CONSUMER REPORTS: Premium Gas not needed for Acura TLX 4 cylinder
#81
Senior Moderator
Not another one of these again, and all based off an article where they based it off using up 1 tank of gas?
For what is less than the cost of 1 cup of coffee per tank of gas, I will follow the manufacturers recommendations for something as basic as fuel, especially since I don't lease my car, and will keep it for more than a couple of years, and more than a couple of tanks worth of gas.
Every mass produced car requiring 91+, no matter how high performing won't explode using regular, just like they won't explode using crappy oil, filters, etc, etc. So yes they can run on things below the specs that were designed for, but the recommendations are the recommendations for a reason.
Just a reminder this is the TLX forum, so stay on topic please.
For what is less than the cost of 1 cup of coffee per tank of gas, I will follow the manufacturers recommendations for something as basic as fuel, especially since I don't lease my car, and will keep it for more than a couple of years, and more than a couple of tanks worth of gas.
Every mass produced car requiring 91+, no matter how high performing won't explode using regular, just like they won't explode using crappy oil, filters, etc, etc. So yes they can run on things below the specs that were designed for, but the recommendations are the recommendations for a reason.
Just a reminder this is the TLX forum, so stay on topic please.
Last edited by Mr Hyde; 06-01-2016 at 09:27 AM.
#82
Team Owner
the funny thing is... CR likely still had a few gallons of 91 in the car when they filled it up with 87... yup, one tank isn't very indicative of anything.
#83
In order to purge the cars of premium that could be in the fuel system, we drove them nearly dry, then ran through a full tank of regular gas before starting testing.
#84
Team Owner
What does nearly dry mean? In my 3G TL, even when it says "0km until empty", and the needle looks buried, there's still 2 gallons left in the tank.
#85
#86
Team Owner
Assumptions...
#89
Banned
#90
"just put mid grade 89 if you are looking to save money, but IMHO luxury car buyers have a little more to spend thats why they went with an acura over a honda
why worry about a few extra cents, especially if the person owns a 2.4 over the v6"
#91
Check at 1:00 below
#92
Azine Jabroni
DANG. I disappear for a week and we get a 4 page gasoline thread. I love AZine
#93
#94
Azine Jabroni
#95
Originally Posted by TacoBello
What does nearly dry mean? In my 3G TL, even when it says "0km until empty", and the needle looks buried, there's still 2 gallons left in the tank.
Quote:
Originally Posted by niray9
I'm sure CR has additional equipment in their garages.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TacoBello
Assumptions...
What does nearly dry mean? In my 3G TL, even when it says "0km until empty", and the needle looks buried, there's still 2 gallons left in the tank.
Quote:
Originally Posted by niray9
I'm sure CR has additional equipment in their garages.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TacoBello
Assumptions...
#96
Advanced
My feeling is that Acura requires it as the HP would fall under 200hp without it, giving them a perceived weakness in the marketplace vs the competition.
Cars run better on better fuel and outside of the HP I’m sure the noise, quality and other dynamics are better on 91+.
The engine is a variant of the tried and true K-series engines, most or all of which ran on Regular unleaded fine. I believe this is the reason.
Just my $.02.
Cars run better on better fuel and outside of the HP I’m sure the noise, quality and other dynamics are better on 91+.
The engine is a variant of the tried and true K-series engines, most or all of which ran on Regular unleaded fine. I believe this is the reason.
Just my $.02.
#97
Good lord, this has been discussed to death at this point but will add my 2 cents in. I have had both the 07 type S, 17 tlx fwd and 18 v6 aspec. Only the 07 ran poorly (and noticably so) on anything but premium (knocking, pinging and all kinds of bad noises on the one tank I tried of regular), more so the hotter the outside temp was the worse it ran and more knock and pinging which is very bad. Used premium in it for the life and no issues and would never ever try regular again in that car. The 17/18 v6 there was no noticable difference in one grade vs another. Never a knock or ping under heavy acceleration and high temps. Gain what little you can from that or more. Also had an early 3 series bmw that wouldn't even idle steady on anything but premium so that's what I used. There is a difference between 'premium reccomended vs required" The TLX falls in the "recomended" bucket. Most people should notice the difference in one tank. If you don't that a good indicator. Cost wasn't a factor for me, I just saw no observable benefit. Could be different from car to car. I will say in my own real life experience when the grade was too low it was clearly obvious the octane was not adequate.
