I'm a Believer
02-28-2004 | 11:58 AM
#41
Dyno plot says I have the most area under the Administrator curve
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 7,060
Originally Posted by sryth
So you're saying that you will definitely get a knock if you run 87? This is the first I've heard that claim.
Originally Posted by sryth
Ok...so he may have run the 1st dyno on 87. Were these dynos on different days? Were the graphs corrected?
02-28-2004 | 12:06 PM
#42
Supporting Maxima.org Member
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 1,431
I will second steve's dyno discussion. There were a couple of people who for some unknown reason decided to dyno on 87 octane at our last dyno meet. Guess what. They were puttin down 140's and 150's when everyone else was in the 160-170+ range. Granted, this is mod dependent, but it does make the difference that Steve is claiming. Not too good for the various emission control devices in the system either.
02-28-2004 | 12:22 PM
#43
Newbie - Just Registered
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 1,424
From: Poughkeepsie, NY
Originally Posted by SteVTEC
Nope, you misunderstood what I was saying. The knock sensor which is directly in the V-valley of the engine and has much better "ears" than you do, will hear it first, and tell the ECU to retard the ignition timing long before your own ears would ever pick it up. So the onset of knock is detected and that's about as far as it gets before the KS picks it up, which tells the ECU to retard the timing. You'll never hear it.
Originally Posted by SteVTEC
Same dyno but a week or so apart, and SAE correction takes care of different conditions on different days, etc. It's a valid measurement.
02-28-2004 | 01:05 PM
#44
Dyno plot says I have the most area under the Administrator curve
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 7,060
Originally Posted by sryth
I didn't misunderstand. When I say 'knock', I don't mean an audible knock...just predetonation. You'll need at least 1 knock for the knock sensor to detect in order for the ECU to retard the timing. I'm asking if it's possible to go through a tank of 87 octane gas without predetonation occuring. If this were to happen, I submit that the timing (and performance) will never change.
- If you're at higher altitudes where the need for octane is reduced.
- If you never crack the throttle open say, more than 10-20% (granny driving, or highway)
If you drive in those conditions, then there's probably no need for higher octane fuel. I don't think there are many here that would qualify for that, though. In that case the wonderful VQ engine is going to waste and your needs would be better served by an Accord 4-banger.
Originally Posted by sryth
So the main question is: Why does he think he may have been running on 87 for the first run? Because his numbers were low?
02-28-2004 | 03:41 PM
#45
Newbie - Just Registered
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 13
if you have been using 87 or 89, just try a tank of the 93 once the old stuff is almost gone. you don't have to take our words for it, and it isn't like you will have to buy it for a year or commit to anything. just try it once. no matter what anyone or the manual says, you should feel the difference. you could use any number of comparisons for why the higher octane is better. look at it this way. if you like to take good care of your car, and you know that the purity of the gasoline gets better with higher octane (less impurities), why wouldn't you use it. as others have said, the difference in cost isn't that much. you wouldn't use crappy oil or crappy tires. the car doesn't go without gas, why not use the best. just my 0.02
02-28-2004 | 04:09 PM
#46
Newbie - Just Registered
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 1,424
From: Poughkeepsie, NY
Originally Posted by SteVTEC
Sure.
- If you're at higher altitudes where the need for octane is reduced.
- If you never crack the throttle open say, more than 10-20% (granny driving, or highway)
- If you're at higher altitudes where the need for octane is reduced.
- If you never crack the throttle open say, more than 10-20% (granny driving, or highway)
Unfortunately I can't bring myself to conduct the test. I will never put less than 91 octane fuel in.
I just didn't think that predetonation was that common when running 87 octane. Is there any way to tell if the timing has been retarded? I assume it doesn't throw a CEL
02-28-2004 | 04:38 PM
#47
Dyno plot says I have the most area under the Administrator curve
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 7,060
Originally Posted by nailz22
if you like to take good care of your car, and you know that the purity of the gasoline gets better with higher octane (less impurities), why wouldn't you use it.
02-28-2004 | 04:49 PM
#48
Dyno plot says I have the most area under the Administrator curve
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 7,060
Originally Posted by sryth
Why would the throttle make any difference? The compression will be the same regardless of throttle position, no?
Originally Posted by sryth
Unfortunately I can't bring myself to conduct the test. I will never put less than 91 octane fuel in.
I just didn't think that predetonation was that common when running 87 octane. Is there any way to tell if the timing has been retarded? I assume it doesn't throw a CEL
I just didn't think that predetonation was that common when running 87 octane. Is there any way to tell if the timing has been retarded? I assume it doesn't throw a CEL
http://forums.maxima.org/showthread.php?threadid=233739
Basically, the ECU is always trying to run as much timing advance as possible (as much as 45-degrees) so unless you're really grannying it it'll probably pick up knocking and retard the timing when on 87. When I had my knock sensor bypassed in the summer when it was shot, I still got some light knocking whenever the temperature exceeded 90F, and that was on 93 octane fuel.
This is why when your knock sensor goes, the ECU puts the timing into a sort of safe map that is ridiculously conservative. Nissan has to assume the worst case, that you're running 87 octane fuel and the engine is heat soaked. So without a knock sensor working, the timing is sent way back and you lose even more power - in excess of 20hp/tq. Maybe more like 30.
02-28-2004 | 06:31 PM
#49
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,327
I used to do cross country twice a year so that's four trips and octane will not affect your gas mileage unless you get ethanol then you will not get the right gas mileage.
Maybe you can look on your manual or the mileage on your sale sticker and see what it says about ethanol. You can probably do a search on the internet to see the same thing.
The higher octane does help going up mountains under load, it's not necessary but your top end will be higher.
Your still not guarranteed your getting 92 octane when you buy it. More than likely your getting 87 just paying the high price.
Your car will knock when it's under load going up hill it's not a strong knock but you can hear it.
But I imagine you will find somewhere in your manuals or whereever stating not to use ethanol gas or to avoid if possible.
I am not even sure if they are even lableing the gas anymore, I know it's mainly used in the summer and mostly in the midwest.
There is probably 200 different blends of gasoline out there your gas mileage might be affected by your blend especially ethanol, I would say normal driving with 10 percent ethanol your going to get about 80 miles less than you should so about 387 miles per fill up.
