3G TL (2004-2008)
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

Accidentally put in 93 octane...

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 07-29-2017, 01:45 PM
  #1  
Burning Brakes
Thread Starter
 
TheSauceBoss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Columbus, OH
Age: 29
Posts: 815
Received 307 Likes on 214 Posts
Accidentally put in 93 octane...

So naturally I'm getting crappy gas mileage.

I was just wondering if its possible to "balance it out" (I'm at half a tank of 93) by adding a half tank of 89 octane.....resulting in an average of 91?

Or is this the worst idea of all time?

Thanks either way,
TheSauceBoss is offline  
Old 07-29-2017, 01:48 PM
  #2  
Moderator
iTrader: (1)
 
justnspace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 86,295
Received 16,260 Likes on 11,971 Posts
What!?!?!?!
93 octane is great for the car!!!!!!!!!!!!
P.s. in some states only 93 is offered.
justnspace is offline  
Old 07-29-2017, 01:58 PM
  #3  
Burning Brakes
Thread Starter
 
TheSauceBoss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Columbus, OH
Age: 29
Posts: 815
Received 307 Likes on 214 Posts
Originally Posted by justnspace
What!?!?!?!
93 octane is great for the car!!!!!!!!!!!!
P.s. in some states only 93 is offered.
Are you serious? Lol I thought that 91 was manufacturers spec....and the engine's compression ratio is optimized for 91. I definitely get better gas mileage with 91...I guess I never really thought about it past that
TheSauceBoss is offline  
Old 07-29-2017, 02:10 PM
  #4  
Three Wheelin'
 
MyGuti's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,330
Received 194 Likes on 158 Posts
acura recommends anything 91 and above...
MyGuti is offline  
Old 07-29-2017, 02:13 PM
  #5  
Race Director
 
nfnsquared's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: MAGA country
Posts: 12,474
Received 1,793 Likes on 1,346 Posts
I've run 87 octane for over 167K miles, no issues
nfnsquared is offline  
Old 07-29-2017, 02:19 PM
  #6  
Suzuka Master
 
truonghthe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Age: 36
Posts: 7,952
Received 1,687 Likes on 1,303 Posts
put water in the tank, its will balance thing out automatically.
truonghthe is offline  
Old 07-29-2017, 02:41 PM
  #7  
Three Wheelin'
 
peter6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Age: 27
Posts: 1,523
Received 489 Likes on 373 Posts
Yes, it's well known DIY method for water injection.
peter6 is offline  
Old 07-29-2017, 03:12 PM
  #8  
Safety Car
 
BROlando's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 3,744
Received 1,163 Likes on 874 Posts
Originally Posted by TheSauceBoss
Are you serious? Lol I thought that 91 was manufacturers spec....and the engine's compression ratio is optimized for 91. I definitely get better gas mileage with 91...I guess I never really thought about it past that

Higher octane fuels just resist knock/pre detonation better. 91...93, close enough.

Some states/areas have 91 as the highest available standard pump gas octane. Other places get 93.

I'm sure the car runs fine on anything 87 to 100ish+ octane.
BROlando is offline  
Old 07-29-2017, 07:35 PM
  #9  
Pro
 
GreenSpades's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 532
Received 61 Likes on 55 Posts
Wow. Just wow. I mean ignorance is bliss my friend and I am jealous honestly of the blissful life you must lead. You will be fine. Dont even sweat it, these cars will take any gas from what ive seen.
GreenSpades is offline  
Old 07-29-2017, 07:44 PM
  #10  
Burning Brakes
 
WheelMcCoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Northeast
Posts: 764
Received 151 Likes on 115 Posts
Originally Posted by TheSauceBoss
So naturally I'm getting crappy gas mileage.

I was just wondering if its possible to "balance it out" (I'm at half a tank of 93) by adding a half tank of 89 octane.....resulting in an average of 91?

Or is this the worst idea of all time?

Thanks either way,
That's how gas stations make 89 octane... that is, by mixing various grades to get an average. You should be fine without doing anything, but it won't hurt if you want to mix it yourself. Your engine knows how to use the higher octane.