Last edited by jhb31; 04-01-2019 at 09:18 PM.
#98
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Raleigh, NC - USA
Age: 82
Posts: 7,674
Received 2,599 Likes
on
1,581 Posts
Good lord, this has been discussed to death at this point but will add my 2 cents in. I have had both the 07 type S, 17 tlx fwd and 18 v6 aspec. Only the 07 ran poorly (and noticably so) on anything but premium (knocking, pinging and all kinds of bad noises on the one tank I tried of regular), more so the hotter the outside temp was the worse it ran and more knock and pinging which is very bad. Used premium in it for the life and no issues and would never ever try regular again in that car. The 17/18 v6 there was no noticable difference in one grade vs another. Never a knock or ping under heavy acceleration and high temps. Gain what little you can from that or more. Also had an early 3 series bmw that wouldn't even idle steady on anything but premium so that's what I used. There is a difference between 'premium reccomended vs required" The TLX falls in the "recomended" bucket. Most people should notice the difference in one tank. If you don't that a good indicator. Cost wasn't a factor for me, I just saw no observable benefit. Could be different from car to car. I will say in my own real life experience when the grade was too low it was clearly obvious the octane was not adequate.
"Just because you don't hear it doesn't mean its not happening. Hook up a live data recorder and watch the difference".
Could not hear it in my post with the engine data graph. Wonder if anyone uses mid-grade as a 87-91/93 alternative.
#99
Some Guy Who Loves Cars
Interesting how polarizing this topic is as I read through the thread. My tl;dr response is that I typically choose midgrade when it's available. Where it's not, I typically lean toward premium. But I have no problem grabbing a tank of regular when I'm visiting an urban area with high gas prices. I personally have never noticed a significant MPG fluctuation given any tank, nor have I felt any loss or boost in acceleration. I'm always around 25-28mpg to each tank.
The science is clear though. I'm a big fan of science. The cool thing about science is it's true whether or not you believe it. Octane is related to compression ratio. That's a fact. An engine designed with a certain compression ratio will run optimally on certain octane gas. When these don't match, the engine will run "not optimally." That's a fact too. The manufacturer recommends premium because that is how the car is designed to run. You don't have to use premium, but the car won't run optimally on regular.
The strengths of the opinions expressed herein made me curious to know what the actual dollars indicate. They're not insignificant.
Those who run regular spend between $240-$360 less per year, or one car payment. Regular is $9 less per 15gal fill up than premium. You fill up about 20-26 times a year. Math, much like science, doesn't lie. So extrapolating over a 20 year vehicle life and you can see you can save $3,500 to over $7,000, or a new engine.
The truth is that few people drive vehicles for long enough to realize much savings, or to see if regular vs. premium causes long-term damage. I mean, in the chart above, driving 20 years on strictly regular affords you one trip to Disney World, all the while exposing engine components to heat and forces to which they're not designed. I knew premium was recommended when I bought the car. If I cared so much about that, I should have bought something that required regular. While $9 extra per tank can feel painful for some, to me, I'd rather drive a car with its designed performance and longevity. I actually find it a little irresponsible for a reputable and knowledgeable car publication to try experiments like these and recommend anything except what the manufacturer does.
Eating fast food for three meals a day over the course of a week, a month or even a year probably won't kill you, but your body won't feel good, look good or function optimally.
The science is clear though. I'm a big fan of science. The cool thing about science is it's true whether or not you believe it. Octane is related to compression ratio. That's a fact. An engine designed with a certain compression ratio will run optimally on certain octane gas. When these don't match, the engine will run "not optimally." That's a fact too. The manufacturer recommends premium because that is how the car is designed to run. You don't have to use premium, but the car won't run optimally on regular.
