Gas. 87, 91, 93 Octane?

[MisterMac]

Well put. 87 octane or above top tier gas just as the OM says, drivers choice, all is fine, car runs well, everybody is happy

 

[StungBlueGT2]

Well that Engineering Explained video was about as much of a controlled environment with scientific results as you could ask for, but obviously since it didn't include the Stinger GT no one can say exactly what the results are for our cars. Hoping to get 15% hp boost from premium is essentially confirmation bias in action. All anyone has determined is that if you feel like paying a fair amount more for gas to get a little bit more power and it makes you feel good to do so, then you should. If you enjoy saving money more than a couple hp and can't feel the difference then that's fine too as long as it's top tier. Although if anyone here is just leasing a Stinger for three years then you probably don't need to care about clean gas anyway, if you want to be a jerk for the next owner. That's something I'd definitely be concerned about buying a formerly leased BMW.

Before you get ahead of yourself please get your facts straight. Nobody is saying you’ll gain 15% HP using premium...

13.5% was the peak MPG gain AAA recorded, and 15HP(4%)was an estimated loss our 3.3TT could see using 87 based on the most similar engine AAA tested. 3.5T=11HP(3.9%)

Also, 15% is not “bias in action”. It’s a hypothesis based on AAAs comprehensive scientific testing and facts in the video very relevant to our 3.3TT

Please understand I’m not saying premium fuel will drastically effect HP/MPG. I’m simply taking AAAs results, and applying those numbers for safe estimates of what our 3.3TT should achieve. Even if my numbers are optimistic it still shows that using 87 to save significant money on fuel is simply, unrealistic.

I don't care what the experts say, I ran two tests: 2 hundred miles, highway, 1 stop, cruise, 70mph, flat both directions, 89oct/93oct. Did not notice any significant difference, if anything felt better with the 89oct. The biggest difference was the price of gas. Still using 89 oct. I'll use my judgement and experience.

Paul I’m surprised at this statement knowing you’re a car guy, but of course there wouldn’t be a “significant” difference on a long highway cruise. Cruising at almost no load barely uses any HP or fuel, so the difference is insignificant over long distances. If you watched the video it shows the 3.5T only saw a 2HP(0.6%)difference at 2k rpm, but 11HP(4.0%) at 4k.

So I do agree with you on in regards to that specific situation. However, for the repeated acceleration of daily city driving using 87 will definitely hinder performance & MPG to the point that 15HP and 10-15%/2-4mpg is reasonable. I and many other have backed that up with personal experience too.

Again, I’m not trying to be biased or argue opinions. I’m simply taking the provided facts, experiences & logic to inform people before they jump to conclusions. Just because the “average” vehicle AAA, or others test shows minor HP/MPG difference doesn’t mean that will apply to our high performance & premium recommend Stingers.

So to clarify further, unless you’re cruising hundreds of miles at a time and running through tanks of gas often, you’re just not going to see noticeable savings using 87. Please follow manufacturers recommendations and consider all the facts before making decisions that will cause our beautifully engineered Stingers to operate worse than intended.

 

[Paul32]

Before you get ahead of yourself please get your facts straight. Nobody is saying you’ll gain 15% HP using premium...

13.5% was the peak MPG gain AAA recorded, and 15HP(4%)was an estimated loss our 3.3TT could see using 87 based on the most similar engine AAA tested. 3.5T=11HP(3.9%)

Also, 15% is not “bias in action”. It’s a hypothesis based on AAAs comprehensive scientific testing and facts in the video very relevant to our 3.3TT

Please understand I’m not saying premium fuel will drastically effect HP/MPG. I’m simply taking AAAs results, and applying those numbers for safe estimates of what our 3.3TT should achieve. Even if my numbers are optimistic it still shows that using 87 to save significant money on fuel is simply, unrealistic.
Paul I’m surprised at this statement knowing you’re a car guy, but of course there wouldn’t be a “significant” difference on a long highway cruise. Cruising at almost no load barely uses any HP or fuel, so the difference is insignificant over long distances. If you watched the video it shows the 3.5T only saw a 2HP(0.6%)difference at 2k rpm, but 11HP(4.0%) at 4k.

