Premium or Regular Unleaded?
05-08-2019, 09:59 AM
#41
Three Wheelin'
I would be careful going against the manufacturer's recommendation. What is in it for them to recommend premium if there was no benefit to it? We are not experts, so what we perceive as being OK may not reflect the reality that it is not.
The following users liked this post:
DHood (05-09-2019)
05-08-2019, 10:09 AM
#42
The use of regular would not be going against the manufacturer's recommendation. No where do they say that they do not recommend regular. They recommend premium for the best performance. If the use of regular would grenade the engine, I'm certain that they would specify the use of premium only. They do not.
FWIW... Folks in lower elevations will see slightly more of an improvement using premium than those of us at higher elevations that will see little to none. From my observations, yours may differ.
FWIW... Folks in lower elevations will see slightly more of an improvement using premium than those of us at higher elevations that will see little to none. From my observations, yours may differ.
Last edited by FrankZZR; 05-08-2019 at 10:13 AM.
The following users liked this post:
JB in AZ (05-08-2019)
05-08-2019, 10:20 AM
#45
Three Wheelin'
So according to you the recommendation for premium is completely superfluous? They are clearly saying that if you want optimal performance, use premium. The engine knows how to protect itself from damage if you go as low as 87. But just because you can't perceive any performance problems with 87 doesn't mean the engine is performing optimally.
05-08-2019, 10:28 AM
#47
So according to you the recommendation for premium is completely superfluous? They are clearly saying that if you want optimal performance, use premium. The engine knows how to protect itself from damage if you go as low as 87. But just because you can't perceive any performance problems with 87 doesn't mean the engine is performing optimally.
05-08-2019, 10:29 AM
#48
So according to you the recommendation for premium is completely superfluous? They are clearly saying that if you want optimal performance, use premium. The engine knows how to protect itself from damage if you go as low as 87. But just because you can't perceive any performance problems with 87 doesn't mean the engine is performing optimally.
The video posted above seems to validate my thoughts.
This issue will likely never stop being discussed. Oh well.
05-08-2019, 10:33 AM
#49
I would really recommend people to try a 0-60, 0-100 run. This will shed light on this topic. You will then truly know how much more power the vehicle is making using premium.
05-08-2019, 07:34 PM
#52
Racer
Hopefully this puts an end to this topic https://youtu.be/TdcPEk3ldzc
The following users liked this post:
zroger73 (05-13-2019)
05-10-2019, 01:25 PM
#55
Advanced
05-10-2019, 01:56 PM
#57
Agree with this. I tried using 87 (Regular Unleaded in CT) and got a little engine ping when accelerating on steep hills. Switched to 89 (mid-grade) and the ping went away so have stuck with that. My 2016 RDX ran well on 87.
05-10-2019, 06:43 PM
#58
Instructor
Two reasons I purchase Premium Fuel.
So in the end it is a political decision by me.
Note I put little miles on my car, so cost is negligible to me.
The irony of it, Ethanol does not produce the same energy as gasoline. Although this is negligible in one vehicle, in a thousands it does add up. So, more is burned, more exhaust is in the air.
- Premium fuel that I purchase here in Canada has 0% ethanol. Ethanol is hydrophilic, meaning it will mi or dissolve with water. Once ethanol is with water the two will not separate.
- Using corn ethanol in fuel is crazy. The cost of farming, distilling & shipping is a waste. Add Gov't subsidies, well .....
So in the end it is a political decision by me.
Note I put little miles on my car, so cost is negligible to me.
The irony of it, Ethanol does not produce the same energy as gasoline. Although this is negligible in one vehicle, in a thousands it does add up. So, more is burned, more exhaust is in the air.
The following users liked this post:
DHood (05-10-2019)
05-10-2019, 07:16 PM
#59
.....
So in the end it is a political decision by me.
Note I put little miles on my car, so cost is negligible to me.