The strengths of the opinions expressed herein made me curious to know what the actual dollars indicate. They're not insignificant.
Those who run regular spend between $240-$360 less per year, or one car payment. Regular is $9 less per 15gal fill up than premium. You fill up about 20-26 times a year. Math, much like science, doesn't lie. So extrapolating over a 20 year vehicle life and you can see you can save $3,500 to over $7,000, or a new engine.
The truth is that few people drive vehicles for long enough to realize much savings, or to see if regular vs. premium causes long-term damage. I mean, in the chart above, driving 20 years on strictly regular affords you one trip to Disney World, all the while exposing engine components to heat and forces to which they're not designed. I knew premium was recommended when I bought the car. If I cared so much about that, I should have bought something that required regular. While $9 extra per tank can feel painful for some, to me, I'd rather drive a car with its designed performance and longevity. I actually find it a little irresponsible for a reputable and knowledgeable car publication to try experiments like these and recommend anything except what the manufacturer does.
Eating fast food for three meals a day over the course of a week, a month or even a year probably won't kill you, but your body won't feel good, look good or function optimally.
The following users liked this post:
JT4 (04-03-2019)
#100
Interesting how polarizing this topic is as I read through the thread. My tl;dr response is that I typically choose midgrade when it's available. Where it's not, I typically lean toward premium. But I have no problem grabbing a tank of regular when I'm visiting an urban area with high gas prices. I personally have never noticed a significant MPG fluctuation given any tank, nor have I felt any loss or boost in acceleration. I'm always around 25-28mpg to each tank.
The science is clear though. I'm a big fan of science. The cool thing about science is it's true whether or not you believe it. Octane is related to compression ratio. That's a fact. An engine designed with a certain compression ratio will run optimally on certain octane gas. When these don't match, the engine will run "not optimally." That's a fact too. The manufacturer recommends premium because that is how the car is designed to run. You don't have to use premium, but the car won't run optimally on regular.
The strengths of the opinions expressed herein made me curious to know what the actual dollars indicate. They're not insignificant.
Those who run regular spend between $240-$360 less per year, or one car payment. Regular is $9 less per 15gal fill up than premium. You fill up about 20-26 times a year. Math, much like science, doesn't lie. So extrapolating over a 20 year vehicle life and you can see you can save $3,500 to over $7,000, or a new engine.
The truth is that few people drive vehicles for long enough to realize much savings, or to see if regular vs. premium causes long-term damage. I mean, in the chart above, driving 20 years on strictly regular affords you one trip to Disney World, all the while exposing engine components to heat and forces to which they're not designed. I knew premium was recommended when I bought the car. If I cared so much about that, I should have bought something that required regular. While $9 extra per tank can feel painful for some, to me, I'd rather drive a car with its designed performance and longevity. I actually find it a little irresponsible for a reputable and knowledgeable car publication to try experiments like these and recommend anything except what the manufacturer does.
Eating fast food for three meals a day over the course of a week, a month or even a year probably won't kill you, but your body won't feel good, look good or function optimally.
The science is clear though. I'm a big fan of science. The cool thing about science is it's true whether or not you believe it. Octane is related to compression ratio. That's a fact. An engine designed with a certain compression ratio will run optimally on certain octane gas. When these don't match, the engine will run "not optimally." That's a fact too. The manufacturer recommends premium because that is how the car is designed to run. You don't have to use premium, but the car won't run optimally on regular.
The strengths of the opinions expressed herein made me curious to know what the actual dollars indicate. They're not insignificant.
Those who run regular spend between $240-$360 less per year, or one car payment. Regular is $9 less per 15gal fill up than premium. You fill up about 20-26 times a year. Math, much like science, doesn't lie. So extrapolating over a 20 year vehicle life and you can see you can save $3,500 to over $7,000, or a new engine.