Engines rated for 87, however, don't know how to use higher octane and it would be a waste of money putting in a higher octane (unless your engine is knocking).
WheelMcCoy is offline  
Old 07-29-2017, 07:48 PM
  #11  
Burning Brakes
Thread Starter
 
TheSauceBoss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Columbus, OH
Age: 29
Posts: 815
Received 307 Likes on 214 Posts
Originally Posted by GreenSpades
Wow. Just wow. I mean ignorance is bliss my friend and I am jealous honestly of the blissful life you must lead. You will be fine. Dont even sweat it, these cars will take any gas from what ive seen.
It's crazy to me how l paid no attention to gas octane until today....I wouldn't go so far as to say blissful - I did a trans drain/refill yesterday evening, as well as a trans fluid filter replacement (that housing was a bitch...not to mention pouring tranny fluid all over the bottom of my bay- 3 hours of my life I wish i had back.....but then today I turn around and realize I don't know how gas affects the engine.

strange indeed lol
TheSauceBoss is offline  
Old 07-29-2017, 08:26 PM
  #12  
-------Tim-------
 
Slpr04UA6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Tampa, Fl
Age: 45
Posts: 2,541
Received 609 Likes on 513 Posts
LoFl!




I've only used 93 octane, as that is Supreme gas here in Florida. (Recommended)
Slpr04UA6 is offline  
Old 07-29-2017, 09:38 PM
  #13  
Latent car nut
iTrader: (2)
 
horseshoez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Southern New Hampshire
Age: 68
Posts: 7,844
Received 2,005 Likes on 1,407 Posts
Originally Posted by TheSauceBoss
So naturally I'm getting crappy gas mileage.

I was just wondering if its possible to "balance it out" (I'm at half a tank of 93) by adding a half tank of 89 octane.....resulting in an average of 91?

Or is this the worst idea of all time?

Thanks either way,
If you're getting crappy gas mileage it has nothing to do with the 93 AKI (do not confuse the U.S. AKI rating with "octane) fuel you put in your car. FWIW, the fuel where I live is 87 AKI, 89 AKI, and 93 AKI; I only use 93 and today after a few days of driving my nephew around to see some sights here in New Hamster, I filled up; my average speed was 50 mph (probably 70% highway, 30% urban), I drove 428.4 miles on 14.263 gallons which works out to just over 30 mpg. Not exactly what I would call crappy gas mileage.
horseshoez is online now  
Old 07-30-2017, 07:59 AM
  #14  
Advanced
 
grandlaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2017
Age: 66
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts
Only ever used 87 in both my TL's, the '01 now has 293K miles and never one ping. Be interesting to calculate the amount of money I've saved:-)
grandlaker is offline  
Old 07-30-2017, 07:59 AM
  #15  
Latent car nut
iTrader: (2)
 
horseshoez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Southern New Hampshire
Age: 68
Posts: 7,844
Received 2,005 Likes on 1,407 Posts
Originally Posted by grandlaker
Only ever used 87 in both my TL's, the '01 now has 293K miles and never one ping. Be interesting to calculate the amount of money I've saved:-)
Probably none.
horseshoez is online now  
Old 07-30-2017, 08:45 AM
  #16  
Race Director
 
nfnsquared's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: MAGA country
Posts: 12,474
Received 1,793 Likes on 1,346 Posts
Originally Posted by grandlaker
Only ever used 87 in both my TL's, the '01 now has 293K miles and never one ping. Be interesting to calculate the amount of money I've saved:-)
about $5K, assuming the difference in price between 87 and 91 is $0.45/gal and 25 mpg avg....
nfnsquared is offline  
Old 07-30-2017, 11:18 AM
  #17  
Latent car nut
iTrader: (2)
 
horseshoez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Southern New Hampshire
Age: 68
Posts: 7,844
Received 2,005 Likes on 1,407 Posts
Originally Posted by nfnsquared
about $5K, assuming the difference in price between 87 and 91 is $0.45/gal and 25 mpg avg....
A forty-five cent delta between regular and premium? Yikes, don't know where y'all live but around here the delta between 87 and 93 is only twenty cents.

That plus a likely reduction in fuel economy and I highly doubt running regular will result in any savings at all.