So I do agree with you on in regards to that specific situation. However, for the repeated acceleration of daily city driving using 87 will definitely hinder performance & MPG to the point that 15HP and 10-15%/2-4mpg is reasonable. I and many other have backed that up with personal experience too.

Again, I’m not trying to be biased or argue opinions. I’m simply taking the provided facts, experiences & logic to inform people before they jump to conclusions. Just because the “average” vehicle AAA, or others test shows minor HP/MPG difference doesn’t mean that will apply to our high performance & premium recommend Stingers.

So to clarify further, unless you’re cruising hundreds of miles at a time and running through tanks of gas often, you’re just not going to see noticeable savings using 87. Please follow manufacturers recommendations and consider all the facts before making decisions that will cause our beautifully engineered Stingers to operate worse than intended.

I guess I can see your point of view when pushing your Stinger but you know a little about me, on a week to week bases, my Stinger does not see RPM's above 2k, even if I'm on service roads. Also, I'm not comparing to 87 oct but to 89. So for my kind of driving 89 works well. When I was in my 20's and 30's, I used the top Sunoco concentrate in my 348 and 409 Chev's. Don't know the octane and it was leaded.

 

[MerlintheMad]

on a week to week bases, my Stinger does not see RPM's above 2k

Man! Let it hang out once in a while, so that engine knows it's alive! Iirc, somewhere in the manual it actually warns about constantly driving with low RPMs. The engine thrives on bursts of power; keeps the cylinders cleaned out or summat.

 

[Clearly Canadian]

Where I live, there’s a 20 cent difference between 87 and 91 octane per litre.

What are you folks working with in terms of price difference?

 

[davebo]

Usually 60 cents per gallon, so like 15.9 cents a liter.

 

[MisterMac]

Here, 87 octane is $2.50 gal and 91 is & 2.85 gal, or 16.2% more than the base. This, at say 22 mpg avg on 87, I'd need to achieve 25.5 mpg on premium to break even. Guys and gals. That simply is not happening. My mpgs on premium have averaged exactly the same as on regular.

Additionally, while we may attain slightly more hp from using premium, as a daily driver, you will not realize it on a 0-60. Your mind might fantasize it, but that is where the difference exists. There and only there.

Think about it, even 10hp gain, on a base of 365 at the crank, that is 2.7% extra hp. Minus an estimated 15% loss at the wheels, that is 2.3% more actual hp. All else being equal, that is about 1/2 of 1/10 second faster. You will not feel it.

Thus, unless you have ping, knock, or both... Feel secure running regular 87 top tier gas and save your money.

 

[Ucinn]

Any car that uses knock sensors and has variable timing, will benefit with a higher octane rated gasoline. My Sorento does not have that technology, thus it would be a total waste to use the 93 gas as I would see no benefits at all.

 

[SilverNitr8]

I'll just throw this out there.... The biggest argument here is 87 vs. 91, but what about 89? It's a mid grade and all the test we've seen only compares regular vs. premium. I don't believe 89 is considered regular does it? Also if the HP loss is estimated around 15 HP, 3 stickers easily makes up for it.

 

[MisterMac]

Everyone on here also has to realize the posted octane ratings are all stated minimums.... Who on here thinks the octane rating is always exactly 87, 89,, 91, 93, etc...

For a number of years my wife oversaw fuel distribution for a large company I cannot name. I'll just say there is a lot of marketing here which many people have bought into, hook, line, and sinker.

Again, run whatever octane you want in your stinger and have lots of fun with it. Spend as much as you want on your gas. Our efforts help keep people employed and make stock holders wealthy while we enjoy our cars.

I'm not here to dispel anyone's reality. Yet, I do want those who are unsure if they can use 87 octane, for whatever reason, to know they are totally fine doing so. They will not irreparably harm their Stinger (if it would, premium would be REQUIRED, not just recommended). They won't suffer lousy performance or spend more per mile than they would buying premium.

