Premium 91 Octane...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: Rand
Can someone tell me what a "waist of money" is?

Is that one of those belts you conceal gold coins in?

Some Iraqi and Syrian refugees have waist of gold coin and $100 USD bills.
grin2.gif
 
Originally Posted By: 94 saturn sl1 2000 saturn sc2
I have owned a HHR with a 2.4 a chevy cruze with a 1.4 turbo and a malibu with a DI 2.4. I have had 2 people who are trained GM factory technicians that the cars computers are open to higher octane fuel and you will see a performance benefit that is measurable . That said I too had measurable differences with premium fuel in both acceleration and MPG and use it today . IMO throttle response in these 4 cylinder engines with regular fuel is criminal .


Can I see your "measurable" differences? We all know seat of the pants dynos are VERY susceptible to placebos.

Originally Posted By: MobilinHyundia
My Sonata is much more fun driving on 93. I tested it several times and there is a difference.


If people wish to spend $0.40 more a gallon(that is the price premium here in St. Louis) to make believe their little fuel sippers are F1 cars, go ahead.
 
Further to what stchman is digging at, anybody who has ever played around with cars that had a distributor and could manually change their ignition timing knows that at some point you stop getting gains and will actually start losing power. Every engine has an ignition advance "sweet spot".

So, further to that, an example, the 5.0L Ford (stock, the old pushrod one) shipped with 10 degrees of base timing. This gave the ECM the ability to advance total timing to something like 32 degrees IIRC (forgive me if that's off, it has been a while). It was found, via numerous dyno tests that throttle response and power (to the tune of 5-10HP IIRC) could both be improved with more initial (which subsequently increased total) advance. This engine was 8.8:10 compression IIRC, had your typical wedge shaped chamber and a 4" bore. The "sweet spot" for this engine was 14-15 degrees initial, anything after that didn't increase gains and going much beyond that, as I noted earlier, resulted in a loss of power.

The penalty for this? Well, you had to run 89 or 91 (varied a bit by engine) to ward off detonation. 94 didn't yield any more power and wasn't required to prevent pinging.

With modern computer controls that include a knock sensor and an ECM that varies timing based on the feedback from that sensor, the realization of some additional power MAY be had (greatly depending on the engine, compression ratio, chamber design, bore size....etc) through using higher octane gasoline.

HOWEVER

There will be a limit to how much total timing the ECM will add. It isn't going to just keep adding timing until it pings, the table used for advance has a limit, established by the factory and if 89 for example prevents ping at maximum total advance there is ZERO benefit to running 91 or 93/94.

This is why cars like my wife's '06 Charger for example spec 87 but "recommend" 89. Total advance can only happen with the higher octane fuel. However it will run just fine on 87.

A car with forced induction is another beast all together however, as elevated intake air temps will by themselves create a necessity for reduced ignition advance due to pinging/detonation and depending on how high you drive up ACT's will determine how far down it has to be pushed. Add increased boost and that's a whole other topic altogether and a bit outside the scope of this rambling however
grin.gif
 
Originally Posted By: Rhymingmechanic
Using the Torque app, I have verified less knock retard under normal driving conditions with 93 octane, and a little less with 89 compared to 87. I'm not sure if that means the vehicle is programmed to increase advance with higher octane, or just that less ping makes it pull less timing. I'll have to watch both advance and KR next time.


Can the Torque app graph and datalog KR along with engine speed and load percent? I have no experience with the Torque app and I only have a ScanguageII with KR readout programmed mounted in a poor location so I can't see what RPM and load % pinging occurs.
 
people know their engines, this bump, albeit small is very real..IIR my Honda even sounded better.
 
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Further to what stchman is digging at, anybody who has ever played around with cars that had a distributor and could manually change their ignition timing knows that at some point you stop getting gains and will actually start losing power. Every engine has an ignition advance "sweet spot".

So, further to that, an example, the 5.0L Ford (stock, the old pushrod one) shipped with 10 degrees of base timing. This gave the ECM the ability to advance total timing to something like 32 degrees IIRC (forgive me if that's off, it has been a while). It was found, via numerous dyno tests that throttle response and power (to the tune of 5-10HP IIRC) could both be improved with more initial (which subsequently increased total) advance. This engine was 8.8:10 compression IIRC, had your typical wedge shaped chamber and a 4" bore. The "sweet spot" for this engine was 14-15 degrees initial, anything after that didn't increase gains and going much beyond that, as I noted earlier, resulted in a loss of power.

The penalty for this? Well, you had to run 89 or 91 (varied a bit by engine) to ward off detonation. 94 didn't yield any more power and wasn't required to prevent pinging.

With modern computer controls that include a knock sensor and an ECM that varies timing based on the feedback from that sensor, the realization of some additional power MAY be had (greatly depending on the engine, compression ratio, chamber design, bore size....etc) through using higher octane gasoline.

HOWEVER

There will be a limit to how much total timing the ECM will add. It isn't going to just keep adding timing until it pings, the table used for advance has a limit, established by the factory and if 89 for example prevents ping at maximum total advance there is ZERO benefit to running 91 or 93/94.

This is why cars like my wife's '06 Charger for example spec 87 but "recommend" 89. Total advance can only happen with the higher octane fuel. However it will run just fine on 87.