The truth is that few people drive vehicles for long enough to realize much savings, or to see if regular vs. premium causes long-term damage. I mean, in the chart above, driving 20 years on strictly regular affords you one trip to Disney World, all the while exposing engine components to heat and forces to which they're not designed. I knew premium was recommended when I bought the car. If I cared so much about that, I should have bought something that required regular. While $9 extra per tank can feel painful for some, to me, I'd rather drive a car with its designed performance and longevity. I actually find it a little irresponsible for a reputable and knowledgeable car publication to try experiments like these and recommend anything except what the manufacturer does.
Eating fast food for three meals a day over the course of a week, a month or even a year probably won't kill you, but your body won't feel good, look good or function optimally.
#101
Senior Moderator
Interesting how polarizing this topic is as I read through the thread. My tl;dr response is that I typically choose midgrade when it's available. Where it's not, I typically lean toward premium. But I have no problem grabbing a tank of regular when I'm visiting an urban area with high gas prices. I personally have never noticed a significant MPG fluctuation given any tank, nor have I felt any loss or boost in acceleration. I'm always around 25-28mpg to each tank.
The science is clear though. I'm a big fan of science. The cool thing about science is it's true whether or not you believe it. Octane is related to compression ratio. That's a fact. An engine designed with a certain compression ratio will run optimally on certain octane gas. When these don't match, the engine will run "not optimally." That's a fact too. The manufacturer recommends premium because that is how the car is designed to run. You don't have to use premium, but the car won't run optimally on regular.
The strengths of the opinions expressed herein made me curious to know what the actual dollars indicate. They're not insignificant.
Those who run regular spend between $240-$360 less per year, or one car payment. Regular is $9 less per 15gal fill up than premium. You fill up about 20-26 times a year. Math, much like science, doesn't lie. So extrapolating over a 20 year vehicle life and you can see you can save $3,500 to over $7,000, or a new engine.
The truth is that few people drive vehicles for long enough to realize much savings, or to see if regular vs. premium causes long-term damage. I mean, in the chart above, driving 20 years on strictly regular affords you one trip to Disney World, all the while exposing engine components to heat and forces to which they're not designed. I knew premium was recommended when I bought the car. If I cared so much about that, I should have bought something that required regular. While $9 extra per tank can feel painful for some, to me, I'd rather drive a car with its designed performance and longevity. I actually find it a little irresponsible for a reputable and knowledgeable car publication to try experiments like these and recommend anything except what the manufacturer does.
Eating fast food for three meals a day over the course of a week, a month or even a year probably won't kill you, but your body won't feel good, look good or function optimally.
The science is clear though. I'm a big fan of science. The cool thing about science is it's true whether or not you believe it. Octane is related to compression ratio. That's a fact. An engine designed with a certain compression ratio will run optimally on certain octane gas. When these don't match, the engine will run "not optimally." That's a fact too. The manufacturer recommends premium because that is how the car is designed to run. You don't have to use premium, but the car won't run optimally on regular.
The strengths of the opinions expressed herein made me curious to know what the actual dollars indicate. They're not insignificant.
Those who run regular spend between $240-$360 less per year, or one car payment. Regular is $9 less per 15gal fill up than premium. You fill up about 20-26 times a year. Math, much like science, doesn't lie. So extrapolating over a 20 year vehicle life and you can see you can save $3,500 to over $7,000, or a new engine.
The truth is that few people drive vehicles for long enough to realize much savings, or to see if regular vs. premium causes long-term damage. I mean, in the chart above, driving 20 years on strictly regular affords you one trip to Disney World, all the while exposing engine components to heat and forces to which they're not designed. I knew premium was recommended when I bought the car. If I cared so much about that, I should have bought something that required regular. While $9 extra per tank can feel painful for some, to me, I'd rather drive a car with its designed performance and longevity. I actually find it a little irresponsible for a reputable and knowledgeable car publication to try experiments like these and recommend anything except what the manufacturer does.
Eating fast food for three meals a day over the course of a week, a month or even a year probably won't kill you, but your body won't feel good, look good or function optimally.
#102
Some Guy Who Loves Cars
I'm not really sure what to make of your post. It's really hard to tell what your message is without dissecting it.