Last edited by horseshoez; 07-30-2017 at 11:20 AM.
horseshoez is online now  
Old 07-30-2017, 11:30 AM
  #18  
Senior Moderator
 
thoiboi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: SoCal, CA
Posts: 46,875
Received 8,582 Likes on 6,629 Posts
thoiboi is offline  
Old 07-30-2017, 11:37 AM
  #19  
Burning Brakes
 
WheelMcCoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Northeast
Posts: 764
Received 151 Likes on 115 Posts
Originally Posted by horseshoez
A forty-five cent delta between regular and premium? Yikes, don't know where y'all live but around here the delta between 87 and 93 is only twenty cents.

That plus a likely reduction in fuel economy and I highly doubt running regular will result in any savings at all.
My experience as well. When I use a lower octane, I get slightly lower fuel economy. And V-TEC works better with the recommended fuel. But sadly, in the Northeast, the delta between regular and premium can be between 35 cents and 50 cents.
WheelMcCoy is offline  
Old 07-30-2017, 11:43 AM
  #20  
Burning Brakes
 
WheelMcCoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Northeast
Posts: 764
Received 151 Likes on 115 Posts
Originally Posted by thoiboi
LOL. I know, I know. Yet another fuel thread.
WheelMcCoy is offline  
Old 07-30-2017, 11:54 AM
  #21  
Latent car nut
iTrader: (2)
 
horseshoez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Southern New Hampshire
Age: 68
Posts: 7,844
Received 2,005 Likes on 1,407 Posts
Originally Posted by WheelMcCoy
My experience as well. When I use a lower octane, I get slightly lower fuel economy. And V-TEC works better with the recommended fuel. But sadly, in the Northeast, the delta between regular and premium can be between 35 cents and 50 cents.
Interesting, I'm in New Hampshire and typically see twenty to twenty-five cents as the delta.

Agreed on the "yet another octane thread". I'm thinking it might make sense to lock this one as the OP has already had his answer covered several times.
horseshoez is online now  
Old 07-30-2017, 01:28 PM
  #22  
Race Director
 
nfnsquared's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: MAGA country
Posts: 12,474
Received 1,793 Likes on 1,346 Posts
I've run 87 octane for over 167K miles and it hasn't affected MPG at all. And any thought that VTEC works better is just that, a thought. I recorded multiple WOT runs to near redline on Torque Pro and didn't register any timing pull whatsoever on 87 vs 91 octane.

And yeah, the delta is $0.45 - $0.55 up here.
nfnsquared is offline  
Old 07-30-2017, 01:38 PM
  #23  
Latent car nut
iTrader: (2)
 
horseshoez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Southern New Hampshire
Age: 68
Posts: 7,844
Received 2,005 Likes on 1,407 Posts
Granted I've never put a J32 on a dyno, but when I was with Mercedes we put lots of the (then new) 3.2 liter V6 motors for the (then newish) W210 E-Class on dynos and ran them with different fuels; there was always a noticeable reduction in power in the mid to top RPM ranges and a reduction on BSFC (which has a direct correlation to fuel economy) across the board when lower octane fuel was used.

Last edited by horseshoez; 07-30-2017 at 01:40 PM.
horseshoez is online now  
Old 07-30-2017, 01:45 PM
  #24  
Race Director
 
nfnsquared's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: MAGA country
Posts: 12,474
Received 1,793 Likes on 1,346 Posts
I've never put a J32 on a dyno either, but if timing isn't being pulled throughout the entire power band, then no power is being lost. And for 167K+ miles on 87 octane, I still get 30 MPG on the highway.
nfnsquared is offline  
Old 07-30-2017, 02:11 PM
  #25  
Latent car nut
iTrader: (2)
 
horseshoez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Southern New Hampshire
Age: 68
Posts: 7,844
Received 2,005 Likes on 1,407 Posts
Originally Posted by nfnsquared
I've never put a J32 on a dyno either, but if timing isn't being pulled throughout the entire power band, then no power is being lost. And for 167K+ miles on 87 octane, I still get 30 MPG on the highway.
So what you're saying is you don't really know, you're just guessing.
horseshoez is online now  
Old 07-30-2017, 02:46 PM
  #26  
Race Director
 
nfnsquared's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: MAGA country
Posts: 12,474
Received 1,793 Likes on 1,346 Posts
If timing isn't being pulled and MPGs are the same, how would any power be lost?
nfnsquared is offline  
Old 07-30-2017, 02:51 PM
  #27  
Latent car nut
iTrader: (2)
 