A car with forced induction is another beast all together however, as elevated intake air temps will by themselves create a necessity for reduced ignition advance due to pinging/detonation and depending on how high you drive up ACT's will determine how far down it has to be pushed. Add increased boost and that's a whole other topic altogether and a bit outside the scope of this rambling however
grin.gif



As I've mentioned before, what we were able to glean from our very secretive customer (most good info was obtained via whispers in the corners of dyno rooms or electronics labs) was that they intended to have the knock detection system drive the timing...they really wanted to run at very light knock, far below what the driver could perceive. Whether this really panned out or not, I don't know.
 
A mechanic friend of mine swears by 93 octane gas in his Tundra pick up. Figured out his mpg increase justified the extra cost/gallon. I tried it in my 99 Dodge V-8 with no noticeable gain under pretty consistent conditions.
However some years ago when towing our camper my van would maintain speed on inclines with 93 octane where when 0n 87 it would drop off.
 
Originally Posted By: Rand
Can someone tell me what a "waist of money" is?

Is that one of those belts you conceal gold coins in?


It's probably about how if you have a big waist, you're eating too much and the big waist you have is a waste of money and to stop eating so much.

So literally, the bigger the waist, the more the waist is made of money.

Also getting back on topic, the reason for premium is usually due to higher compression engines. Usually the cars are designed with timing that will yield peak power with regular gas have lower compression. People seem to think car designers do it both ways. Ideally you'd want peak power which is a specific timing point. If you normally run it retarded, then you're not getting the peak efficiency out of the engine. And engineers do the best they can to get the most power out of a car. So with a new engine, running premium won't have any effect on gas mileage or power.

I think people who think their cars run better on premium either have something wrong with their cars where timing has been retarded or have fallen victim to very good marketing which makes people think their cars run better with premium. I suspect it's mostly the latter.
 
In the past, raising octane didn't do much w/out mods. Now days, it is a different story. You'll hear conflicting information on the subject. There is no black and white answer.
 
2-3 mpg would probably only be a break even on cost per mile. guess it depends on the starting point mpg and the cost spread between regular and premium. In my area, there is about a 40 cent per gallon spread in pricing. Let's take 20 mpg on regular as a starting point. At 2.16 for regular, in my area, that is a hair under 11 cents a mile. At $2.57 for premium in my area, and if I got the 2 mpg better, the cost per mile would be just under 12 cents a mile. At 3 mpg better, the cost per mile would be still be over 11 cents a mile. There would be no good reason to run premium.

Everyone gets all hung up on mpg, which has a cathartic effect. But the cost per mile is really where its at.

I suppose if using premium actually corrected a problem, it might be worth it. But for most engines that are designed to use regular, if they need premium, that speaks more of carbon buildup in the cylinders, dirty MAF, etc. Premium is usually just a bandaid for another problem.
 
Originally Posted By: wirelessF
Originally Posted By: Rhymingmechanic
Using the Torque app, I have verified less knock retard under normal driving conditions with 93 octane, and a little less with 89 compared to 87. I'm not sure if that means the vehicle is programmed to increase advance with higher octane, or just that less ping makes it pull less timing. I'll have to watch both advance and KR next time.


Can the Torque app graph and datalog KR along with engine speed and load percent? I have no experience with the Torque app and I only have a ScanguageII with KR readout programmed mounted in a poor location so I can't see what RPM and load % pinging occurs.


Torque does have a graph function, but I haven't used that feature enough to understand it. At first glance, it seems like you can only track two sensors at a time. Maybe somebody who knows will answer you.

Regarding my earlier comment, I'm not sure whether my truck's computer increases the max advance or just pulls less timing on premium. Either way, the advance ends up higher than with 87.
 
Originally Posted By: Rhymingmechanic
Regarding my earlier comment, I'm not sure whether my truck's computer increases the max advance or just pulls less timing on premium. Either way, the advance ends up higher than with 87.


For a specific engine design, max power is achieved at a specific timing. So if it's too advanced or retarded, performance suffers. That's why it hard to understand why people think that using premium will give you more performance if the engine is designed for max performance on regular. On the other hand, it makes perfect sense if the car is designed for premium, timing is retarded on regular due to knock sensors and performance and gas mileage suffers. If there's carbon build up and regular causes knocking, then timing is retarded and performance suffers. Using premium brings timing back to optimal, but performance doesn't exceed a similar engine that doesn't have the timing retarded due to carbon building. Therefore if there's nothing wrong with your car, then premium won't do anything and it's just a waste of money.
 
Originally Posted By: Wolf359

For a specific engine design, max power is achieved at a specific timing. So if it's too advanced or retarded, performance suffers. That's why it hard to understand why people think that using premium will give you more performance if the engine is designed for max performance on regular. On the other hand, it makes perfect sense if the car is designed for premium, timing is retarded on regular due to knock sensors and performance and gas mileage suffers. If there's carbon build up and regular causes knocking, then timing is retarded and performance suffers. Using premium brings timing back to optimal, but performance doesn't exceed a similar engine that doesn't have the timing retarded due to carbon building. Therefore if there's nothing wrong with your car, then premium won't do anything and it's just a waste of money.


Just because a vehicle can run fine on 87 without knocking doesn't mean that its maximum performance occurs with 87. My RAV4 V6 (NA) had no problems on 87, but Toyota itself said the engine got a little more power on 91. This was very likely due to a modern knock detection system that allowed ECU to adjust timing to the verge of knocking or into very, very light knock (probably more advanced than the one I worked on 20+ years ago). One can argue about whether it's worth the extra money to get a little extra kick with some (maybe most) vehicles, but, in the end, that's up to the driver.
 
advances the timing to optimize the available octane..that explains the performance bump.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top