The irony of it, Ethanol does not produce the same energy as gasoline. Although this is negligible in one vehicle, in a thousands it does add up. So, more is burned, more exhaust is in the air.
- Using corn ethanol in fuel is crazy. The cost of farming, distilling & shipping is a waste. Add Gov't subsidies, well .....
So in the end it is a political decision by me.
Note I put little miles on my car, so cost is negligible to me.
The irony of it, Ethanol does not produce the same energy as gasoline. Although this is negligible in one vehicle, in a thousands it does add up. So, more is burned, more exhaust is in the air.
Perhaps if a was a farmer in the US mid west I'd feel differently.
05-11-2019, 12:55 PM
#60
Intermediate
Thread Starter
It appears as everyone has their own preferences, but overall it seems like most of the people like using regular 87. Glad I asked the question. Once I finally get my, I will most likely experiment with both grades and see how it works out.
05-11-2019, 02:50 PM
#61
Not sure if the RDX is designed the same way, but the Mazda specifically says that their CX-5 2.5T produces 250 hp @ 5,000 rpm on 93 octane and 227 hp @ 5,000 rpm on 87 octane, but 310 lb-ft of torque @ 2,000 rpm irrespective of octane.
That could be why most people don't notice any difference, as one rarely drives at such high engine speeds. With the RDX, peak hp is around 6,500 rpm, which I'd bet most people never even get close to in regular driving... 90% of the time it's between 1,500-4,000 rpm, and the torque has more of an impact in daily driving than peak hp.
That could be why most people don't notice any difference, as one rarely drives at such high engine speeds. With the RDX, peak hp is around 6,500 rpm, which I'd bet most people never even get close to in regular driving... 90% of the time it's between 1,500-4,000 rpm, and the torque has more of an impact in daily driving than peak hp.
The following users liked this post:
zroger73 (05-13-2019)
05-11-2019, 04:28 PM
#62
BTW, octane is not the only thing to think about with respect to preventing knock / pre-ignition and engine health.
The advent of high-pressure direct injection and closed-loop EGR and PCV systems has caused increased oil dilution, dirty intake valves, and increased ingestion of oil droplets (mixed with fuel and soot) into the combustion chamber. Not pretty. Throw in a widescale shift to turbocharged smaller engines designed to produce most of their torque at lower rpms, and this has resulted in an increase in knocking during low rpm high load situations (i.e., when you floor it at low rpm), a phenomenon called Low Speed Pre-Ignition (LSPI). How can it be prevented?
Recent research has pointed to engine oil as being one of the important factors in preventing LSPI. One theory is that the detergents in the oil interacts with the gas and creates a low octane byproduct that can trigger pre-ignition. Therefore, one should always use an engine oil that is rated API SN PLUS / ILSAC GF-6 / GM dexos 1, which has been tested to prevent LSPI. I would also argue that only using fully synthetic oil is important to reduce the deposits on the intake valves (with direct injection, the intake valves don't get cleaned by the incoming fuel anymore like they did with port fuel injection).
Some advocate using oil catch cans as well, but I worry about issues with warranty coverage if they see mods installed in the engine bay, and you need to empty the thing on a regular basis.
Some links for further reading:
https://www.motor.com/magazine-summa...-pre-ignition/
https://www.turnology.com/tech-stori...oboost-engine/
https://www.theturboforums.com/threa...issues.384229/
The advent of high-pressure direct injection and closed-loop EGR and PCV systems has caused increased oil dilution, dirty intake valves, and increased ingestion of oil droplets (mixed with fuel and soot) into the combustion chamber. Not pretty. Throw in a widescale shift to turbocharged smaller engines designed to produce most of their torque at lower rpms, and this has resulted in an increase in knocking during low rpm high load situations (i.e., when you floor it at low rpm), a phenomenon called Low Speed Pre-Ignition (LSPI). How can it be prevented?
