonna fill up.

cibs

ya that huge difference of 100-150 bucks over the course of the year is really making a huge difference in their pocket books..

i guess if that's your goal than you can put in 89... but if you really want to pinch penny's or keep profits from the oil co's then ride a bike or get a solar car like mrgold said...

i'd rather keep my car running as good as possible, and let the oil co's do their own thing, my hundred bucks / yr isn't going to make or break them...

bradykp

i'm not convinced by it. especially only one fillup. i was also driving a good portion on a freshly paved route 80, so that could have helped, but only slightly.

i don't use 93 octane, as i think it's a large waste of money. i get sunoco 91. i figured since 91 wasn't at this citgo, i'd try 89 just for the heck of it. when i got back to hoboken, 91 at my normal sunoco stop was around $2.61/gallon, so it's not a money saving issue. i knot it's not hurting oil companies, but they do make more profit on the higher octanes from what i've read. i'm just pleasantly happy to see that 89 is not detrimental to my mileage (too early to tell for sure until we make it through the tank).

i know it sounds funny when someone buys a $30,000 car and tries to save a few pennies on gas, and that's not why i did it, but either way, if it did turn out to not make a difference in mileage, i wouldn't mind extra bucks in my pocket, even if it only translated to an extra $100/year. that's $100 i can put somewhere else (like student loans!).

but seriously, I wouldn't switch for the $ savings at all, i was just curious to see how it would do on 89 and also noted that i saved around 13 cents per gallon on this particular fillup!

bradykp

ok not to get into a huge debate, because as i stated, i didn't do it for monetary purposes. i did it to see if i get similar mileage and similar performance, and so far, I have.

and as far as $100 bucks...i just did a quick google and as of 2001 there are more than 600 million motor vehicles on the road. just as an fyi, if every motor vehicle cut there gas consumption by $100 annually, it would be $60 billion dollars out of their pockets.

in the words of margeret mead:

"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed people can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has."

but back on topic.....i've seen no difference in performance or mileage yet, 80 miles into the tank. i know people have done various tests on this, but i was just curious for my own mind.

mrgold35

They make more $$ on 91/93 octane but they sell a lot less in that grade compared to 86/87/89 octane. I imagine the ratio is 300 to 1 comparing cars/trucks/SUVs on 87/89 octane compared to 91 octane. Other than foreign luxury/sports brands (bmw/mercs/Acura/etc) all other vehicles use lower octane.

So every $1 profit from 91 octane gives them $300 worth of profits with the lower grades. Using 89 octane help the oil company CEO get his $10 million bonus+stock options.

jlukja

How much 91 octane did you have left in the tank when you filled up? The fuel economy numbers are impressive on 89. Did you notice any drop in performance? I assume since you were going for good economy that you didn't do any full throttle runs. Just curious.

bradykp

i'm not sure your logic makes sense. if 91/93 is more profitable, then it's not a direct correlation when speaking of profits. using 89 instead of 91 would cut profits slightly.

but again, i was just saying that as a joke, not like i'd seriously do damage to oil profits by switching to 89.

bradykp

the fuel light came on, and i went about 10-15 miles past "0" left on the range. i filled up about 15 gallons, so there was approximately 2 gallons left in the tank of 91 sunoco.

i did mostly cruise, on the highway, but in the spirit of driving in NJ and trying to get around slowpokes, i did plenty of full throttle to make quick passes and really didn't notice any hesitation (i did notice a difference when 87 was mistakenly put in the tank). again, it's only 80 miles, so nothing to get excited over yet, but shows promise right?

jlukja

^^ yep, promising indeed. I'll still fill up with 91 (I have the reflash) but its good for others to know that 89 for a tank will not result in poor performance or mileage.

bradykp

yes, i'm not advocating to fill up on 89. i will most likely continue to use sunoco 91, as the pennies difference is not worth it, but i just felt it was interesting to see that i'm getting the same mileage mostly and no noticeable performance difference. we shall see on the avg mpg by the end of the tank. i usually close in at abour 26.5-27.5 depending on the driving.

mrgold35

You can sell 10 products (91 octane) for $10 with a 50% markup OR sell 100 products for $9 with a 40% markup (87/89 octane). At the end of the day you have:

$10X10 = $100 in sales with $50 in profits (bigger margin/less profits)
OR
$9X100 = $900 in sales with $360 in profits (smaller margin/bigger profits)
$410 total for the day.

$360 sounds a lot better than $50 at the end of the day. Now take that $50 and $360 and invested it separately for 6 months to 1 year OR put the money back into your business OR expand your business to other areas. It takes money to make money; you can do a lot more with $360 compare to $50. Either octane level is going to make the oil companies fat and happy.

