Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm not sure if your Camaro would do this but my G35 retards timing with lower octane gasoline so I only run 91. What’s the point of buying a powerful car if you're going to sacrifice output to save a dollar or two?
Retarding your timing will not hurt anything other than losing a few hp.
Mid grade should be fine, like was said, the computer knock sensor should compensate. I always run premium in my Buick, as is recommended, because I've heard of several cases of pistons getting chipped when under boost.
That's exactly what I said. You're decreasing power output for the sake of saving a buck or two. What is the point?
30 cents a gallon X 15 gallons = $4.50 per fill up
If you filled up every week that's an annual difference of $234.
If the vehicles loses 5% of its hp, but the driver doesn't need the power, then using lower octane fuel simply saves a meaningful amount of money. That assumes the engine runs well otherwise.
30 cents a gallon X 15 gallons = $4.50 per fill up
If you filled up every week that's an annual difference of $234.
If the vehicles loses 5% of its hp, but the driver doesn't need the power, then using lower octane fuel simply saves a meaningful amount of money. That assumes the engine runs well otherwise.
$234 over a year is pocket change. I don't mind paying that small amount to know that I'm running a higher quality fuel in my vehicle. Not sure if this is true or not but I've also seen reports that lower octane fuels decrease fuel mileage but it might just be the placebo effect. Can anyone refute or back this up?
You won't crud up the injectors, if you have a knock-sensing ignition you shouldn't have any problem running lower than spec octane so far as detonation ("spark knock") is concerned, although, you may (and I think you *will*) see a reduction in mileage greater than the 10% difference in fuel cost.
But, you may not.
If I were you, I'd approach it this way: Run the car down to about 1/4 tank of fuel, put in about 1/4 tank worth of regular. This will make a blend that's damn close to mid-grade. Drive it awhile, back down to 1/4 tank - if you didn't have any problems, get about 1/4 tank more worth of regular - again if no problems with drivability, you probably are not going to have drivability problems with regular - but if you don't log your fuel consumption, you won't notice the decrease in MPG unless your "butt dyno" is better than mine...
Egg's got a good point too - when you put foot to wood, you'll not be getting what you paid for in that Camero - you may get enough to be satisfactory but you'll get more power with the premium fuel the car is designed for.
Both my old-school Chevy Impala (400ci small block, TH 350, 2.73 gear) and DW's Subaru Legacy are actually more economical to operate on premium - the gas costs about 7 to 10% more per gallon but mileage improves more than that.
Using lower-spec fuel can make sense on a long freeway drone, particularly in cooler weather, but on a car that does not have a knock sensor you need to pay attention for the sound of knock and back off on the throttle if you hear it. You also have to keep your promise to yourself to keep your foot out of it until you return to spec fuel.
The savings is harldy worth it. I did not do the math, but we are looking to cut every penny from our budget. Our expenses are climbing like mad, while my income remains the same. We now make less than our monthly bills and expenses, so we have to cut all we can. Unfortuantely I am not a politician, so I have not mastered the art of spending five times the amount of my income. We have a mandatoy balanced budget mandate in our household (at least we do now).
Saving a few hundred dollars a year when we have to cut more than $10,000 from our yearly expenses seems trivial, but everything we look at as a cost savings seems trivial. Hopefully it will all add up to something significant. I will have to check the mileage though. If the mileage drops, there will be no savings at all. I will keep using super for a couple of weeks and calculate the mileage and then switch and see what happens. I like Mitch's idea about mixing for a bit. That way I will not be stuck with days of knocking if I just fill up with garbage gas.
I dare not use the HP much anymore. The local police departments are really desperate. They see writing tons of tickets as the only way to avoid layoffs of reductions in hours. Instead of chasing bad guys, they are hidden all over the place along the major roads. I see 8-10 a day on my trip to work where I used to see 1 or none. People are reportedly getting pulled over for less than 5 mph over the limit. Using the power to blast through a yellow light before it turns red, jet out of a red light to avoid having anyone in front (so you can go faster), or just playing around, is really risky now. Although it is still useful on the freeway, they have taken away all of the fun from a high performance car. Still, there are the rural roads out by Mom and Dad's house. . . .
Crap, CJ, I never got to the punch line - you put some regular in but you don't fill up specifically so if you DO have drivability problems you can fill the rest of the way up with premium and hopefully make the problems go away....senior moments I guess!
I'd guess because that engine is considered a performance engine and has a higher c.r. is why thew higher octane required.
Sure it "might" work fine on 87...provided your knock sensor picks up the knock and tells the ECM to retard the ignition enough to compensate. otherwise you can run into detonation issues, and that's not something you want.
If you think about it, on average by using 87 instead of 91-93 you "might" be saving $3.00 a tank fill up. Now suppose the worse case scenario the knock sensor isn't working/comes unplugged and here you are getting on it/going up a hill/racing a Mustang and next thing you know the rods and pistons take an exit from the block....now was that really worth your $3 savings?
My 2 cents if you don't want to run the good stuff in a performance engine then sell it and buy a V6 model. I think on those you can get away with 87.
I'd guess because that engine is considered a performance engine and has a higher c.r. is why thew higher octane required.
Sure it "might" work fine on 87...provided your knock sensor picks up the knock and tells the ECM to retard the ignition enough to compensate. otherwise you can run into detonation issues, and that's not something you want.
If you think about it, on average by using 87 instead of 91-93 you "might" be saving $3.00 a tank fill up. Now suppose the worse case scenario the knock sensor isn't working/comes unplugged and here you are getting on it/going up a hill/racing a Mustang and next thing you know the rods and pistons take an exit from the block....now was that really worth your $3 savings?
My 2 cents if you don't want to run the good stuff in a performance engine then sell it and buy a V6 model. I think on those you can get away with 87.
I agree. Except for the V6 part.. My supercharged 3.8 buick lives off of premium
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