Recent research has pointed to engine oil as being one of the important factors in preventing LSPI. One theory is that the detergents in the oil interacts with the gas and creates a low octane byproduct that can trigger pre-ignition. Therefore, one should always use an engine oil that is rated API SN PLUS / ILSAC GF-6 / GM dexos 1, which has been tested to prevent LSPI. I would also argue that only using fully synthetic oil is important to reduce the deposits on the intake valves (with direct injection, the intake valves don't get cleaned by the incoming fuel anymore like they did with port fuel injection).
Some advocate using oil catch cans as well, but I worry about issues with warranty coverage if they see mods installed in the engine bay, and you need to empty the thing on a regular basis.
Some links for further reading:
https://www.motor.com/magazine-summa...-pre-ignition/
https://www.turnology.com/tech-stori...oboost-engine/
https://www.theturboforums.com/threa...issues.384229/
The following users liked this post:
Gate 17 (05-11-2019)
05-11-2019, 04:41 PM
#63
Therefore, one should always use an engine oil that is rated API SN PLUS / ILSAC GF-6 / GM dexos 1/
In the meantime, oils certified for API SN PLUS should be on the shelves already.
05-12-2019, 07:00 PM
#64
Burning Brakes
You are wrong by a mile. My 06 TL required premium as does my current 14. Our 13 TSX recommended premium. The only time we would fill TSX with premium was on road trips, otherwise it was very happy with regular.
05-12-2019, 09:31 PM
#65
As an example, the last year these TV shows (The Tonight Show with Jay Leno, or How I met Your Mother) aired new episodes was 2014. Is it fair to say it has been many years since they aired new episodes?
The following users liked this post:
zroger73 (05-13-2019)
05-13-2019, 01:06 PM
#66
Actually, the 2013 TSX requires 91. See this link.
That aside, the TSX runs just fine in daily driving with 87.
That aside, the TSX runs just fine in daily driving with 87.
05-13-2019, 01:25 PM
#67
05-13-2019, 01:47 PM
#68
05-13-2019, 01:55 PM
#69
https://hondanews.com/releases/2013-...e=26&query=epa
05-14-2019, 02:22 AM
#70
If using 87 saves you $200-$500 a year, it seems like an easy choice, especially if you don't feel a difference. Your powertrain is covered under warranty for 6 years so you're saving $1200-$3000 before you would be responsible for a new engine. I think I would take that "gamble" assuming I'd have to buy a brand new engine for a 6+ year old car worth about $15k at that point that needed one since I used "cheap" gas...lol. If not, I just saved $3000 by following what was required by the manufacturer. Seems crazy that people are putting 91+ and burning an extra $500 a year for no perceivable benefit and just the feeling of insurance that they aren't damaging their engine (that would be covered under warranty for 6 years when using 87 anyways).
The following 3 users liked this post by skarface:
05-14-2019, 06:49 AM
#71
If using 87 saves you $200-$500 a year, it seems like an easy choice, especially if you don't feel a difference. Your powertrain is covered under warranty for 6 years so you're saving $1200-$3000 before you would be responsible for a new engine. I think I would take that "gamble" assuming I'd have to buy a brand new engine for a 6+ year old car worth about $15k at that point that needed one since I used "cheap" gas...lol. If not, I just saved $3000 by following what was required by the manufacturer. Seems crazy that people are putting 91+ and burning an extra $500 a year for no perceivable benefit and just the feeling of insurance that they aren't damaging their engine (that would be covered under warranty for 6 years when using 87 anyways).
$1,600 for regular
$1,920 for premium
That's a difference of $27 per month, $320 per year, or $1,920 over six years which is about half of what a new RDX buyer who finances the vehicle will pay in interest over the life of a 60--month loan.
Is it worth spending $1,920 to win a stoplight race against another RDX?