horseshoez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Southern New Hampshire
Age: 68
Posts: 7,844
Received 2,005 Likes on 1,407 Posts
Originally Posted by nfnsquared
If timing isn't being pulled and MPGs are the same, how would any power be lost?
You have absolutely zero way of knowing whether timing is pulled or not; when an engine is running at WOT, there is a very conservative fuel map being run which is very-very rich. Long story short, it doesn't surprise me you saw no difference at WOT.
horseshoez is online now  
Old 07-30-2017, 03:00 PM
  #28  
Race Director
 
nfnsquared's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: MAGA country
Posts: 12,474
Received 1,793 Likes on 1,346 Posts
Oh, but I do. OBDII data doesn't lie...

So you're admitting that there's no difference in timing whether running 87 or 91 at WOT? Got it, thanks for confirming my results

And like I said, if timing isn't being pulled, then there's no loss in power. And it's backed up by no change in MPG for 167K miles...
nfnsquared is offline  
Old 07-30-2017, 03:06 PM
  #29  
Racer
 
RenoTL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Reno, NV
Age: 73
Posts: 390
Received 67 Likes on 53 Posts
I think we are missing the point of the OP's post. He says, "Accidentally put in 93 octane... So naturally I'm getting crappy gas mileage." Running the car on a higher octane gas shouldn't result in "crappy gas mileage". Something else must be going on here.
RenoTL is offline  
Old 07-30-2017, 03:58 PM
  #30  
Pro
 
eastcoastguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Springfield, MO
Age: 45
Posts: 674
Received 108 Likes on 95 Posts
This thread cant be serious, worried about putting in 93 octane. It seems the cheaper gas gets around here the bigger the divide between 87 and 91. 93 is outrageous at the stations that have it, I settle for 91 and I get pinging at that.
eastcoastguy is offline  
Old 07-30-2017, 04:05 PM
  #31  
Senior Moderator
 
thoiboi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: SoCal, CA
Posts: 46,875
Received 8,582 Likes on 6,629 Posts
Clickbait OP.. same as his "catastrophic cup holder failure"


thoiboi is offline  
Old 07-30-2017, 04:09 PM
  #32  
Pro
 
eastcoastguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Springfield, MO
Age: 45
Posts: 674
Received 108 Likes on 95 Posts
Originally Posted by thoiboi
Clickbait OP.. same as his "catastrophic cup holder failure"


He should get a job as a marketing guy! lol
eastcoastguy is offline  
Old 07-30-2017, 04:43 PM
  #33  
Latent car nut
iTrader: (2)
 
horseshoez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Southern New Hampshire
Age: 68
Posts: 7,844
Received 2,005 Likes on 1,407 Posts
Originally Posted by nfnsquared
Oh, but I do. OBDII data doesn't lie...

So you're admitting that there's no difference in timing whether running 87 or 91 at WOT? Got it, thanks for confirming my results

And like I said, if timing isn't being pulled, then there's no loss in power. And it's backed up by no change in MPG for 167K miles...
Negative, when at WOT, all other maps are overridden and the upstream O2 sensor are ignored and a full rich fuel mixture coupled with a very retarded spark timing are the default. Get into partial throttle in the mid ranges and you'll see a very different story. Like I said, you really have no idea what low octane fuel is doing to your engine.
horseshoez is online now  
Old 07-30-2017, 04:53 PM
  #34  
Senior Moderator
iTrader: (1)
 
ggesq's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 12,452
Received 2,181 Likes on 1,210 Posts
You will not convince him horseshoe. This debate has been going on for the last 12 years. Never mind the fact that he lives in N. Dakota where I imagine he doesn't have high temps beyond 80 degrees and does mostly highway driving.

Ive used 87 twice since new and 231k miles later on my 05 and both times driving in this FloriDUH heat I experienced decreased MPG and loss of performance.
ggesq is offline  
The following 3 users liked this post by ggesq:
04WDPSeDaN (07-30-2017), Costco (07-31-2017), Jackass (07-30-2017)
Old 07-30-2017, 04:57 PM
  #35  
Pro
 
musiclevelz5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Troy, Ohio 45373
Age: 37
Posts: 510
Received 61 Likes on 59 Posts
I wish I could get 93 for 20 cents over 87. Most stations here especially Shell and BP are 70-90 cents higher.
musiclevelz5 is offline  
Old 07-30-2017, 04:57 PM
  #36  
Latent car nut
iTrader: (2)
 
horseshoez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Location: Southern New Hampshire
Age: 68
Posts: 7,844
Received 2,005 Likes on 1,407 Posts
Originally Posted by ggesq
You will not convince him horseshoe. This debate has been going on for the last 12 years. Never mind the fact that he lives in N. Dakota where I imagine he doesn't have high temps beyond 80 degrees and does mostly highway driving.