In the end it affects top end, you even stated with a supercharger and your not going to get better gas mileage with a supercharger just faster top end speed.
I did the experiment switching between 87 and 92 and more than once your not going to change your gas mileage significantly all your going to notice is that the engine from take off to speed limit is going to seem smoother.
Your toyota I don't know much about anymore just hope it has a lexus v8. The last toyota I owned you could put either leaded or unleaded in the gas tank and again same mileage.
If you really think 87 is going to damage your engine or isn't worth it, pay that extra couple bux on 92 for that piece of mind.
I go cheap I rarely put the pedal to the floor and where I live everything is practically in a straight line.
Keep in mind though that there is more profit in higher octane.
Maybe you can look on your manual or the mileage on your sale sticker and see what it says about ethanol. You can probably do a search on the internet to see the same thing.
The higher octane does help going up mountains under load, it's not necessary but your top end will be higher.
Your still not guarranteed your getting 92 octane when you buy it. More than likely your getting 87 just paying the high price.
Your car will knock when it's under load going up hill it's not a strong knock but you can hear it.
But I imagine you will find somewhere in your manuals or whereever stating not to use ethanol gas or to avoid if possible.
I am not even sure if they are even lableing the gas anymore, I know it's mainly used in the summer and mostly in the midwest.
There is probably 200 different blends of gasoline out there your gas mileage might be affected by your blend especially ethanol, I would say normal driving with 10 percent ethanol your going to get about 80 miles less than you should so about 387 miles per fill up.
In the end it affects top end, you even stated with a supercharger and your not going to get better gas mileage with a supercharger just faster top end speed.
I did the experiment switching between 87 and 92 and more than once your not going to change your gas mileage significantly all your going to notice is that the engine from take off to speed limit is going to seem smoother.
Your toyota I don't know much about anymore just hope it has a lexus v8. The last toyota I owned you could put either leaded or unleaded in the gas tank and again same mileage.
If you really think 87 is going to damage your engine or isn't worth it, pay that extra couple bux on 92 for that piece of mind.
I go cheap I rarely put the pedal to the floor and where I live everything is practically in a straight line.
Keep in mind though that there is more profit in higher octane.
02-28-2004 | 06:50 PM
#50
Dyno plot says I have the most area under the Administrator curve
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 7,060
Originally Posted by Armelius
I used to do cross country twice a year so that's four trips and octane will not affect your gas mileage unless you get ethanol then you will not get the right gas mileage.
Originally Posted by Armelius
The higher octane does help going up mountains under load, it's not necessary but your top end will be higher.
Originally Posted by Armelius
Your still not guarranteed your getting 92 octane when you buy it. More than likely your getting 87 just paying the high price.
Originally Posted by Armelius
Your car will knock when it's under load going up hill it's not a strong knock but you can hear it.
Originally Posted by Armelius
In the end it affects top end, you even stated with a supercharger and your not going to get better gas mileage with a supercharger just faster top end speed.
Originally Posted by Armelius
I did the experiment switching between 87 and 92 and more than once your not going to change your gas mileage significantly all your going to notice is that the engine from take off to speed limit is going to seem smoother.
Originally Posted by Armelius
If you really think 87 is going to damage your engine or isn't worth it, pay that extra couple bux on 92 for that piece of mind.
Originally Posted by Armelius
I go cheap I rarely put the pedal to the floor and where I live everything is practically in a straight line.
Originally Posted by Armelius
Keep in mind though that there is more profit in higher octane.
Anything else you'd like to add?
by SteVTEC! 
02-28-2004 | 07:58 PM
#53
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,327
Yeah. I don't have a vtech in my maxima.
How many miles have you been driving? And what is your tire pressure cold? Your saying you get better gas mileage with a supercharger, hate to say it but your full of it.
You say you will get a knock and then you say you won't get a knock going uphill underload, which is it so I can remind myself the hot air your trying to blow.
You want some technical evidence? Go show me your buying 92 octane, prove to me that the gas your using is really 92 octane go have it analyzed.
Finally, what is your mile per gallon and how many miles per fill up?
How many miles have you been driving? And what is your tire pressure cold? Your saying you get better gas mileage with a supercharger, hate to say it but your full of it.
You say you will get a knock and then you say you won't get a knock going uphill underload, which is it so I can remind myself the hot air your trying to blow.
You want some technical evidence? Go show me your buying 92 octane, prove to me that the gas your using is really 92 octane go have it analyzed.
Finally, what is your mile per gallon and how many miles per fill up?
02-28-2004 | 08:09 PM
#54
You guys are insane about the pricing. Before you start knocking I will state that I ALWAYS fill up with premium. Maybe its different around you but here every step up from 89 is $.10. So $.20 times 17 gallons is $3.40. I know its not much but after 2 tanks a week for 52 weeks thats a difference of $353.60 a year. Thats enough to buy a lot of good mods. Still the fact remains that these cars are meant to run on Premium.
02-28-2004 | 08:37 PM
#55
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,327
Makes no difference, not with turbo, not with a supercharger. It's going to feel smoother but todays engine is all fuel injection with a computer, it's not going get you better gas mileage, it's not going to harm your engine, or emission controls. Your starts from dead stop to punching it will be faster not by much and at top end speeds or passing will feel smoother or faster but going under 100 it's barely noticable.
You want to save gas check your tire pressure every week.
this is for steVtech http://www.honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=747686
http://www.zcar.com/forums/read.php?...35389&t=435389
Basically if your car is pinging/knocking like steVtech's you probably need higher octane if your car is doing fine with 87 and you want to buy 92 go ahead it won't hurt anything but your wallet.
You want to save gas check your tire pressure every week.
this is for steVtech http://www.honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=747686
http://www.zcar.com/forums/read.php?...35389&t=435389
Basically if your car is pinging/knocking like steVtech's you probably need higher octane if your car is doing fine with 87 and you want to buy 92 go ahead it won't hurt anything but your wallet.
02-28-2004 | 09:35 PM
#56
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 866
Just use a minimum of 91. Like others have said, lower octane fuel can cause knocking. Our knock sensor detects this knocking before we can hear it, and retards the timing to prevent it. Retarded timing means less power and mileage.
