Why would you do more than what the manufacturer required?... especially when there's no real world benefit.

 

Do you know Kurt?

 

I chose to run premium in my 2019 RDX so that if I ever raced another 2019 RDX filled with regular then I'd win by a photo finish.

If you're going to track your RDX then by all means - run premium. For legal, safe, and courteous driving on public roads, there's no difference. If premium means entering the highway at 75 MPH instead of 74.9 MPH, then fuel grade is the least of my concerns.

DISCLAIMER: I use Honda-branded oil and filters and always use the recommended fuel type - even though it's not required.

 

Kurt who?

 

So if I tell you to eat banana you'd be silly enough to ignore my recommendation to keep it first.
​​​​​
And that if Honda knows more about the car it designed and built than you do? If there is no real world benefit, than why does Honda recommend it?

 

They do, and they are the ones saying 87 is required.

And if anyone can show me a 30% increase in real world benefit to offset the 30% increase in fuel cost I'll be the first one in line at the 91/93 octane pump.

 

 

Yeah, I'm pretty sure it's just what the car is designed to use.

But sure, you guys do you, but remember @Stew4HD complains constantly and will likely sell the car long before there are any ill-effects from using the wrong fuel in the engine.

 

Mazda is the only company in this class that I know of to state a lower HP when using regular gas, about 40hp difference (specifically on the CX-5). It doesn't state anything else with adverse effects of reliability.

That being said. I know folks who lease cars will just put whatever cheapest gas in their car. They don't care about longevity nor reliability.

Trust your manufacturer recommendation and remember this engine isn't a "premium" engine, it's the same one that's in the Honda's.

 

Number 1 is, to me anyhow, the likely reason - product image.

Anyone remember the old Marlboro cigarette ads - the one with the cowboy on horseback? Solely to promote a product image of rugged manliness, the product itself was no different than any other on the market. (BTW, the 'cowboy' was reputed to have died from lung cancer.)

 

Now That's Funny!!!

 

 

I'll take door #2.

The difference may be small, but in the world of marketing a win is a win.

But to be clear, the engine needs to be tuned to take advantage of the higher-grade fuel.

Modern engines have knock sensors and their engine controllers will de-tune as necessary to prevent major engine damage. The converse is NOT necessarily true. An engine tuned to run on regular will not necessarily give better performance running on premium fuel. It won't "up-tune". ( I'm leaving ethanol out of the discussion only because I get tired of repeating myself. Sometimes. )

But engines tuned to run on regular may benefit from higher-grade fuel under strenuous conditions, such as towing, because those conditions may be more likely to cause pre-ignition ( knock ). The Owner's Manual for Honda Pilot does recommend running premium fuel for towing.

Acura and Honda Owner's Manuals don't say anything about racing, except in the warranty section.

 

 

I'm pretty sure it's so they can advertise the extra 10hp or so performance gain that no one will actually notice.

 

No. If that were the reason then 91 octane would be required as the EPA would not certify the engine for 87 octane.

 

ooh, maybe they could pump the gas for us, and check our oil. How weird would THAT be??

 

There was a time when that was the standard, not concierge service. But at that time, checking the oil wasn't just for show. Cleaning the windshield was a nice touch.

Aren't full-service stations still required by law in New Jersey and Oregon? But I don't think they clean windshields anymore.

 

Does anyone have any first hand experience using an allowable but not recommended octane and having engine failure? Acura says that 91 is recommended but there may be problems/damage if you use below 87. I have never used 91 on any of my Acura cars and they have all gone well over 100,000 miles with absolutely no problems with the engine. 167,000, 106,000, 184,000, 280,000 miles. Each used 87 octane. By my calculation I save between $700 - $1000 per year by running 87 octane. BTW I can afford the car and I can afford any gas. I just can't see any reason to pay an extra $1000 per year for no benefit or loss of performance. And the 280,000 mile car is running just fine right now.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Easy. Click on a different thread.

Like maybe an engine oil thread...

 

Yep, no controversy when it comes to that subject.

 

Well after running 4 or 5 tanks of premium I put in a gallon of regular, tank was empty. I run my RDX pretty hard, use Sport + a lot, and like to feel the acceleration and SH-AWD in action. Seat of the pants I notice zero difference, will be running regular from now on. It's not like it's a performance vehicle which will really benefit, Premium or Regular it still bogs down horribly because of the turbo lag.

 

so premium or regular still suffer from turbo lag?, not good..