The 91 and 89/87 octane works the same way, it cost close to the same to find/drill/transport/refine/formulate/advertise/distribute the different octane levels. They make a bigger profit on lower octane because they sell so much. The higher octane will never out sell lower octane fuel. 91 octane is the icing on top of the cake for them.

I’m a computer nerd not a business/financial person; let me know if I’m missing something in my logic.

bradykp

they make more total profits off of 87 and 89 because they sell more. yes.

but my point was that 91 is a higher markeup.

so let's say 1 gallong of 91 cost $1 and 1 gallon of 89 costs $0.90

let's say 91 cost the company $0.50 and 89 costs them $0.55

they'd make 35 cents off me if i buy 89, but they'd make 50 cents off me if i buy 91.

these are all hypothetical.

if i'm buying some kind of gas, and i choose the one that they have a smaller profit margin, i'm hurting their profits. you see what i'm saying? yes, they make a profit either way, but if i fully converted to 89 after being a 91 customer, they would lose a certain amount per gallon i purchase. either way i'm purchasing about 15 gallons per fillup, the product i choose dictates how much money they make off me.

i'm just assuming 91 is more profitable because it's not necessarily any more "oil" per say, rather it's their top secret additives, which i'm assuming cost less than the oil does. just a hunch. i could talk to my buddy who is a chem e for sunoco though and find out.

drunkenbuda

i would never think for a sec filling up my TSX aynthing other then 92 or better.

bradykp

that's your personal preference, but like i said....not affecting mileage or performance. this thread isn't meant to be a debate on it though, i'm just stating what i accomplished with 89.

and 92 or better? why? the manual recommends 91

CL Platano

You are actually hurting your car putting in a lessor octane as required. You can damage to your rings over a period of time. I used to only put in 89 then my car started acting up, driving sluggish and spotty performance and the first question they asked was the gas and I told them and they told me to immediately put in 93 and a octane booster to get the lessor octane out and all the lights will turn off and I will have better performance and it worked.

bradykp

performance yes, but as far as the other things go, in my opinion, and in friends of mine who are mechanics opinion, that's just a coincidence in your case.

again, thread is not meant to debate this issue, as it's been covered many times, but the facts are that our car is recommended to take 91 octane gas for the best performance and for the timing of the engine so it does not knock. if you use a lower grade, the ECU will compensate, and you will probably see diminished performance, and may hear some knocking, but the ECU will compensate and the knocking would go away.

it's probably not a good idea to use lower than 91, but it should not do hard core damage to your car, worst that happens is decreased performance. that's what the ECU is compensating for.

i'm just stating that i filled up with 89 and have seen no drop in mpg or diminshed performance. i've also not heard any knocking. it's only been 80 miles, and the tank is technically a blend of 15 gallons of 89 and 2 gallons of 91.

i've run a tank of 87, because the attendant screwed up and pumped it by mistake. my mpg dropped by 4mpg on average over the 380 miles i travelled on that tank, and i did notice a slight decrease in pickup on initial acceleration in the car, but did not hear any engine knocking.

i'm just telling what i've experienced. i highly doubt that your engine trouble was only a result of the octane gas you were using. the reason i doubt it is because my father's mechanic, and long time family friend, has a high performance pickup truck that he used to tow his rail car drag racer. it says premium fuel recommended in the manual, just like ours does, and he broke his in on 87 and uses nothing but 87. he hasn't had a problem with it other than routine maintenence and is beyond 100,000 miles now.

mjtsx

Mod Edit: deleted political text

I put 91 octane in the car because the manufacturer, who I have to assume tested the car before selling it, says to do that. Until I see evidence from someone I trust more than Honda that putting in 91 is unnecessary, I'll continue to run with 91.

EDIT: Because the manufacturer also says that the car will run well but not optimally on lower-grade fuel, I certainly won't panic if I end up with some and I won't tell someone else they have to run 91 octane.

