TunerMaxima3000

iTrader: (4)

For a very long time on the .ORG, it's been generally accepted and practised that the PROPER, RECOMMENDED fuel for the Maxima is 91 octane. Well despite me personally believing this unfailingly alongside many others, the truth is, something changed that most of us didn't realize. With the introduction of the 3.5 things changed. Now, 2002 is still a grey-area, but without doubt, the 2003 3.5 liter has a recommened fuel rating of 87 octane

Considering how much this blew my mind when exploring my new 2003 G35 6MT, I thought I'd share it with all you fine people.

1995-2001 FUEL RECOMMENDATION:
Unleaded premium gasoline with an octane
rating of at least 91 AKI (Anti-Knock Index)
number (Research octane number 96)
If unleaded premium gasoline is not available,
unleaded regular gasoline with an
octane rating of at least 87 AKI (Research
octane number 91) can be used.

2002 'grey area' FUEL RECOMMENDATION:

Unleaded premium gasoline with an octane
rating of at least 91 AKI (Anti-Knock Index)
number (Research octane number 96)
If unleaded premium gasoline is not available,
unleaded regular gasoline with an
octane rating of at least 87 AKI (Research
octane number 91) can be used.

Octane rating tips
In most parts of North America, you should use
unleaded gasoline with an octane rating of at
least 87 or 91 AKI (Anti-Knock Index) number.
However, you may use unleaded gasoline with
an octane rating as low as 85 AKI number in
these high altitude areas [over 4,000 ft (1,219
m)] such as: Colorado, Montana, New Mexico,
Utah, Wyoming, northeastern Nevada, southern
Idaho, western South Dakota, western
Nebraska, and that part of Texas which is
directly south of New Mexico.

2003 FUEL RECOMMENDATION
Use unleaded regular gasoline with an octane
rating of at least 87 AKI (Anti-Knock
Index) number (Research octane number
91).

For improved vehicle performance,
NISSAN recommends the use of unleaded
premium gasoline with an octane rating of
at least 91 AKI number (Research octane
number 96).

T_Behr904

We (the U.S.) use the (R+M)/2 for octane ratings.

On my gas door, it says that premium fuel is recommended for maximum performance.

Here in Florida, premium fuel is 93 octane (R+M)/2 method.

SethGreen

I run 94 in my 95 maxi every time.

TunerMaxima3000

iTrader: (4)

Almost all Nissan/Infiniti cars have that exact sticker replicated on the fuel doors. however, that sticker isn't what you should go off, the owners manual specs the fuel for the car.

Because the name of Premium/midgrade is different station to station, state to state, etc, going off the "name" is useless, you have to go off the Octane rating, which is spec'd in the Manual.

For the 95-02, it's 91
For the 2003 it's 87

All recomend higher octane for improved performance though as you said, but the key here is that in the 2003 (and prolly the 02 but that's speculation), it's not NEEDED

njmaxseltd

iTrader: (19)

The way that's worded simply points to marketing 101 by Nissan. The motor runs best with the higher octane fuel. Most average people use regular (87) in their vehicles despite what the mfg. says without any issues. Ask any gas attendant which fuel is most popular, especially in this economy.

T_Behr904

Yep i'm well aware of the octane ratings posted on the pumps. I use premium (93) octane Shell V-Power almost all the time. If I need gas and i'm not around one of my local Shell's, I'll get Chevron, or another similar high quality gas. I avoid the cheap off-brand gas.

http://www.toptiergas.com/retailers.html

TunerMaxima3000

iTrader: (4)

the '95-01 need 91 to run properly or the timing retards, fuel mileage goes down and so does performance. Those who notice no difference probably have a bad knock sensor or other component causing a default retard mode. There SHOULD be a notable difference between running 87 and 91 on the 95-01 models.

I get what you're saying, but even with the price of fuel so high, the difference between a fill up on 87 and fill up on 91 in the states is only around $3-4

Now in Canada it's around $10 or more difference.

TunerMaxima3000

iTrader: (4)

http://www.toptiergas.com/retailers.html

This^

Also here's a good one to avoid ethanol:

http://pure-gas.org/

T_Behr904

Premium gas here is just a few cents shy of $4 a gallon now.

T_Behr904

That's a good website, i've used it before. Finding pure gas around here is difficult. The few stations that do carry it only have mid-grade 89 octane, and it costs quite a bit more than the "up to 10% ethanol" gas that's all over the southeast now.

I've bought it before, and the car does run well with the gas, despite only being 89 octane. However I did notice an increase in fuel mileage.