They will simply be making the appropriate economic decision for themselves. Anyone who wants to denegrade their choice, or scare/bully them into thinking differently should simply be silent. A fool looks intelligent until opening his mouth to speak.

 

[twig2121]

Everyone on here also has to realize the posted octane ratings are all stated minimums.... Who on here thinks the octane rating is always exactly 87, 89,, 91, 93, etc...

For a number of years my wife oversaw fuel distribution for a large company I cannot name. I'll just say there is a lot of marketing here which many people have bought into, hook, line, and sinker.

Again, run whatever octane you want in your stinger and have lots of fun with it. Spend as much as you want on your gas. Our efforts help keep people employed and make stock holders wealthy while we enjoy our cars.

I'm not here to dispel anyone's reality. Yet, I do want those who are unsure if they can use 87 octane, for whatever reason, to know they are totally fine doing so. They will not irreparably harm their Stinger (if it would, premium would be REQUIRED, not just recommended). They won't suffer lousy performance or spend more per mile than they would buying premium.

They will simply be making the appropriate economic decision for themselves. Anyone who wants to denegrade their choice, or scare/bully them into thinking differently should simply be silent. A fool looks intelligent until opening his mouth to speak.

I like your proverb - works both ways

All people have to do is google direct injection engine sludge or something to that effect and they'll see what happens to engines that don't use top tier gas. Yes, there will be buildup in most DI cars, but it'll happen faster if you use cheap/dirty gas. There's a reason it's recommended. Yes, companies may profit but it can also be true that it's in the best interest of the vehicle's maintenance. As for octane ratings, it is a minimum, however, why gamble? Tunes are crafted specifically for your grade of gas and it can vary btw 91 or 93. Yes engines will likely survive (at least a few years) due to knock sensors, etc., but it may still degrade and impart unnecessary wear/stress on an engine. Why gamble with such an expense machine? It truly doesn't cost a lot more and you don't know whether it'll be covered under a warranty if you have issues. Seems foolish not to follow the recommendations in this case, especially when we're talking about a substantially priced vehicle...this isn't an econobox.

 

[MisterMac]

See, proof positive!

 

[Clearly Canadian]

I like your proverb - works both ways

All people have to do is google direct injection engine sludge or something to that effect and they'll see what happens to engines that don't use top tier gas. Yes, there will be buildup in most DI cars, but it'll happen faster if you use cheap/dirty gas. There's a reason it's recommended. Yes, companies may profit but it can also be true that it's in the best interest of the vehicle's maintenance. As for octane ratings, it is a minimum, however, why gamble? Tunes are crafted specifically for your grade of gas and it can vary btw 91 or 93. Yes engines will likely survive (at least a few years) due to knock sensors, etc., but it may still degrade and impart unnecessary wear/stress on an engine. Why gamble with such an expense machine? It truly doesn't cost a lot more and you don't know whether it'll be covered under a warranty if you have issues. Seems foolish not to follow the recommendations in this case, especially when we're talking about a substantially priced vehicle...this isn't an econobox.

It seems to me that tuning is a much larger gamble than simply using the minimum required gasoline octane (87). Particularly in the face of evidence indicating that it does not damage the engine.

 

[MerlintheMad]

Tuning, heh. A hobby. A compulsion to tinker, etc. If I want a hotter car I'll buy a hotter car. I bought the car I want. And I'll follow the manual like scripture. All you all can do whatever you want.

 

[BlaydeX15]

Oof, this conversation has gotten rough. Lol.

It's pretty easy to boil it down though. Manual says at least 87, so get at least 87. If you want optimum performance, get higher.

Top tier is different. If a station has top tier, their 85 octane will be top tier, and so will their 91+, so stop getting that mixed up. Lol.