Mokos23

Well I haven't seen a Citgo gas station here in a long time in IL

bradykp

they recommend you do that, they don't say to do it.

i'm not recommending to do otherwise either. i was just simply starting a thread, with sarcasm if you couldn't tell by the title (because i knew it would draw these responses), stating that i put 89 in to see what the result is and have seen no major changes so far.

i will almost definitely fill up next time on 91, and am not arguing that anyone should do otherwise. i just thought it was interesting that i didnt see a drop in mpg or performance.

bradykp

i posted before your edit, sorry!

also, as far as the citgo comment...i agree.....we're not very good friends with most of our oil sources, we just pretend to be cordial to keep prices relatively cheap.

drunkenbuda

Yeah, i drive hard everyday so i'll need that 91.

bradykp

well i guess i'd have to ask why do you drive hard? just for fun? lol. anyways, i'd stick to 91, i am just surprised that the 89 didn't have any noticeable effects.

mrgold35

I imagine there are very good 89 octane gas and bad 91 octane depending on the vendor of choice. You could have had just enough 91 octane in the tank to boost the level to 89.5 or even 90 octane and the ECU only had to make a slight/no adjustment for 2300-2700 RPM hwy driving. There could of been a tail wind, cool weather and you did not run the A/C as much, smoother traffic flow and you used cruise control longer, did not accelerate to pass any vehicles, flat and level travel from A to B, and/or driven behind larger vehicles that broke the wind for you.

There might of been a more a noticeable difference with several tanks of 89. The only way to know is to run several tanks of 89 to see what happens.

bradykp

it's the same road that i've driven on before at the same cruise speeds. a/c doesn't make that much of a difference, as i hardly use it.2 gallons out of 17 isn't going to raise the octane level. sunoco is my normal 91, and it's one of the best out there that i found. don't know about citgo and quality.

i definitely floored it a few times to pass trucks and slow jersey drivers. went through construction zones and had to slow down, then my lead foot accelerates hard out of those zones. i didn't draft behind any large vehicles, because i can't stand doing that (rocks kick up, can't see around them, jersey drivers slam on breaks for no reason).

i know it's only 80 miles so far, and i'll continue the experiment, but when an attendant pumped 87 in by mistake (with about the same amount of 91 left maybe a bit more even), i got 4mpg less and with the 89, i'm at the same amount right now. so we'll see, but i'm pretty confident that it's not a change.

alkie4life

I have an '06 and 91 is not recommended. It's required. There was also a very good news story mid summer on the Today show about using lesser octane that what is required and the experts were of a unanimous opinion that this is VERY bad...

drunkenbuda

Whenever my egine screams, it makes me wet.

feelgood13

i wonder if you would be this experiment-happy if it were really your car...

bradykp

in my mind, required means it only runs on that. like diesel or unleaded.

from manual:

Fuel Recommendation
Your vehcile is designed to operate on premium unleaded gasoline with a pump octane number of 91 or higher. Use of a lower octane gasoline can cause occasional metallic knocking noises in the engine and will result in decreased engine performence. Use of a gasoline with a pump octane number less than 87 can lead to engine damage.
On vehicles with manual transmission
You may hear a knocking noise from the engine if you drive the behicle at low engine speed (below about 1,000 rpm) in a higher gear. To stop this, raise the engine speed by shifting to a lower gear.

We recommend quality gasoline containing detergent additives that help prevent fuel system and engine deposits.
In addition, in order to maintain good performance, fuel economy, we strongly recommend, in areas where is is available, the use of gasoline that does NOT contain manganese-based fuel additives such as MMT.
Use of gasoline additives may adversely affect performance, and cause the malfunction indicator lamp on your instrument panel to come on. If this happens, contact your authorized dealer for service.

Some gasoline today is blended with oxygenates such as ethanol or MTBE. Your vehicle is designed to operate on oxygenated gasoline containing up to 10% ethanol by volume and 15% MTBE by volume. Do not use gasoline containing methanol.
If you notice any undesirable operating symptoms, try another service station or switch to another brand of gasoline.

bradykp

i wonder if you'll ever be married.

godfather2

though some people seem to be doing fine running 89 octane (and even 87 on a couple occasions), IF YOUR CAR IS MODIFIED, YOU NEED TO RUN ON 91+

bradykp

i'm still not saying i'm an advocate of running on anything less than 91. just pointing out the results on my engine.

i'll be driving another 80-100 miles tomorrow, so i'll updated everyone on my mpg. i suspect the avg over the tank will come in around 25-26, which is what i usually get.

godfather2

^ keep us posted

bradykp

i shall for sure. i'm still debating on running a second tank on 89 once i go through this. i know it won't do damage, and it's just to satisfy my curiousity but we'll see....

bradykp

OK, so my fiance drove around a bit yesterday, and i drove her to work this morning. All in all, it added another 35 miles all local/heavy traffic driving and i'm currently at 27.6mpg (which is around what i'm normally at after a complete tank is used. I'll be driving to a client and back this afternoon, should be a mix of highway and traffic, and i'll give you an update later. still looks like my normal average is going to hold out though.

jlukja

:ibmyenginefelloutandnowimscrewedthread: