Well we all know it's been a tough market and most of us are (as we say in the south) squeezing blood from a turnip to save as much $.$$ as we can. In my case one way I've been doing it by putting 87 Octane fuel in my 08 Base TL Tech.

So lately I notice my gas mileage in the city 17-18mpg/hwy 28-29mpg is off from when I was using 93 octane. So i set-up to try a comparison. I filled up my car with 93 octane last week. It came out to be $5 more total, my mpg went back up to 20-21mpg cty/ 34-35 mpg hwy but that wasnt the BIG change. The power OMG... It must have felt like i gained 10-15hp in mid-range and 10 ft/lbs tq down low. The torque-steer was as strong as my 03 CL-S6.

So in the conclusion, I'll stay with using 93 octane and save money somewhere else ha ha!!!

I'd like to read any story you've had with gas in your car and maybe which brand you prefer.

 

I'll say it for the millionth time, you don't save money per mile traveled when you use the lower octane in these motors

 

inb4 another Gas Thread.

I think majority of the members use what's recommended, 91-93 octane, depending on what's considered the "premium" in that region.

As for brands, for the most part, it's personal preference.

 

nothing but 93 octane used in every Acura I ever owned.

 

At least you had trial and error, and learned something. Hopefully this sheds the light to other new members.

 

So the ....



.... picture really isn't necessary then?

 

Different brands = different additives.

 

I only use Shell 93 in my TL since I've had it and have consistent 18-20mpg city and 28-30 highway.

but +1 on no change in MPG with different octane levels.

 

I love thechamps avatar for some reason.

 

i do 4 tanks of 91 then 1 of 94 octane

 

couldn't hurt

 

High reving/compression engines need high octane fuel,
B- series H- series k- series and J-series and any other Honda Acura engine i left out

 

I do it very similar except I do 5 tanks of 93, then start over, muy simplico.

 

Yo le echo 93 y ya.
Que se vallan pa la pinga con 87

 

Captain obvious - lol. I love it.

Its amazing that we still see threads like this.

 

Been saying this for a long time on here. Lower octane fuel costs more money and kills hp and let's not forget the resulting pinging hammers the pistons, rings, rod bearings, and head gaskets.

 

What are the different addives that are put into chevron vs shells. Is it true chevron gives a tiny performance boost vs shells but burns away faster than shells.

That's what I heard from a friend lol

 

So wait, using this theory, would 100 octane prove even better?

 

No. Once you're past the detonation threshold, adding more octane won't hurt but it won't help. I've mixed 100 octane with 91 octane and to completely get rid of detonation as seen on a scanner, it took a mixture of about 96 octane. This was on a 105 degree summer day so this is more of a worst case scenario. You will see improvements up to that point but once you get past 91 octane, the improvements are going to be very small, probably not measurable in the mpg department.

If you were able to tune our ECU, you could possibly see small gains in hp and mpg on 100 octane (vs 91) with a little more timing.

If you have a car that has no detonation on 87 octane, adding 91 won't help.

 

Words of wisdom from the man who knows.

IHC = /thread