Ive used 87 twice since new and 231k miles later on my 05 and both times driving in this FloriDUH heat I experienced decreased MPG and loss of performance.
Hmmm, not sure where you got North Dakota from; per my profile I live in New Hampshire. Granted this summer has been wonderfully temperate in that we've only had maybe a dozen or so days over 90°F, that said I've also lived on SoCal, Texas, Georgia, and Virginia, so I know well the effects heat can bring.
horseshoez is online now  
Old 07-30-2017, 05:04 PM
  #37  
Burning Brakes
Thread Starter
 
TheSauceBoss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Columbus, OH
Age: 29
Posts: 815
Received 307 Likes on 214 Posts
Originally Posted by eastcoastguy
He should get a job as a marketing guy! lol
Originally Posted by thoiboi
Clickbait OP.. same as his "catastrophic cup holder failure"


Hey, I just wanted people to respond haha...

Either way, thanks to everyone else from getting me up to speed. I ended up just burning the entire tank and it evened out to 25mpg average (on the trip computer, at least) while the previous weekend I hit a 30mpg average on my way to Chicago w/91....though most of my recent driving was highway as well.

Sorry for causing another argument lol
TheSauceBoss is offline  
Old 07-30-2017, 05:54 PM
  #38  
Burning Brakes
 
WheelMcCoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Northeast
Posts: 764
Received 151 Likes on 115 Posts
Originally Posted by horseshoez
Hmmm, not sure where you got North Dakota from; per my profile I live in New Hampshire. Granted this summer has been wonderfully temperate in that we've only had maybe a dozen or so days over 90°F, that said I've also lived on SoCal, Texas, Georgia, and Virginia, so I know well the effects heat can bring.
@ggesq was referring to @nfnsquared's location. You can't change @nfnsquared's mind because he is known troll on this board. Don't know his altitude, but high altitude also is a great equalizer of regular and premium -- that is, the advantages of premium start to fade as you go higher.
WheelMcCoy is offline  
The following 3 users liked this post by WheelMcCoy:
04WDPSeDaN (07-30-2017), Costco (07-31-2017), horseshoez (07-30-2017)
Old 07-30-2017, 07:36 PM
  #39  
Pro
 
GreenSpades's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 532
Received 61 Likes on 55 Posts
Originally Posted by TheSauceBoss
Hey, I just wanted people to respond haha...

Either way, thanks to everyone else from getting me up to speed. I ended up just burning the entire tank and it evened out to 25mpg average (on the trip computer, at least) while the previous weekend I hit a 30mpg average on my way to Chicago w/91....though most of my recent driving was highway as well.

Sorry for causing another argument lol
Hey, it worked

As for price difference it is pretty standard now in PA that it is X for 87, X+20 for 89, and X+50 for 92-93. Or even more sometimes, especially at top tier stations.

I remember when I was first driving and gas was 1.99 for regular for longest time and it was always 10c more for mid and another 20c more for premium and just about everybody had pricing within a few cents. Nowadays they change pricing all of the freakin time and the pricing is always different lol even within franchises a few miles apart.
GreenSpades is offline  
Old 07-30-2017, 07:53 PM
  #40  
iWhine S/C 6MT TL
iTrader: (1)
 
04WDPSeDaN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: NJ
Age: 38
Posts: 5,814
Received 2,563 Likes on 1,317 Posts
Originally Posted by ggesq
You will not convince him horseshoe. This debate has been going on for the last 12 years. Never mind the fact that he lives in N. Dakota where I imagine he doesn't have high temps beyond 80 degrees and does mostly highway driving.

Ive used 87 twice since new and 231k miles later on my 05 and both times driving in this FloriDUH heat I experienced decreased MPG and loss of performance.
Couldn't agree more.
04WDPSeDaN is offline  



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:41 PM.