Our cars will run on 87 octane. But they will not run as efficiently, as the timing will be retarded to prevent knocking. Higher octane fuels are even more important in the summer (high heat) and when towing (high load). Knocking is more prevalent in those conditions.
Having said all of that, I have not found any information proving that anything above 91 octane is better for our cars. As long as the fuel you use has enough octane to prevent knock, you will not get more power by using higher octane than required.
Nissan recommends 91 octane as they feel this is sufficient to prevent knock. since they engineered our cars, they're recommendation is probably correct for the majority of people. However, heavily modded cars or ones used in extreme heat may benefit from the added insurance of a slightly higher octane (knock causes damage, and that damage is accumulative. Knock won't instantly kill your engine, but does it over time).
Dave
Our cars will run on 87 octane. But they will not run as efficiently, as the timing will be retarded to prevent knocking. Higher octane fuels are even more important in the summer (high heat) and when towing (high load). Knocking is more prevalent in those conditions.
Having said all of that, I have not found any information proving that anything above 91 octane is better for our cars. As long as the fuel you use has enough octane to prevent knock, you will not get more power by using higher octane than required.
Nissan recommends 91 octane as they feel this is sufficient to prevent knock. since they engineered our cars, they're recommendation is probably correct for the majority of people. However, heavily modded cars or ones used in extreme heat may benefit from the added insurance of a slightly higher octane (knock causes damage, and that damage is accumulative. Knock won't instantly kill your engine, but does it over time).
Dave
02-28-2004 | 09:47 PM
#57
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,327
Yeah, there you go. Save about 400 dollars a year using 87 octane. My car is 95 so in 2005 that's about 4,000 dollars. I think I can afford an engine rebuild. Let's see if my car goes until 2010 (which I think it will) that means total savings of 6,OOO dollars, hmmm that still isn't a new car but I can probably pick up a 2006 maxima for that price and I will bet the owner was kind enough for me to run 91 plus octane or I can just pocket that money and buy beer.
02-28-2004 | 10:28 PM
#58
No point in arguing with SteVTEC, hes got proof, you guys dont.
Just use premium, your spending what, $2 more each tank??? Cmon, thats insurance on your engine lasting a long time. Rather pay $2 every fillup than dealing with mechanical problems later down the road.
Just use premium, your spending what, $2 more each tank??? Cmon, thats insurance on your engine lasting a long time. Rather pay $2 every fillup than dealing with mechanical problems later down the road.
02-29-2004 | 06:55 AM
#59
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,327
Yeah, right. I will believe the oil companies information and will start buying synthetic oil from now on, I mean oil has more protective qualities than gas doesn't it?
You have the best v6 in the world and running 87 isn't going to destroy your car. Matter of fact you can probably convert your car to burning grease from McDonalds and still not damage your engine.
I bet you people go to a hair stylist get 20 dollar hair cuts and buy the most expensive shampoos and conditioners, and even have a water softener in your house. I think that's great if you do because you spend thousands of dollars on your hair it's not going to fall out right? Never mind the hair spray.
You have the best v6 in the world and running 87 isn't going to destroy your car. Matter of fact you can probably convert your car to burning grease from McDonalds and still not damage your engine.
I bet you people go to a hair stylist get 20 dollar hair cuts and buy the most expensive shampoos and conditioners, and even have a water softener in your house. I think that's great if you do because you spend thousands of dollars on your hair it's not going to fall out right? Never mind the hair spray.
02-29-2004 | 08:22 AM
#60
Originally Posted by Armelius
Yeah, right. I will believe the oil companies information and will start buying synthetic oil from now on, I mean oil has more protective qualities than gas doesn't it?
You have the best v6 in the world and running 87 isn't going to destroy your car. Matter of fact you can probably convert your car to burning grease from McDonalds and still not damage your engine.
I bet you people go to a hair stylist get 20 dollar hair cuts and buy the most expensive shampoos and conditioners, and even have a water softener in your house. I think that's great if you do because you spend thousands of dollars on your hair it's not going to fall out right? Never mind the hair spray.
You have the best v6 in the world and running 87 isn't going to destroy your car. Matter of fact you can probably convert your car to burning grease from McDonalds and still not damage your engine.
I bet you people go to a hair stylist get 20 dollar hair cuts and buy the most expensive shampoos and conditioners, and even have a water softener in your house. I think that's great if you do because you spend thousands of dollars on your hair it's not going to fall out right? Never mind the hair spray.
So I guess your the type of person that eats fast food cause its cheap and doesnt eat anything healthy..... am I right?
02-29-2004 | 08:47 AM
#61
Dyno plot says I have the most area under the Administrator curve
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 7,060
oh geez, still going?
You're so confused and overwhelmed that you can't even track of what I said. If you have a technical point or argument to bring, then bring it. Otherwise just stop posting. 
x 2
Originally Posted by Armelius
Yeah. I don't have a vtech in my maxima.
How many miles have you been driving? And what is your tire pressure cold? Your saying you get better gas mileage with a supercharger, hate to say it but your full of it.
You say you will get a knock and then you say you won't get a knock going uphill underload, which is it so I can remind myself the hot air your trying to blow.
How many miles have you been driving? And what is your tire pressure cold? Your saying you get better gas mileage with a supercharger, hate to say it but your full of it.
You say you will get a knock and then you say you won't get a knock going uphill underload, which is it so I can remind myself the hot air your trying to blow.
x 2
02-29-2004 | 08:51 AM
#62
Dyno plot says I have the most area under the Administrator curve
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 7,060
Originally Posted by Armelius
Makes no difference, not with turbo, not with a supercharger. It's going to feel smoother but todays engine is all fuel injection with a computer, it's not going get you better gas mileage, it's not going to harm your engine, or emission controls. Your starts from dead stop to punching it will be faster not by much and at top end speeds or passing will feel smoother or faster but going under 100 it's barely noticable.
Here's one straight from the "SteVTEC Archives"
A Car & Driver magazine test of regular vs premium fuel from the November 01 issue, scanned by myself.
