Automakers push Congress for higher fuel standards

[wemay]

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/busine...dards/33902227/


Quote:
Key to that progress, they say, is higher octane fuel — about 91-octane compared to today’s 87-octane pump standard — which will deliver 3-percent-better fuel economy for an estimated 3-percent increase in cost. The standard is referred to by its international metric, 95 RON, which translates to U.S. 91-octane...

Higher octane makes gas more stable under ignition compression — commonly known as knock — which can damage internal engine components. A higher, 91-octane (95 RON) standard would allow engineers to design engines to a higher compression ratio — perhaps to 15:1 over today’s average of 10:1 — and gain more mpg while not sacrificing performance.

European nations like Germany have already mandated 95 RON gas. Coupled with high gas taxes and engine displacement fees, their goal is to make gas engines more efficient.

“America deserves at least as good a fuel as Europe has,” Nicholson told the SAE panel last week. “It will have customer value if it’s done correctly. We’ve studied it and we know that it’s cost-effective.”

 

[bbhero]

Yeah I bet the cost for this will be well in excess of 3%.

I have gotten used to running 93 octane from Shell, Exxon or BP. I think I got 87 the other day from Exxon.... Though the pump said 93. Car ran rather rough at idle. Or it was bottom of the tank gas was jacked up.

 

[PimTac]

Hopefully you didn’t get some bad fuel.

 

[fdcg27]

IOW, government mandates what the industry wants, like more costly higher octane gas, even though the punters will have to pay 10% more for the fuel real world based upon what the cost is today and that's a public benefit.
Government mandates what the industry doesn't want, like much better fuel efficiency and that's a bad thing.
The term for this is speaking out of both sides of one's mouth.
The industry started lying with the fist safety and emissions standards of the sixties and has maintained their collective mendacity ever since.

 

[JimPghPA]

There are plenty of people who run the cheapest gas they can find even if their vehicle is a high-end luxury vehicle and they bought their vehicle new. It sounds like the vehicle manufacturers know this and would like to make the lowest octane (cheapest) gas a high octane.

 

[Revving2Redline]

Want higher fuel standard? Drop the ethanol content and you will have a more stable fuel with more mpg and less fuel related issues. Im sure you could go 87 E0,92 E0 and be fine. Minimum of 91 E0 could do wonders.

 

[PimTac]

Originally Posted By: wemay
https://www.detroitnews.com/story/busine...dards/33902227/


Quote:
Key to that progress, they say, is higher octane fuel — about 91-octane compared to today’s 87-octane pump standard — which will deliver 3-percent-better fuel economy for an estimated 3-percent increase in cost. The standard is referred to by its international metric, 95 RON, which translates to U.S. 91-octane...

Higher octane makes gas more stable under ignition compression — commonly known as knock — which can damage internal engine components. A higher, 91-octane (95 RON) standard would allow engineers to design engines to a higher compression ratio — perhaps to 15:1 over today’s average of 10:1 — and gain more mpg while not sacrificing performance.

European nations like Germany have already mandated 95 RON gas. Coupled with high gas taxes and engine displacement fees, their goal is to make gas engines more efficient.

“America deserves at least as good a fuel as Europe has,” Nicholson told the SAE panel last week. “It will have customer value if it’s done correctly. We’ve studied it and we know that it’s cost-effective.”





As a owner of a 13:1 compression engine I would love to see this happen. Of course the flip side is the price. I’m already paying $3.75 for Shell 91. Likely to see $4.00 before too long.

 

[gathermewool]

Here, we have 87, 89, and 93 AKI as our most common octane selections. 89 is closer to 93 than 87 in cost. Maybe mandated 91 would reduce that cost, but bbhero is probably correct —> 3% sounds like a pipe dream!

 

[Revving2Redline]

Would higher octane in winter cause higher consumption? I ran 91 long ago and mpg was awful vs 87 back in 90's.

 

[gathermewool]

Originally Posted By: Marco620
Would higher octane in winter cause higher consumption? I ran 91 long ago and mpg was awful vs 87 back in 90's.


That doesn’t make much sense to me.

 

[bbhero]

I think I may have PimTac. Good news if I did it was only 4 gallons of it. And my car has a 20 gallon tank. So really it could have been a lot worse obviously.

 

[MParr]

The quest to solve the LSPI problem.

 

[Revving2Redline]

Got the solution right here!

 

[skyactiv]

I told BITOG members and started a thread that GM wants a higher standard octane.
It's coming like it or not. And it is all because of Cheapo Joe.

 

[pbm]

I'm not very good at math but if regular is currently $3.00 a gallon this means we would be getting mid-grade for just 9 cents a gallon more (3%).....This leads me to ask why mid-grade and premium cost so much more than regular now?

 

[bbhero]

Great post. And exactly right skyactiv.

 

[MParr]

Marco620
The ethanol free certainly improves my fuel mileage. And, I can only get 87 octane pure gas.

 

[bbhero]

Exactly what I was thinking pbm. Around here 89 costs 30 cents more a gallon than 87. No way 91 won't be rather close to 93 octane prices. Which I paid $3.19 a gallon for that just yesterday.

 

[Revving2Redline]

I need to pull up to the 110 octane pump for you guys. Too bad its E 10.

 

[Trav]

Quote:
European nations like Germany have already mandated 95 RON gas. Coupled with high gas taxes and engine displacement fees, their goal is to make gas engines more efficient.


I guess it has nothing to do with how much money they can rake in with taxes and "fees".