I ran premium in my RDX, Si, and G35 because those models were tuned to run at peak performance on premium even though they'd run just fine on regular with reduced maximum power. It was worth the price to me knowing that the engine was capable of producing the advertised amount of power when I floored the accelerator (that's a regular occurrence for me). My mom, however, has never floored an accelerator pedal in all of her decades of driving. For her, there would be zero benefit to using premium unless it was required. For me, it's mostly a psychological benefit and that's okay - we humans tend to make a lot of financial decisions (read: "mistakes") based on emotions.
Last edited by zroger73; 05-14-2019 at 06:53 AM.
05-14-2019, 07:09 AM
#72
I wonder what threads we would get if Acura offered a 20hp upgrade for $2-3k option. People would wonder what kind of stuff they were smoking lol...then again maybe we should wait for the Type-S to come out. We might be surprised haha.
The following users liked this post:
zroger73 (05-14-2019)
05-14-2019, 07:25 AM
#73
On the other hand, where else can you buy 20 more HP on race day for less than the price of a hamburger?
During the week, run regular for your commutes to work and the grocery store.
On Saturday, run premium when you're headed to the track, strip, or course.
Switch back to regular on Sunday for your drive to the house of the lord.
On the other hand, how many people actually take their RDX's to the track, strip, or course for timed or competitive purposes? (Be careful, though - failures due to competition or racing aren't covered under warranty.)
During the week, run regular for your commutes to work and the grocery store.
On Saturday, run premium when you're headed to the track, strip, or course.
Switch back to regular on Sunday for your drive to the house of the lord.
On the other hand, how many people actually take their RDX's to the track, strip, or course for timed or competitive purposes? (Be careful, though - failures due to competition or racing aren't covered under warranty.)
05-14-2019, 07:37 AM
#74
Nor, are accidents covered by your normal insurance.
05-22-2019, 11:11 AM
#75
Not sure if the RDX is designed the same way, but the Mazda specifically says that their CX-5 2.5T produces 250 hp @ 5,000 rpm on 93 octane and 227 hp @ 5,000 rpm on 87 octane, but 310 lb-ft of torque @ 2,000 rpm irrespective of octane.
That could be why most people don't notice any difference, as one rarely drives at such high engine speeds. With the RDX, peak hp is around 6,500 rpm, which I'd bet most people never even get close to in regular driving... 90% of the time it's between 1,500-4,000 rpm, and the torque has more of an impact in daily driving than peak hp.
That could be why most people don't notice any difference, as one rarely drives at such high engine speeds. With the RDX, peak hp is around 6,500 rpm, which I'd bet most people never even get close to in regular driving... 90% of the time it's between 1,500-4,000 rpm, and the torque has more of an impact in daily driving than peak hp.
06-03-2019, 10:34 AM
#76
06-03-2019, 08:36 PM
#77
Drifting
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: New Yorkie, Hudson Valley
Posts: 3,001
Received 1,024 Likes
on
714 Posts
I drive mine pretty hard and hit those RPM's regularly, especially in sport + mode which cranks up the RPM's to get more power. I switched between premium and regular fill ups for a few months and seat of the pants noticed zero difference. Just anecdotal, I'd be curious to see a dyno test using either grade at different RPM's.
Is the beer better too?
The following users liked this post:
johnnyhatchback (06-04-2019)
06-03-2019, 10:27 PM
#79
We're not in 2008 anymore, Toto.
06-04-2019, 07:50 AM
#80
The only Acura that requires Premium is NSX. For all other models it is only recommended; you can use Regular if you wish, but will lose some power. No other drawbacks if engine is tuned properly.
I use 93 for 19 years for Civic Si and for 9 years in RDX. Both endines are in great shape.
Also, Honda, as pretty much all other top manufacturers, highly recommends Top Tier gas. This is why I switched from Gulf to Costco.
I use 93 for 19 years for Civic Si and for 9 years in RDX. Both endines are in great shape.
Also, Honda, as pretty much all other top manufacturers, highly recommends Top Tier gas. This is why I switched from Gulf to Costco.