Now I suppose the TURBOCHARGED Saab 9-5 Aero here dynoed so much lower on regular (16 whp!) when it was rated to run on premium fuel because regular vs premium "makes no difference", huh? And the 10% increase in acceleration is because it doesn't make a difference either, right?
x 3What other "expert advice" do you have to offer all of us?
02-29-2004 | 09:48 AM
#63
Junior Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 29
Originally Posted by Armelius
Yeah, right. I will believe the oil companies information and will start buying synthetic oil from now on, I mean oil has more protective qualities than gas doesn't it?
You have the best v6 in the world and running 87 isn't going to destroy your car. Matter of fact you can probably convert your car to burning grease from McDonalds and still not damage your engine.
I bet you people go to a hair stylist get 20 dollar hair cuts and buy the most expensive shampoos and conditioners, and even have a water softener in your house. I think that's great if you do because you spend thousands of dollars on your hair it's not going to fall out right? Never mind the hair spray.
You have the best v6 in the world and running 87 isn't going to destroy your car. Matter of fact you can probably convert your car to burning grease from McDonalds and still not damage your engine.
I bet you people go to a hair stylist get 20 dollar hair cuts and buy the most expensive shampoos and conditioners, and even have a water softener in your house. I think that's great if you do because you spend thousands of dollars on your hair it's not going to fall out right? Never mind the hair spray.
Good lord man, are you just arguing just to be arguing? None of us have anything to gain by trying to prove this to you. For that matter, what does Nissan have to gain by recommending 91 octane? Seems to me they would want to keep service costs down. You'll believe what you want to believe regardless of what the org'ers say. It's your vehicle, tear it up man.
As far as the oil is concerned, I believe Corvettes come from the factory with Mobil 1 full syn. I'm not positive but I think Porsche does the same thing. I've used Mobil 1 full syn in every car I have owned, and think it does great. That's another subject altogether though.
After reading the whole thread you strike me as the guy from the commercial that shoves his kid in the pool to grab a quarter at the bottom. Go forth and be tighta**ed. Save that $6000 figure you pulled out and buy a used Chevy/Geo whatever Metro with a 3cyl, and find some 87 p*sswater and be happy. My 2 cents, wait, that's a 1/10 of what I pay more per gallon for premium, better save it. This thread is turning into a grudge match. Just let it go, or offer good proof yourself. Not trying to get stuff started here.
02-29-2004 | 11:54 AM
#65
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,327
Originally Posted by BlueC
Think of it this way, higher octane is like vitamins for cars. Sure you can go without them, but the performance will decrease and it will run poorly. Im not gonna let my baby hit Redline w/o the proper care.
So I guess your the type of person that eats fast food cause its cheap and doesnt eat anything healthy..... am I right?
So I guess your the type of person that eats fast food cause its cheap and doesnt eat anything healthy..... am I right?
There's all kinds of vitamins out there and there isn't much proof it does anything but get digested into crap. Your body can only hold so much then it's waste. You telling me you don't use the toilet? How much of that food is wasted.
You going to get premium? How much of that is wasted? Oil will protect you car from damage more than premium to 87 octane. You use synthetic? Additives in your oil?
Just admit you don't know what your buying and you think your purchasing a piece of mind.
02-29-2004 | 12:06 PM
#66
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,327
Originally Posted by SteVTEC
So all of the guys with turbos and superchargers here should be using regular gas instead of premium because it makes no difference? I guess that explains why the guys with JWT ECUs and advanced timing gain power by running a little race gas at the track. And yeah, running regular fuel in a boosted car will definitely help keep detonation in check.
Here's one straight from the "SteVTEC Archives" A Car & Driver magazine test of regular vs premium fuel from the November 01 issue, scanned by myself.
Now I suppose the TURBOCHARGED Saab 9-5 Aero here dynoed so much lower on regular (16 whp!) when it was rated to run on premium fuel because regular vs premium "makes no difference", huh? And the 10% increase in acceleration is because it doesn't make a difference either, right?
x 3
What other "expert advice" do you have to offer all of us?
Here's one straight from the "SteVTEC Archives"
A Car & Driver magazine test of regular vs premium fuel from the November 01 issue, scanned by myself.Now I suppose the TURBOCHARGED Saab 9-5 Aero here dynoed so much lower on regular (16 whp!) when it was rated to run on premium fuel because regular vs premium "makes no difference", huh? And the 10% increase in acceleration is because it doesn't make a difference either, right?
x 3What other "expert advice" do you have to offer all of us?
You want to save gas buy a Honda Civic Hybrid or a Prius (whatever).
87 isn't going to damage your engine and your not going to notice improved gas mileage. If you can notice a 10 percent increase in acceleration using premium then I really think your car has a problem. Instead of paying extra for that 10 percent feeling you should save it for an engine rebuild.
02-29-2004 | 12:11 PM
#67
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,327
Originally Posted by Nighty93MaxSE
Good lord man, are you just arguing just to be arguing? None of us have anything to gain by trying to prove this to you. For that matter, what does Nissan have to gain by recommending 91 octane? Seems to me they would want to keep service costs down. You'll believe what you want to believe regardless of what the org'ers say. It's your vehicle, tear it up man.
As far as the oil is concerned, I believe Corvettes come from the factory with Mobil 1 full syn. I'm not positive but I think Porsche does the same thing. I've used Mobil 1 full syn in every car I have owned, and think it does great. That's another subject altogether though.
After reading the whole thread you strike me as the guy from the commercial that shoves his kid in the pool to grab a quarter at the bottom. Go forth and be tighta**ed. Save that $6000 figure you pulled out and buy a used Chevy/Geo whatever Metro with a 3cyl, and find some 87 p*sswater and be happy. My 2 cents, wait, that's a 1/10 of what I pay more per gallon for premium, better save it. This thread is turning into a grudge match. Just let it go, or offer good proof yourself. Not trying to get stuff started here.
As far as the oil is concerned, I believe Corvettes come from the factory with Mobil 1 full syn. I'm not positive but I think Porsche does the same thing. I've used Mobil 1 full syn in every car I have owned, and think it does great. That's another subject altogether though.