This statement is really derpy. It's like the Billy Madison debate answer. There is no science, fact, math or evidence here. You guaranteeing that 95% of TLX drivers fill up with regular isn't based on research or study. It's probably not even true. But in line with your overly sweeping assumption, if they do strictly fill up with regular, then they will never observe any benefits of premium or be able to even compare.
I'm pretty sure a dyno in a perfectly controlled experiment with an engine and variety of gasolines would prove this assertion wrong.
This is plausible, but not really backed by knowledge. It's more of a guess. I know a lot of vehicles driven by a lot of people whose transmissions outlasted their engines and vice versa.
This is true, but I never said anyone should run premium in an engine that doesn't require it. That is literally burning money.
Higher octane should have fixed the knocking, so I'm glad it indeed worked for you.
Just because you can't hear knocking doesn't mean that the engine is running at maximum efficiency. Your 3-4 year clarification is why I said that most people won't own a car long enough to see if gas effects longevity.
Umm, where did I insinuate anything remotely close to this?
I never said regular does damage. I'm saying the engine will run "non optimally" if the compression doesn't match the octane.
You sound like the kind of guy whose doctor would recommend more vegetables and you'd leave his office saying "glad he didn't require more vegetables."
Clearly this topic strikes a chord with you. That's fine. I shared why I act a certain way. You argued with my way without much substance. So that's one power of forums.
I'm pretty sure a dyno in a perfectly controlled experiment with an engine and variety of gasolines would prove this assertion wrong.
Umm, where did I insinuate anything remotely close to this?
Clearly this topic strikes a chord with you. That's fine. I shared why I act a certain way. You argued with my way without much substance. So that's one power of forums.
Last edited by someguy11; 04-02-2019 at 12:41 PM.
#103
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Raleigh, NC - USA
Age: 82
Posts: 7,674
Received 2,599 Likes
on
1,581 Posts
Since we are back on octane thought I would post this current thread item from a BMW octane debate.
OP wanted to know if he should go to 100 octane for track day instead of his normal 93 stock 440 with the MPPSK package. Usual set of response as we would see here I suggested this.
"Could help if the engine heats up while running. Will put off knock better then 93 under high heat, high load"
&
"Have not tracked the 440i B58M. Last BMW to be tracked was the 335is. It was run stock with 50/50 93/100 & drag raced JB4/COBB with pure 100. The COBRA replaced it & the 435i N55M I got at the same time went to second choice DD duty.
Its not oil or water you need to watch its the air inlet temperature. The B58 water cooled intercooler might be better but the air 2 air N54/55 would heat soak quickly. This generally required an aftermarket unit. I ran an ECS unit.
If you have scanning tool it can be useful to track that temperature to see how you are doing ambient vs inlet.
FWIW 100 is cheap insurance for a track day that will prevent an ignition pulls under load. I was getting mine at the pump in Cary NC for $7.10 a gallon at the time."
Its an incorrect urban legend that high octane fuel will go unburned & cause issues. Its also an urban legend that it will harm you car.
The only thing harmed is your wallet if you buy more octane then you need.
For DD & an occasionally hard moonshine back road run NC's normal premium @ 93 octane is fine. If I ever take it to VIR it will go on a 100/93 mix."
FWIW the BMW 440MPPSK is tuned for 93 octane
*****Most posts were don't do it it will do nothing, to you will have more unburned gas, etc all the usual stuff.*****
When the rubber met the road he posted this.
"Good call brotha!"
Today's experience feeding 100 Octane to a B58M (440i + MPPSK)
NIGHT AND DAY DIFFERENCE.
I did 10 laps on 93 and 12 laps on 100 octane.
It was a very obvious increase in power/boost.
Next time, you're wondering if it's worth it or ok to do it: If you're ok with 10+ $/gal it is absolutely worth it.
OP wanted to know if he should go to 100 octane for track day instead of his normal 93 stock 440 with the MPPSK package. Usual set of response as we would see here I suggested this.