This pic was taken at a Gate gas station probably 6-8 months ago, when gas prices were lower. I should stop by this station to see what the price is now.

mrjasonlyrics

It depends on how high the gas is. Now it's about 1.28 per/litre so i'm using the 89. when it goes lower i'll get a higher octane. On an empty tank with 89 it's cost me $86-95,but I only fill up once a week driving 85km a day 5 days a week so I can't complain

tcb_02_max

iTrader: (5)

fyi: AKI = (R+M)/2

There are a few factors to consider when purchasing fuel, namely price, octane rating and quality. Theoretically, for the identical operating conditions/demand for power, higher octane fuel will lead to slightly lower consumption - in engines that can use it (i.e. higher compression ratio, variable valve timing, knock sensors+corresponding engine control, etc). So, no, a 1991 Honda Accord SOHC 2.2L with 8.8:1 compression ratio need not apply. Higher octane fuels (and also name brand vs. discount) generally have better cleaning detergents, so you should have better long-term performance/fewer deposits with more expensive fuel. But, with modern knock sensors, most cars can run on any AKI down to 87, with correspondingly decreased performance.

In my opinion, fuel grade choice is a personal preference (with the exception of super-ultra-high-performance engines).

btw. I fill up my 2001 BMW 530i with Aral (BP) Ultimate 102 here in Germany [102 (RON) + 90 (MON)]/2 = 96 (AKI). Do I have to? No. Do I ensure that I am getting the maximum from my engine, even if something else would still work? Yes. Just my 0,02 €

Shift_Max

iTrader: (18)

I run 91 octane ethanol free in my vehicles. Currently at $3.75 a gallon

AznRyan

iTrader: (1)

My friend in B'ham, AL was at the right place at the right time. Come on, Raceway, do the same for me. Please :[

Amerikaner83

iTrader: (17)

DUDE.....WOW

And that's completely random too...cuz the price signs that are viewable to drivers are changed separately...so not like they were advertising 36 cent gas... wow.

score!

AznRyan

iTrader: (1)

He had other people on his friends list that tried to get in on it, but were too late. One guy said he left work for nothing xD

foodmanry

iTrader: (15)

I don't know...first 100,000 miles of my 2k Max I ran 91 octane. Since 100,000 miles and on I've only filled up with 87 octane.

I really didn't notice a difference...my Max continues to run great at more than 230,000 miles on it now. I'm expecting at least another 100,000 from it.

I chalk it up to personal preference as well...

02whitemaximase

iTrader: (38)

bump the timing to 17 and then 93 octane is fine no matter what.

luvlexus101

iTrader: (6)

$4.08 for premium in ny, I find I get better fuel economy running the 93.

Amave

i use 89 octane here in St Lucie county Florida , at 3.89 gallon .

i dont hear any knocking or pinging

TunerMaxima3000

iTrader: (4)

And you won't. Nissan uses a knock sensor to detect this, so when you use lower octane in the 95-01 engine it just retards the timing and gives you worse performance, higher emmisions, less power, etc.

No big deal

T_Behr904

The only time i've heard an engine ping is when they had alot of carbon buildup. My ex g/f's old car used to ping like a **** going up a bridge with the engine under load.

ShocknAwe

iTrader: (3)

e10 93 octane in the dirty dirty ATL where we ride 10sec supras(like on tonights Pass time on Speed) like every day

foodmanry

iTrader: (15)

My butt dyno knows no difference, but my wallet knows the difference. As such, I'll stick with 87.

No big deal

T_Behr904

Well with gas in LA around $5 a gallon now (saw that on the national news) i'd be taking the bus.

foodmanry

iTrader: (15)

Not quite $5 a gallon yet...still hovering around $4.15 for 87. 91 is running around $4.50 a gallon. I'm sure by Memorial day it will be up over $5 a gallon. Time to dust off the moto...

TunerMaxima3000

iTrader: (4)

What's the difference in cost per fill up there? $5.00 tops for a full tank?
Calculate your mileage, I would be surprised if you don't get better mileage with the proper fuel. And this fuel mileage savings normally equates to surpass the "$5" saving you get when you fill up on cheaper gas.

Your engine will also last longer run better and require less maintenence. Your catalytic converters will last longer, your 02 sensors will last longer, the list goes on.

Saving a few dollars at the pump on each fill up is a shortsighted way to look at the situation. though I've been just as guilty of filling up lower than recommended, as I"m sure we all have, I'm not about to say that it makes no difference. To make that bold statement you need to consider all the variables, not just the one-time fill up price.

Just food for thought man.

And as I've said before, if you REALLY don't notice a difference using different fuel, then you've got a problem with your car, such as the infamous Knock Sensor or something that is putting your car in default retarded timing mode regardless of the fuel used.

nelledge

iTrader: (6)

^^^This. Spend a dime to save a nickel. Pinchfists.

I haven't put a drop of anything under advertised 93 in my cars in over 7 years.

Rods03Max619

iTrader: (5)

I use 91 all the time...right now it was at 4.15 a gal....and 2 weeks maybe it was like 3.75.....WTF.....

ranmas2004

iTrader: (2)

I used to put 87 in, but then oneday I decided to try 93. It was a noticable difference in performance. Since that day I have used nothing but 93 octane in my maxima at $3.89/gal currently.........gas not going to ever go down anyway.

NmexMAX

iTrader: (22)

We back on this again?

TunerMaxima3000

iTrader: (4)

Well the only real reason for this thread was to clarify that the 2003 DOESN"T call for 91, like the rest of the Maxima's always did. The 2002 also probably doesn't need 91 either but that's a grey area.