After reading the whole thread you strike me as the guy from the commercial that shoves his kid in the pool to grab a quarter at the bottom. Go forth and be tighta**ed. Save that $6000 figure you pulled out and buy a used Chevy/Geo whatever Metro with a 3cyl, and find some 87 p*sswater and be happy. My 2 cents, wait, that's a 1/10 of what I pay more per gallon for premium, better save it. This thread is turning into a grudge match. Just let it go, or offer good proof yourself. Not trying to get stuff started here.
If you think I am tearing up my car using 87 why do I have more miles and get better gas mileage than premium boy? I think your the guy who lost his quarter everytime you reach in your pocket. You don't want your spare change? Send it to me.
02-29-2004 | 12:35 PM
#68
Originally Posted by Armelius
If you can notice a 10 percent increase in acceleration using premium then I really think your car has a problem.
02-29-2004 | 12:49 PM
#69
Junior Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 29
Originally Posted by Armelius
If you think I am tearing up my car using 87 why do I have more miles and get better gas mileage than premium boy? I think your the guy who lost his quarter everytime you reach in your pocket. You don't want your spare change? Send it to me.
In the way of experience, my family has a 98 Max GLE, 97 Pathfinder, 89 GXE, and I own a 93 SE. The GLE and SE get 93 octane and run much better with it. The others get 87 because there is nothing to be gained with higher octane. What we say doesn't matter, so stop posting if you don't want to try and have a constructive "argument".. the point of that is both parties bring information to the table, and each learns from the other, figuring out the best points of each person's info. You don't seem to want to learn anything.
Right back atcha.
02-29-2004 | 01:01 PM
#71
Dyno plot says I have the most area under the Administrator curve
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 7,060
Originally Posted by Armelius
You make my point. Look at the Honda it lost horsepower.
The Honda is not a Nissan VQ engine, which is recommended to run on premium.
So you haven't proved anything.
x 4Do you know why the Honda actually loses power on premium fuel? Please state your case and explain in depth why this occurs on the Honda, but not on other cars. Having owned one and having looked in depth at how that engine works, I know exactly why. Do you?
You only continue to prove your ignornace.
Keep going if you want. I'm enjoying the entertainment.
Originally Posted by Armelius
If you can notice a 10 percent increase in acceleration using premium then I really think your car has a problem.
02-29-2004 | 05:07 PM
#73
Originally Posted by TylerBorg
I went 405 miles on one tank and then i filled it with 16.4 gallons........... always using 91 octane.......but our gas here in colorado has some additive in the winter....... not sure what that does???????
by the way is this normal??? The way I think I had 1.5 to 2 gallons left....... isnt the tank 18 or 18.5??
02-29-2004 | 06:34 PM
#75
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,763
Damn....... 
Originally Posted by SteVTEC
Regardless of formulation, the octane level present in the fuel is what needs attention and you want just enough so that the engine can run at full performance.
A nice paper argument, but I don't think it holds much water. Oil prices are still set by global supply and international politics. If there is relatively more demand for premium vs regular then refineries will churn out more premium and less regular. Overall demand still remains the same, and as you said, people pay more attention to number of gallons, and you can get regular or premium from the same barrel of crude oil.
Or accelerating hard from a dead stop.
Or pulling away from a light.
Or rounding a corner and getting on it hard in 2nd gear.
Or with a 3rd gear pass on the highway.
Or trying to get max performance for a 1/4 mile run.
Or pulling away from a corner on the autocross.
You still get much better performance on premium fuel, because that's specifically what the engine was designed to run on.
Can we PLEASE try to compare apples to apples here!
Straight from the owner's manual of my 1999 Maxima.
FUEL RECOMMENDATION: Unleaded premium gasoline with an octane rating of at least 91. If unleaded premium gasoline is not available, unleaded regular gasoline with an octane rating of at least 87 can be used. However, for maximum vehicle performance, the use of unleaded premium gasoline is recommended.
Octane Rating Tips: In most parts of North America, you should use unleaded gasoline with an octane rating of at least 91. However, you may use unleaded gasoline with an octane rating as low as 85 in these high altitude areas [over 4,000 ft] 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.
If you're at high-altitude, it doesn't matter what sort of load or "top-speed" you're trying to achieve in an automobile. The lower air density and resulting air pressure will mean that the pressures inside the cylinder will never be high enough even at full throttle to warrant the higher octane fuel. Therefore, even Nissan states that you don't need the higher octane fuel at higher altitudes.
As for World War II Fighters, you know a lot of them used superchargers, right? Heck, some of them even had twin-stage superchargers. No boost at low-altitude since there was plenty of air pressure, boost on but lower levels of it at medium altitudes, and finally higher boost at high altitudes to compensate for the lack of air pressure. And since they were warbirds, you can bet the engines ran pretty aggressive compression ratios and aggressive ignition timing and fuel settings also. So of course they probably wanted higher octane fuel. The lack of a little power in an warbird could mean the loss of a pilot, plane, and maybe even a battle.
Nope, you're flat out wrong and I've tested it.
I normally average about 23 mpg in my urban cut-n-thrust driving on 93 octane. Once my parents were in town and they borrowed my car. My father noticed I was low on gas so he took the liberty of filling it up with 87 for me. My mileage dropped to 20 mpg in the same driving and same everything else. I asked him what he put in it and he said 87 (they drive 4-cylinder Camry's
) The engine was knocking, the knock sensor detected it, rolled back the timing, engine responsiveness and power decreased, and my right foot compensated for it by opening the throttle more, thus getting poorer fuel mileage. And when my knock sensor went out, it retards the timing even more. I never got a full tank on it (I bypassed it), but others here report mileage in the teens with blown knock sensors. It's no coincidence that ignition timing has a direct correlation with engine power and fuel mileage. It's just how they work.
That's fine. No matter how much evidence you present some people will never believe you. But some of what you say just isn't technically correct, nor even relevant to the argument. Maybe in your driving and conditions you, on average, never get on it enough to warrant using higher octane fuels. And it sounds like you do a lot of highway driving where throttle position is always low. If so, you very well may get better mileage on 87. But for the cars in general, and for most people here (who like driving their cars relatively harder than most), what you say will not hold true.