"Could help if the engine heats up while running. Will put off knock better then 93 under high heat, high load"
&
"Have not tracked the 440i B58M. Last BMW to be tracked was the 335is. It was run stock with 50/50 93/100 & drag raced JB4/COBB with pure 100. The COBRA replaced it & the 435i N55M I got at the same time went to second choice DD duty.
Its not oil or water you need to watch its the air inlet temperature. The B58 water cooled intercooler might be better but the air 2 air N54/55 would heat soak quickly. This generally required an aftermarket unit. I ran an ECS unit.
If you have scanning tool it can be useful to track that temperature to see how you are doing ambient vs inlet.
FWIW 100 is cheap insurance for a track day that will prevent an ignition pulls under load. I was getting mine at the pump in Cary NC for $7.10 a gallon at the time."
Its an incorrect urban legend that high octane fuel will go unburned & cause issues. Its also an urban legend that it will harm you car.
The only thing harmed is your wallet if you buy more octane then you need.
For DD & an occasionally hard moonshine back road run NC's normal premium @ 93 octane is fine. If I ever take it to VIR it will go on a 100/93 mix."
FWIW the BMW 440MPPSK is tuned for 93 octane
*****Most posts were don't do it it will do nothing, to you will have more unburned gas, etc all the usual stuff.*****
When the rubber met the road he posted this.
"Good call brotha!"
Today's experience feeding 100 Octane to a B58M (440i + MPPSK)
NIGHT AND DAY DIFFERENCE.
I did 10 laps on 93 and 12 laps on 100 octane.
It was a very obvious increase in power/boost.
Next time, you're wondering if it's worth it or ok to do it: If you're ok with 10+ $/gal it is absolutely worth it.
Last edited by BEAR-AvHistory; 04-02-2019 at 07:19 PM.
The following users liked this post:
Beached (04-02-2019)
#104
I'm not really sure what to make of your post. It's really hard to tell what your message is without dissecting it.
This statement is really derpy. It's like the Billy Madison debate answer. There is no science, fact, math or evidence here. You guaranteeing that 95% of TLX drivers fill up with regular isn't based on research or study. It's probably not even true. But in line with your overly sweeping assumption, if they do strictly fill up with regular, then they will never observe any benefits of premium or be able to even compare.
I'm pretty sure a dyno in a perfectly controlled experiment with an engine and variety of gasolines would prove this assertion wrong.
This is plausible, but not really backed by knowledge. It's more of a guess. I know a lot of vehicles driven by a lot of people whose transmissions outlasted their engines and vice versa.
This is true, but I never said anyone should run premium in an engine that doesn't require it. That is literally burning money.
Higher octane should have fixed the knocking, so I'm glad it indeed worked for you.
Just because you can't hear knocking doesn't mean that the engine is running at maximum efficiency. Your 3-4 year clarification is why I said that most people won't own a car long enough to see if gas effects longevity.
Umm, where did I insinuate anything remotely close to this?
I never said regular does damage. I'm saying the engine will run "non optimally" if the compression doesn't match the octane.
You sound like the kind of guy whose doctor would recommend more vegetables and you'd leave his office saying "glad he didn't require more vegetables."
Clearly this topic strikes a chord with you. That's fine. I shared why I act a certain way. You argued with my way without much substance. So that's one power of forums.
This statement is really derpy. It's like the Billy Madison debate answer. There is no science, fact, math or evidence here. You guaranteeing that 95% of TLX drivers fill up with regular isn't based on research or study. It's probably not even true. But in line with your overly sweeping assumption, if they do strictly fill up with regular, then they will never observe any benefits of premium or be able to even compare.
I'm pretty sure a dyno in a perfectly controlled experiment with an engine and variety of gasolines would prove this assertion wrong.
This is plausible, but not really backed by knowledge. It's more of a guess. I know a lot of vehicles driven by a lot of people whose transmissions outlasted their engines and vice versa.
This is true, but I never said anyone should run premium in an engine that doesn't require it. That is literally burning money.
Higher octane should have fixed the knocking, so I'm glad it indeed worked for you.