That being said, it's a pretty generic rule that pushing the bleeding edge gets disproportionately expensive. It's doubtful that spending an extra 20% on gas gives you 20% more performance, in the same way that a 70k car isn't going to be 2x as fast as my 35k GT.

But some people like to buy nice things for their cars. Is there really any difference between the $8 cabin air filter and the $18 cabin air filter? Doubt it. But some people dislike running with the bare minimum and will buy it anyway!

Heck, my dealer put GF5 Conventional oil in my car, and I'm considering draining it and putting in full synthetic less than 500 miles later. Why? I dunno. GF5 Conventional is good enough for Kia, according to the manual, but it's not good enough for me. I think the disconnect is that some people are following the 'Only the best for my car!' line, and others follow the 'Kia says this will be just fine' line. That creates a bit of conflict because people look at it and say, 'Well, you're wrong. You're not treating the car according to MY standards!', which is kinda pointless since your standards are subjective.

For example, I'm ultra OCD about parking. I park, use the back up cam to line myself up, make sure the closest line on the back up cam is dead on the painted line, make sure my steering wheel is perfectly straight, and then get out and double check myself. If I'm not parallel with the lines and dead center, I go back in and fix it. But how much of a jerk would I have to be to go around telling people that 'Yeah, your parking job is technically fine, but you should fix it because it's not good enough for me'?

My unasked for 2c.

As for me, I put in 91 because I might as well. I don't really have any illusions that it's worth it from a $ to Performance/Fuel Economy standpoint, but my motivations for spending money are not particularly based in fiscal responsibility. Lol.

 

[MerlintheMad]

For example, I'm ultra OCD about parking. I park, use the back up cam to line myself up, make sure the closest line on the back up cam is dead on the painted line, make sure my steering wheel is perfectly straight, and then get out and double check myself. If I'm not parallel with the lines and dead center, I go back in and fix it.

And I thought that I was. Lol. You, sir, are the king of perfect parkers.

 

[SilverNitr8]

I think the consensus regarding fuel and octane rating is this.

1. High Octane rating DOES NOT translate to top tier gas.
2. Should you use Top Tier gas? Absolutely, its not even a question if you want to protect your engine.
3. Can you use non top tier gas? Absolutely, but know that these non top tier gas contain less quality detergents required to keep your valves clean.
4. The Stinger is capable on running on 87 and higher octane without any damage to your car. If your hear knocking when using 87, move up to the next octane - affects some cars, not the Stinger.
5. When is high octane highly recommended? Heavy towing, hard acceleration, high compression engines.
6. Can you benefit from higher octane? Yes under certain conditions. Is it worth the money? It's up to you to decide and how deep your pocket is.
7. Recommendation is not a requirement. Requirement is a must, recommendation is for optimal performance and benefits.
8. Using required Octane will not void your warranty.
9. To each is own. Do whatever motivates you in your selection of fuel and octane. As long as you do proper regular maintenance, your car will run just fine and last for a long time.

 

[SteveCo]

3. Can you use non top tier gas? Absolutely, but know that these non top tier gas contain less quality detergents required to keep your valves clean.

Gasoline additives do nothing for your valves in a GDI engine - the fuel doesn't take that route. Cleaning the valves requires a cleaner product (e.g. Seafoam) to be shot through the intake while the engine is running.

 

[Mike_TX]

Gasoline additives do nothing for your valves in a GDI engine - the fuel doesn't take that route. Cleaning the valves requires a cleaner product (e.g. Seafoam) to be shot through the intake while the engine is running.

True on the intake side, but there's always the exhaust ... lol.

Also, there's all this talk about what % increase in horsepower you get between the octane levels ... but horsepower is not what you feel when you hammer down - that's torque. So what we should be concerned about is how much it affects torque output, if any. Gas mileage is something else entirely, and it's really hard to measure those differences with accuracy outside of a lab.

 

[MerlintheMad]

A question about the poll occurred to me: is there any place where 91 and 93 are both offered? I think that it is either one the other, not both. So the poll is really asking, do you use high or low octane? And the overwhelming response is high octane.