Edit: Oh BTW, our Toyota Highlander (10.5:1 compression, even higher than the Maxima) says only 87 is "required" but to use premium for "best performance". It most definitely has some added pep (10-15 lb-ft on the butt-dyno I'd say) on premium fuel, and it also gets better mileage with it also. Again, primarily urban cut-n-thrust style driving.
A nice paper argument, but I don't think it holds much water. Oil prices are still set by global supply and international politics. If there is relatively more demand for premium vs regular then refineries will churn out more premium and less regular. Overall demand still remains the same, and as you said, people pay more attention to number of gallons, and you can get regular or premium from the same barrel of crude oil.
Or accelerating hard from a dead stop.
Or pulling away from a light.
Or rounding a corner and getting on it hard in 2nd gear.
Or with a 3rd gear pass on the highway.
Or trying to get max performance for a 1/4 mile run.
Or pulling away from a corner on the autocross.
You still get much better performance on premium fuel, because that's specifically what the engine was designed to run on.
Can we PLEASE try to compare apples to apples here!
Straight from the owner's manual of my 1999 Maxima.
FUEL RECOMMENDATION: Unleaded premium gasoline with an octane rating of at least 91. If unleaded premium gasoline is not available, unleaded regular gasoline with an octane rating of at least 87 can be used. However, for maximum vehicle performance, the use of unleaded premium gasoline is recommended.
Octane Rating Tips: In most parts of North America, you should use unleaded gasoline with an octane rating of at least 91. However, you may use unleaded gasoline with an octane rating as low as 85 in these high altitude areas [over 4,000 ft] 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.
If you're at high-altitude, it doesn't matter what sort of load or "top-speed" you're trying to achieve in an automobile. The lower air density and resulting air pressure will mean that the pressures inside the cylinder will never be high enough even at full throttle to warrant the higher octane fuel. Therefore, even Nissan states that you don't need the higher octane fuel at higher altitudes.
As for World War II Fighters, you know a lot of them used superchargers, right? Heck, some of them even had twin-stage superchargers. No boost at low-altitude since there was plenty of air pressure, boost on but lower levels of it at medium altitudes, and finally higher boost at high altitudes to compensate for the lack of air pressure. And since they were warbirds, you can bet the engines ran pretty aggressive compression ratios and aggressive ignition timing and fuel settings also. So of course they probably wanted higher octane fuel. The lack of a little power in an warbird could mean the loss of a pilot, plane, and maybe even a battle.
Nope, you're flat out wrong and I've tested it.
I normally average about 23 mpg in my urban cut-n-thrust driving on 93 octane. Once my parents were in town and they borrowed my car. My father noticed I was low on gas so he took the liberty of filling it up with 87 for me. My mileage dropped to 20 mpg in the same driving and same everything else. I asked him what he put in it and he said 87 (they drive 4-cylinder Camry's
) The engine was knocking, the knock sensor detected it, rolled back the timing, engine responsiveness and power decreased, and my right foot compensated for it by opening the throttle more, thus getting poorer fuel mileage. And when my knock sensor went out, it retards the timing even more. I never got a full tank on it (I bypassed it), but others here report mileage in the teens with blown knock sensors. It's no coincidence that ignition timing has a direct correlation with engine power and fuel mileage. It's just how they work. That's fine. No matter how much evidence you present some people will never believe you. But some of what you say just isn't technically correct, nor even relevant to the argument. Maybe in your driving and conditions you, on average, never get on it enough to warrant using higher octane fuels. And it sounds like you do a lot of highway driving where throttle position is always low. If so, you very well may get better mileage on 87. But for the cars in general, and for most people here (who like driving their cars relatively harder than most), what you say will not hold true.
Edit: Oh BTW, our Toyota Highlander (10.5:1 compression, even higher than the Maxima) says only 87 is "required" but to use premium for "best performance". It most definitely has some added pep (10-15 lb-ft on the butt-dyno I'd say) on premium fuel, and it also gets better mileage with it also. Again, primarily urban cut-n-thrust style driving.
02-29-2004 | 11:30 PM
#76
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,327
Jesus passion of christ. You guys are boneheads. Let's see you do everything the book tells you to do. Hmmm, that means you don't have mods, copper plugs, and y pipe. Read that manual.
I just post a few threads about your octane. You have yet to prove to me that your really buying higher octane. Hmmm, you know it's a hell of a trick to get two types of gas in one of those tankers come delivery time.
Oh, wait your gas station goes and test the octane when it's delivered so people like you will get their high octane.
Then I am still getting better gas mileage than you, why is that? Why hasn't my engine been damaged by 87?
I have yet to see a car damaged by 87 octane.
Oh, I know. You feel that 10 percent because your engine is just like a supercharged saab, yeah right.
Go to a dealership and watch them put 87 octane in everything they have on their lot.
I will be holding on to 6 grand over time with the same engine/car and you can tell me how much I was owned.
Bow down to the oil companies.
Just to let you know, I put 91 octane the last time I filled my tank just to see if there might be big difference. This is about a week ago. So far getting the same mileage if I got 87. Everything is just like I said. No difference.
If your flooring and red lining your car I don't care what octane you have your damaging your engine faster than making smooth starts.
I don't know about you but I sure could use that six grand and I am sure glad it's not going to an oil company.
If you have that lead foot and demand 91 plus octane I am sure gas companies enjoy seeing you around.
Hey, have you heard this one? A gallon of bottled water is more expensive than a gallon of gasoline. You better stock up.
I just post a few threads about your octane. You have yet to prove to me that your really buying higher octane. Hmmm, you know it's a hell of a trick to get two types of gas in one of those tankers come delivery time.
Oh, wait your gas station goes and test the octane when it's delivered so people like you will get their high octane.
Then I am still getting better gas mileage than you, why is that? Why hasn't my engine been damaged by 87?
I have yet to see a car damaged by 87 octane.
Oh, I know. You feel that 10 percent because your engine is just like a supercharged saab, yeah right.
Go to a dealership and watch them put 87 octane in everything they have on their lot.
I will be holding on to 6 grand over time with the same engine/car and you can tell me how much I was owned.
Bow down to the oil companies.