It was new info to me, they only ran recommended 87 for 2003 and 2004 3.5's, so this is a pretty much unknown fact for most of us.

Maybe this was common knowledge that just the 2003 is ok without 91 octane? Sorry if this is a repeat. I know the 'what gas do you use' has been beaten to death, this thread was only intended to show the hard facts of what SHOULD go in because Nissan changed it for 2 years.

NmexMAX

iTrader: (22)

Interesting info though.


02-03 engines and ECU's are identical. Both 10.3:1, (vs 10.0:1 for the VQ30DE & DEK).

This alleged grey area is also strange/interesting because the Altima of the same years had 10.0:1 (according to my memory of the FSM), but could be wrong.

Either way, my Pathy has 9.8:1, and I still use Premium in it, and it only gets 15.5 MPG.

Personal preference, and with all of the issues with knocking, pinging, oil burning, screwed up pre-cats with the 3.5L's, I look at it as peace of mind.

If I was an average Joe, (unlike the majority of this board) I would probably use regular.


Also, quite honestly, CR really doesn't seem to play much of a role these days as it used, so with that said, my comments have no technical merit on CR v. Octane, I use it just because. Same reason I have a UDP, nothing concrete on gains, but just to say yeah I have one.

merovi

iTrader: (7)

On my 2k Max I used 93 every time, all the time. I used to work at a Wegmans and people from the neighboring dealerships would come in. Got to know one of the Nissan guys and he told me that running the 93 will cost more upfront but the mileage I would gain will make up for it. I switched from 87 and he was completely right.

Just got my 2k3 and I've been using 91. It's a nice middle ground. When pumps don't have 91 I've been going with 89.

The6spdMax

iTrader: (23)

Good info. I know that 95-01 have the same engine design... but why and what would there a differences between 2002 vs 2003 if they share the same engine?

NmexMAX

iTrader: (22)

There are none.

TunerMaxima3000

iTrader: (4)

Yeah I don't get it either. If I had to speculate, i'd say that Nissan stricktly was covering there butts for the first production year of the 3.5. It's notable that the 2004, 2005 and 2006 Automatic versions of the 3.5 can run 87, but the coupe and 6MT's must run 91. This further illustrates that it's strictly a tuning/ECU thing, not the engine itself that determines the octane rating.

It's nice to be able to market a car at 87 octane (regular gas), huge incentive for sales especially on a Maxima, which is a Family sedan (regardless of some of OUR uses for the car lolz).

And thank you for clearing up the CR comment. Most people just assume that CR is the reason for higher octane requirements, this just isn't true. Though of course, it IS a determining factor, it's actually lower on the list of reasons than you'd think. There's plenty of high compression engines that run 87. They're getting more common too, especially with DI gas engines becoming more popular. Though as higher octane becomes more desirable (if it does), hopefully that will drive the price down. Though the oil companies will probably keep it the same or even increase it, buggers.

NmexMAX

iTrader: (22)

^^^ Was just thinking of that thought.

Along those statements, some manufacturer HP ratings were based on premium fuel. I remember seeing some car makers actually stating two different HP values. I think this may have happened when the 04MY came out (they stopped making A33 03MY’s in January of 03, a bit early IMO). So, it may have been some sort of weird transition to that new SAE standard that we all remember talking about back then.


Also, on CR, I don't remember exactly, but IIRC< it was a car running fairly aggressive CR, but was able to run on 87. Could be one of the manufactures that was saying in order to achieve this hp #, this must be use, otherwise, you're fine with 87.

foodmanry

iTrader: (15)

I calculate mileage after every fill up. It was the same on both octane ratings averaging 23 to 26 MPG. BTW, I have an auto, so that mileage is pretty good for mostly city driving.

Great for my engine. Running fine with over 230,000 miles and shows no signs of wear. I've replaced about every other part on the car with exception of engine and transmission. Just had smog last year and it passed, but I did have to replace my main cat to get it to pass. Main cat replacement was $200. I save $5 a tank with the difference in octane on a fill that is only 40 fill-ups which is about a year of fuel for me. Main cat lasted 10 years on the car. When I switched at 100K up to last year smog 212K it was 6 years. So, saving $5 a fill-up at 40 fill-ups per year for 6 years I saved = $1200. At the cost of the main cat replacement of $200, I saved $1000 in the long-term.

So my knock sensor magically stopped working at some point right around the time when I switched octanes? Doubtful...more likely there IS NOT that much of a difference in performance. It could be related to the boutique fuel blends we have in California. But, in looking at my situation from both the short-term and LONG-TERM I have saved more money that it has cost me. This is over 125,000 miles and lots of people tend to sell or trade in cars before 125,000 miles of service.

I guess my butt dyno is not very sensitive...

NmexMAX

iTrader: (22)

Well stated.

Most of us would rather be ricers and fill up with premium. Which goes back to my earlier statement. Saving money when it comes to my car, I need to try that concept.