Just because you can't hear knocking doesn't mean that the engine is running at maximum efficiency. Your 3-4 year clarification is why I said that most people won't own a car long enough to see if gas effects longevity.
Umm, where did I insinuate anything remotely close to this?
I never said regular does damage. I'm saying the engine will run "non optimally" if the compression doesn't match the octane.
You sound like the kind of guy whose doctor would recommend more vegetables and you'd leave his office saying "glad he didn't require more vegetables."
Clearly this topic strikes a chord with you. That's fine. I shared why I act a certain way. You argued with my way without much substance. So that's one power of forums.
The following users liked this post:
someguy11 (04-03-2019)
#105
Since we are back on octane thought I would post this current thread item from a BMW octane debate.
NIGHT AND DAY DIFFERENCE.
I did 10 laps on 93 and 12 laps on 100 octane.
It was a very obvious increase in power/boost.
Next time, you're wondering if it's worth it or ok to do it: If you're ok with 10+ $/gal it is absolutely worth it.
NIGHT AND DAY DIFFERENCE.
I did 10 laps on 93 and 12 laps on 100 octane.
It was a very obvious increase in power/boost.
Next time, you're wondering if it's worth it or ok to do it: If you're ok with 10+ $/gal it is absolutely worth it.
#106
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Raleigh, NC - USA
Age: 82
Posts: 7,674
Received 2,599 Likes
on
1,581 Posts
There could be a lot of instances where a TLX could more effectively use premium vs regular. A loaded car going on vacation for example.
Anytime the engine is under load or the hotter the weather the octane requirement can change upward. My general thought is most people drive 10/12K miles per year would only spend a few hundred dollars more a year to have insurance in the tank. My trucks both run on 87 unless I am going to load then & will add 93 for a top off.
Only other comment is you can have knock below the human hearing threshold so not hearing it is not a valid statement. The guy in the BMW thread did not hear any knock on his initial normal gas laps.
BTW the MPPSK is a normal production option 320BHP (331WHP Dyno) raised to 355BHP (369WHP Dyno) & its not a heavy mod, just a light tune increase. The current pure stock base I6T "G" generation 340/440 is listed as 383BHP
Last edited by BEAR-AvHistory; 04-03-2019 at 09:17 AM.
The following users liked this post:
CheeseyPoofs McNut (04-04-2019)
#108
Some Guy Who Loves Cars
^KeithL: Great point. Thanks for referencing that. I always wondered about "top tier" claims. I just looked up and read that study. Looks legit. Around my area, we have Costco gas and Kwik Trips, which are on the retailer list, so I'll start seeking those out.
I'm no expert on the subject, but I've also wondered about ethanol. I don't know if this issue is exclusive to the Midwest. I thought ethanol (10%) was added to all gas around here regardless of retailer, which we should all hate, because it not surprisingly results in about a 10% loss of efficiency. Or something like that. Running E85 is worse (for FFV vehicles with special rubber and plastic that can handle that much ethanol) - like a 15-30% reduction. So it's "renewable" but less efficient. But when I see a sign on certain pumps that say "no ethanol added" - I'm skeptical that's true but pump that instead of E10.
I've also wondered about brands that advertise special premium gas. Mobil Synergy, BP Invigorate and Shell V-Power come to mind. I've always had in my mind these are superior premiums to others. No idea if that's true or not, but they market the heck out of their superiority. Any petrochemical engineers here care to weigh in?
I'm no expert on the subject, but I've also wondered about ethanol. I don't know if this issue is exclusive to the Midwest. I thought ethanol (10%) was added to all gas around here regardless of retailer, which we should all hate, because it not surprisingly results in about a 10% loss of efficiency. Or something like that. Running E85 is worse (for FFV vehicles with special rubber and plastic that can handle that much ethanol) - like a 15-30% reduction. So it's "renewable" but less efficient. But when I see a sign on certain pumps that say "no ethanol added" - I'm skeptical that's true but pump that instead of E10.