Just to let you know, I put 91 octane the last time I filled my tank just to see if there might be big difference. This is about a week ago. So far getting the same mileage if I got 87. Everything is just like I said. No difference.
If your flooring and red lining your car I don't care what octane you have your damaging your engine faster than making smooth starts.
I don't know about you but I sure could use that six grand and I am sure glad it's not going to an oil company.
If you have that lead foot and demand 91 plus octane I am sure gas companies enjoy seeing you around.
Hey, have you heard this one? A gallon of bottled water is more expensive than a gallon of gasoline. You better stock up.
03-01-2004 | 10:58 AM
#78
Okay.........
I see the results from Steve and they are hard to argue with. I mean, with those kind of facts(on top of my calling the dealerships and asking a service person......who gets no benefit from telling me this.......if I should use 87 or 91 and they told me 91. They said that they recommend it, and see some problems that supposedly come from using the 87 as high performance-driven.
Where I am coming from, however, is the fact that I have used 91 and 93 and have not seen any difference in the performace or gas mileage. I mean, 5fwhp is pretty ridiculous for just changing gas! I just don't get all of you that are saying that you can instantly feel that much of a differenct when you run some 87 through there and then put some 91 in. I am just saying that because I have tried it, and I cannot tell. Because of that, I am hesitant to go up to the premium for the cost factor. I am not being cheap, but even having to replace the knock sensor every year, you will still save like $120 every year if using 87.
I see the results from Steve and they are hard to argue with. I mean, with those kind of facts(on top of my calling the dealerships and asking a service person......who gets no benefit from telling me this.......if I should use 87 or 91 and they told me 91. They said that they recommend it, and see some problems that supposedly come from using the 87 as high performance-driven.
Where I am coming from, however, is the fact that I have used 91 and 93 and have not seen any difference in the performace or gas mileage. I mean, 5fwhp is pretty ridiculous for just changing gas! I just don't get all of you that are saying that you can instantly feel that much of a differenct when you run some 87 through there and then put some 91 in. I am just saying that because I have tried it, and I cannot tell. Because of that, I am hesitant to go up to the premium for the cost factor. I am not being cheap, but even having to replace the knock sensor every year, you will still save like $120 every year if using 87.
03-01-2004 | 11:57 AM
#79
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 866
Let's see you do everything the book tells you to do. Hmmm, that means you don't have mods, copper plugs, and y pipe. Read that manual.
I have read the manual. It recommends 91 or higher for the majority of people (exception is high altitude) for maximum performance. I'll stick to the recommendation of the manufacturer. Apparently you haven't read the previous posts on why, or how a knock sensor works. And your feable mind just doesn't comprehend the physics involved in efficient internal combustion engine operation.
I just post a few threads about your octane. You have yet to prove to me that your really buying higher octane. Hmmm, you know it's a hell of a trick to get two types of gas in one of those tankers come delivery time.
Oh, wait your gas station goes and test the octane when it's delivered so people like you will get their high octane.
Have you ever looked closely at the gas pump you're using? There's a yellow sticker certifying what that pump dispenses (An average of RON and MON if I recall correctly). But it's just a conspiracy to you. When you buy ground beef at the supermarket, and you don't see the cow being slaughtered, are you sure you're eating beef? The USDA certifies it. Good enough for me to conclude it is not kangaroo meat I'm ingesting. But in your mind, there's a government conspiracy to keep us all subservient little lambs.
Have you ever actually seen a tanker fill up or dispense it's fuel? It has baffles, dividing the inside in to compartments for different fuels. I guess the gas stations having seperate underground storage tanks for different grades is just to keep the illusion going. I'm pretty sure they go through the expense and headache of having multiple tanks installed just to fool us pions. EPA regulations governing those tanks complete the illusion of getting different grades. You really should engage your brain before opening your mouth (or typing, in this case). Don't feel bad, my 11 year old daughter is going through the same stage.
Then I am still getting better gas mileage than you, why is that? Why hasn't my engine been damaged by 87?
I have yet to see a car damaged by 87 octane.
Your gas mileage is dictated by too many factors to rule out one possibility. Driving style, location, tire pressure/size, etc... play big roles in mileage. And why hasn't your engine been damaged from running 87? Why don't you disconnect your knock sensor, run 87 octane for a while, and report back your findings. Knock damage is accumulative, wearing an engine over time. Come to think of it, our knock sensors are just a conspiracy from Nissan to suck more money from our pockets. They recommend we have one working. Dang, there's another recommendation.
Oh, I know. You feel that 10 percent because your engine is just like a supercharged saab, yeah right.
Go to a dealership and watch them put 87 octane in everything they have on their lot.
Maybe you just aren't intune to your car as much as others. You don't seem to be intune with a whole lot based on some of your previous posts (this thread and others) and the attitude you harbor. And yes, the dealerships will put 87 octane in cars on their lot to save them a little money. But they are not the ones who will be driving the car 100,000+ miles, either.
I will be holding on to 6 grand over time with the same engine/car and you can tell me how much I was owned.
Bow down to the oil companies.
Save a buck or two each tank by running 87 octane. You'll then have 2 choices. 1) use that 6 grand you saved (a ludricous figure you came up with, but we'll use it) on a new car/engine, or 2) drive a car that runs like crap because of knock damage. Your car, your call. Oh, wait, just like everyone else on this board who chooses to run 91 octane.
Just to let you know, I put 91 octane the last time I filled my tank just to see if there might be big difference. This is about a week ago. So far getting the same mileage if I got 87. Everything is just like I said. No difference.
If your flooring and red lining your car I don't care what octane you have your damaging your engine faster than making smooth starts.
I don't know about you but I sure could use that six grand and I am sure glad it's not going to an oil company.
If you have that lead foot and demand 91 plus octane I am sure gas companies enjoy seeing you around.
If you think you'll see a mileage increase by visually looking at your gas gauge and computing mileage, you're an idiot. Tests for mileage need more consistent controls, like using the same pump, filling to the same automatic stop, same driving style, same temperatures, etc.... This takes several tanks to get an average for a fair comparison. Anything less can be a fluke.