 

From others on the forum I now understand it's not turbo lag, but rather the transmission computer takes a few seconds to decide what to do. I was speaking to my service manager today and we were discussing my issues with slowing down, applying throttle and feeling nothing for 1-2 seconds. He asked what gas I was using, I had been using premium until my last fill up, which was regular. He said even though regular won't hurt the engine, I probably lost about 20hp and would probably experience lower mileage. Hmm, seat of the pants the power feels the same. It is possible the hesitation has worsened so I'm going to go back to premium for a couple of tanks and see if that helps, if it doesn't then I will go onto regular forever.

 

LOL.

20hp and less mpg? You should point him to the AAA study that suggests such drop in hp/mpg are likely miniscule.

Such strongly worded statements with no basis in fact is a bit concerning for someone who works with automobile products on a daily basis....

We already know many car salesmen are bumbling idiots, but a service manager....sigh

 

I LOL'd at this. But....I use premium, and my infotainment still crashes. Go Figure.

 

Yeah he was very confident in this. I didn't want to be a pain and point out studies and such so I just let it be. I'm going to give premium one more try, but I'm 99.9% certain it will be regular for me.

 

I will be honest, I normally run premium, and the other day I ran regular and my gas mileage was down about 2mpg, and I had 3 less people in the car. I also felt the car did not feel as preppy and quick as with premium. If it costs 30 cents more ill run premium, if its 50 cents to 1 dollar more ill run regular, but I honestly felt a slight difference, not a lot, but a little bit, I do want to read the boost psi readings when on regular, I am wondering if they dial that back a little

 

interesting:

Consumers who were exposed to ads that claimed that Exxon high octane gasoline would reduce auto maintenance costs will get important new information from Exxon soon. In a landmark settlement of Federal Trade Commission charges that the ads were unsubstantiated and misleading, Exxon will run an extensive consumer education campaign, including television ads throughout the United States. The message of the campaign will be that the right octane for most cars is regular octane, and most cars will not benefit from more expensive high octane fuels. The 15 second television ads will run in 18 major metropolitan markets, including New York City, Orlando and Dallas, where Exxon aired the allegedly deceptive ads. Exxon will also make available informational brochures at up to 8,700 Exxon service stations nationwide.

Exxon, the largest oil company in the United States, does business in more than 100 countries worldwide and had revenues of $134 billion in 1996. It is based in Irving, Texas.

"This is a precedent-setting solution that sends a clear message," said Jodie Bernstein, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. "Consumers can save money if they understand that most cars won’t run longer, faster, cleaner or better on ?premium’ gasoline. Now the largest oil company in the country will give consumers the straight story. Exxon will produce materials and run TV ads to let consumers know their cars don’t need and won’t benefit from premium gasoline unless their owner’s manual recomme

 

^ While I don't disagree with the above information nor have the laws of physics and chemistry changed, it's worth noting that this article was published 22 years ago in case someone is expecting to see one of the television ads.

https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/pres...al-ad-campaign

 

It's been so long that people forgot the gas companies already admitted premium wasn't necessary. The spokesman did give a couple of winks during his presentation so people knew it was a government conspiracy to make their cars die sooner and boost the economy.

 

So here is my experience with the regular and premium gas debate... Just my observation.

I been filling up my RDX with regular at least 95% of the time for the last ~20,000 miles. Had to take car into dealer for warranty work and got a loaner RDX with premium gas. Driving between two cars around the same time and road, I can tell that the premium gas loaner response better with more low rpm torque.
I felt my regular gas RDX has to works harder to get the power I expected from the RDX, I have to constantly rev up the engine to get to the power I need either by switching to "S" to keep rpm up or floor it more often. Also as I observed the turbo gauge, it seems boost comes in slower.

I got my RDX to have low on the tank and put in premium and instantly the car feels more responsive like the loaner.

I don't think you get more MAX power between regular and premium, once the power kick in there should be minimal difference. The power comes in sooner with premium and at lower rpm with premium gas. Since I don't have to rev the engine up so much, I observed 2 mpg improvement. For my kind of driving, the overall cost should balance out and I get a more responsive car.

Again it's just my observation. You can try playing around with it for anyone interested.

 

Just use premium, we are talking a few hundred dollars more annually, ~$500 CAD. using $1.20/L for regular vs $1.35/L for premium

65L tank * 1.2 =$78 regular and $88 for premium

$10 difference per fill up, assuming a fill up per week that's $40 monthly and $480 for the year.

 

What makes you think the dealer put premium in the loaner? I will put money on it that they just use 87, like all the BMW and Audi dealers do.

 

Yeah, I'm thinking that way too. No way dealers will spend the extra money to put premium gas in their cars. They're in it to make money, not to lose money. I bet the customers who return the loaners put regular gas in the car too. They're not going to pay extra for the premium especially if it isn't their own car.

I put regular gas in the Infiniti loaners which the manufacturer specified Premium gas only.