I've also wondered about brands that advertise special premium gas. Mobil Synergy, BP Invigorate and Shell V-Power come to mind. I've always had in my mind these are superior premiums to others. No idea if that's true or not, but they market the heck out of their superiority. Any petrochemical engineers here care to weigh in?
#109
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Raleigh, NC - USA
Age: 82
Posts: 7,674
Received 2,599 Likes
on
1,581 Posts
Ethanol is a two edged sword. Its an octane enhancer but has less BTU's then gasoline. So will prevent knock but decrease fuel mileage. With turbo engines is called "poor mans race gas". If you add E85 to 93 in about a 30/35% proportion you can get a considerable increase in power over straight 93. You will suffer reduced MPG & if the mix is too rich your fuel pump will not keep up & needs upgrading.
Just something to keep in mind with the DOHC V6T in the next TLX.
FWIW or not. Is 72*F here today & the street surface is warm. Tried an experiment. Was low on fuel so I recorded a 0-60mph run on the BMW Lap timer that is built into my cars iDrive system. Made a 93 octane run.
Car & Driver claims 4.2 seconds for my car but I did not match it. Put in 5 gallons of 100 octane.
Same section of street in both cases use launch control & let the car shift on its own. Short quick burnout to heat the Summer Tires. The more adventurist here should have a lot of fun with the new TLX.
Just something to keep in mind with the DOHC V6T in the next TLX.
FWIW or not. Is 72*F here today & the street surface is warm. Tried an experiment. Was low on fuel so I recorded a 0-60mph run on the BMW Lap timer that is built into my cars iDrive system. Made a 93 octane run.
Car & Driver claims 4.2 seconds for my car but I did not match it. Put in 5 gallons of 100 octane.
Same section of street in both cases use launch control & let the car shift on its own. Short quick burnout to heat the Summer Tires. The more adventurist here should have a lot of fun with the new TLX.
Last edited by BEAR-AvHistory; 04-04-2019 at 01:00 PM.
#110
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Raleigh, NC - USA
Age: 82
Posts: 7,674
Received 2,599 Likes
on
1,581 Posts
Quick HiJack. Don't have a Go-Pro but this is with full integration. Have the other presentations but not the video.
These systems, of more or less detail, a pretty common in some other makes. My neighbors 2018 StingRay has something similar but his camera is built into the car as part of the package & generates more data. My son in law has some kind of system in his Porsche.
Be nice if Acura offers one in the Type S when it comes out.
OK will be good now & stay on topic.
On Top Tier gas its about cleaning additives not pure octane. I get Costco whenever I can or Shell just down the road on the discount program. At one time Costco did not offer the high end detergent package in 87. Its what you need to watch out for in "Non Top Tier" gas.
These systems, of more or less detail, a pretty common in some other makes. My neighbors 2018 StingRay has something similar but his camera is built into the car as part of the package & generates more data. My son in law has some kind of system in his Porsche.
Be nice if Acura offers one in the Type S when it comes out.
OK will be good now & stay on topic.
On Top Tier gas its about cleaning additives not pure octane. I get Costco whenever I can or Shell just down the road on the discount program. At one time Costco did not offer the high end detergent package in 87. Its what you need to watch out for in "Non Top Tier" gas.
Last edited by BEAR-AvHistory; 04-04-2019 at 01:33 PM.
The following users liked this post:
someguy11 (04-05-2019)
#112
I have not done a scientific study, but I do keep track of each tank of gas that goes into my 2007 Nissan Altima SE 3.5 V6.
The car seems less sluggish with 93 octane vs 89 octane.
The car gets 1.0 to 1.5 mpg LESS w/ 93 octane vs 89 octane.
I'm probably not going to fiddle around with 89 octane with my 2019 TLX A-Spec V6 SH-AWD, though.
The car seems less sluggish with 93 octane vs 89 octane.
The car gets 1.0 to 1.5 mpg LESS w/ 93 octane vs 89 octane.
I'm probably not going to fiddle around with 89 octane with my 2019 TLX A-Spec V6 SH-AWD, though.