As for flooring cars, some people want to. It's their car, they're entitled to. If you want to drive like my Grandma, that's you're right, as long as you aren't impeding the flow of traffic. Remember, your rights stop where someone else's begin. But that is probably too complex of a theory for your mind to comprehend.
Hey, have you heard this one? A gallon of bottled water is more expensive than a gallon of gasoline. You better stock up.
I don't drink bottled water, so I won't comment.
In short, I'll take the recommendations of my car's manufacturer and the advice of knowledgeable people over the thoughts of an idiot any day. And I'll continue running 91 octane until proven it is a waste.
Of course, these are my opinions. Have a nice day.
Dave
I have read the manual. It recommends 91 or higher for the majority of people (exception is high altitude) for maximum performance. I'll stick to the recommendation of the manufacturer. Apparently you haven't read the previous posts on why, or how a knock sensor works. And your feable mind just doesn't comprehend the physics involved in efficient internal combustion engine operation.
I just post a few threads about your octane. You have yet to prove to me that your really buying higher octane. Hmmm, you know it's a hell of a trick to get two types of gas in one of those tankers come delivery time.
Oh, wait your gas station goes and test the octane when it's delivered so people like you will get their high octane.
Have you ever looked closely at the gas pump you're using? There's a yellow sticker certifying what that pump dispenses (An average of RON and MON if I recall correctly). But it's just a conspiracy to you. When you buy ground beef at the supermarket, and you don't see the cow being slaughtered, are you sure you're eating beef? The USDA certifies it. Good enough for me to conclude it is not kangaroo meat I'm ingesting. But in your mind, there's a government conspiracy to keep us all subservient little lambs.
Have you ever actually seen a tanker fill up or dispense it's fuel? It has baffles, dividing the inside in to compartments for different fuels. I guess the gas stations having seperate underground storage tanks for different grades is just to keep the illusion going. I'm pretty sure they go through the expense and headache of having multiple tanks installed just to fool us pions. EPA regulations governing those tanks complete the illusion of getting different grades. You really should engage your brain before opening your mouth (or typing, in this case). Don't feel bad, my 11 year old daughter is going through the same stage.
Then I am still getting better gas mileage than you, why is that? Why hasn't my engine been damaged by 87?
I have yet to see a car damaged by 87 octane.
Your gas mileage is dictated by too many factors to rule out one possibility. Driving style, location, tire pressure/size, etc... play big roles in mileage. And why hasn't your engine been damaged from running 87? Why don't you disconnect your knock sensor, run 87 octane for a while, and report back your findings. Knock damage is accumulative, wearing an engine over time. Come to think of it, our knock sensors are just a conspiracy from Nissan to suck more money from our pockets. They recommend we have one working. Dang, there's another recommendation.
Oh, I know. You feel that 10 percent because your engine is just like a supercharged saab, yeah right.
Go to a dealership and watch them put 87 octane in everything they have on their lot.
Maybe you just aren't intune to your car as much as others. You don't seem to be intune with a whole lot based on some of your previous posts (this thread and others) and the attitude you harbor. And yes, the dealerships will put 87 octane in cars on their lot to save them a little money. But they are not the ones who will be driving the car 100,000+ miles, either.
I will be holding on to 6 grand over time with the same engine/car and you can tell me how much I was owned.
Bow down to the oil companies.
Save a buck or two each tank by running 87 octane. You'll then have 2 choices. 1) use that 6 grand you saved (a ludricous figure you came up with, but we'll use it) on a new car/engine, or 2) drive a car that runs like crap because of knock damage. Your car, your call. Oh, wait, just like everyone else on this board who chooses to run 91 octane.
Just to let you know, I put 91 octane the last time I filled my tank just to see if there might be big difference. This is about a week ago. So far getting the same mileage if I got 87. Everything is just like I said. No difference.
If your flooring and red lining your car I don't care what octane you have your damaging your engine faster than making smooth starts.
I don't know about you but I sure could use that six grand and I am sure glad it's not going to an oil company.
If you have that lead foot and demand 91 plus octane I am sure gas companies enjoy seeing you around.
If you think you'll see a mileage increase by visually looking at your gas gauge and computing mileage, you're an idiot. Tests for mileage need more consistent controls, like using the same pump, filling to the same automatic stop, same driving style, same temperatures, etc.... This takes several tanks to get an average for a fair comparison. Anything less can be a fluke.
As for flooring cars, some people want to. It's their car, they're entitled to. If you want to drive like my Grandma, that's you're right, as long as you aren't impeding the flow of traffic. Remember, your rights stop where someone else's begin. But that is probably too complex of a theory for your mind to comprehend.
Hey, have you heard this one? A gallon of bottled water is more expensive than a gallon of gasoline. You better stock up.
I don't drink bottled water, so I won't comment.
In short, I'll take the recommendations of my car's manufacturer and the advice of knowledgeable people over the thoughts of an idiot any day. And I'll continue running 91 octane until proven it is a waste.
Of course, these are my opinions. Have a nice day.
Dave
03-01-2004 | 01:24 PM
#80
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by SteVTEC
So all of the guys with turbos and superchargers here should be using regular gas instead of premium because it makes no difference? I guess that explains why the guys with JWT ECUs and advanced timing gain power by running a little race gas at the track. And yeah, running regular fuel in a boosted car will definitely help keep detonation in check.
Here's one straight from the "SteVTEC Archives" A Car & Driver magazine test of regular vs premium fuel from the November 01 issue, scanned by myself.
Now I suppose the TURBOCHARGED Saab 9-5 Aero here dynoed so much lower on regular (16 whp!) when it was rated to run on premium fuel because regular vs premium "makes no difference", huh? And the 10% increase in acceleration is because it doesn't make a difference either, right?
x 3
What other "expert advice" do you have to offer all of us?
Here's one straight from the "SteVTEC Archives"
A Car & Driver magazine test of regular vs premium fuel from the November 01 issue, scanned by myself.Now I suppose the TURBOCHARGED Saab 9-5 Aero here dynoed so much lower on regular (16 whp!) when it was rated to run on premium fuel because regular vs premium "makes no difference", huh? And the 10% increase in acceleration is because it doesn't make a difference either, right?
x 3What other "expert advice" do you have to offer all of us?