Regular vs. Premium (Again)
06-06-2004, 09:54 PM
#41
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 419
More than a few people on this site have complained about pinging and lower gas mileage using 87 octane. Shouldn't that be warning enough that using it is a bad idea?
06-06-2004, 10:16 PM
#42
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 419
Originally Posted by dozu
I wish someone has some real data like this:
http://www.siennaclub.org/forum/inde...showtopic=4017
I have been running on regular since I got the '01 SE new..... occasionally experienced slight ping. I just got a new '04 Toyota Sienna, it also recommends premium but regular OK, so I am also running regular on it.... no pinging even under heavy load (hills, hard acceleration)..... the thing I can't understand is that on paper the Sienna's engine has a HIGHER compression ratio.
The discussion on this board so far has been "he sez, she sez"..... anybody can provide some science, with real data?
http://www.siennaclub.org/forum/inde...showtopic=4017
I have been running on regular since I got the '01 SE new..... occasionally experienced slight ping. I just got a new '04 Toyota Sienna, it also recommends premium but regular OK, so I am also running regular on it.... no pinging even under heavy load (hills, hard acceleration)..... the thing I can't understand is that on paper the Sienna's engine has a HIGHER compression ratio.
The discussion on this board so far has been "he sez, she sez"..... anybody can provide some science, with real data?
http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=851106
06-06-2004, 10:48 PM
#43
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,836
Originally Posted by JimmyH
If that is true, why isnt Ford? My stepdad had a Lincoln Mark VIII, which required 91 octane minimum due to its compression ratio.
dont get me wrong, I agree with you. I use premium, and I think it is worth it. Not everyone agrees with me, including my mom. She thinks it a waste of money. And no charliekilo3, your right, she is far from an aggressive driver. But my point is I never experience any pinging in her car at all, even when I push it.
I am not an expert in this matter. Just relating my experiences for those keeping score.
dont get me wrong, I agree with you. I use premium, and I think it is worth it. Not everyone agrees with me, including my mom. She thinks it a waste of money. And no charliekilo3, your right, she is far from an aggressive driver. But my point is I never experience any pinging in her car at all, even when I push it.
I am not an expert in this matter. Just relating my experiences for those keeping score.
06-07-2004, 05:28 AM
#44
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 491
Here's what I finally realized
keep in mind I live in Canada) 87 is .88c a litre, 93 is 98c a litre. Figure my Max has a 60 litre tank, so at 10c more, it costs me an extra 60 cents for a tank of premium. If you can't afford that, start walking!( I do agree that gas prices in general suck, though)
keep in mind I live in Canada) 87 is .88c a litre, 93 is 98c a litre. Figure my Max has a 60 litre tank, so at 10c more, it costs me an extra 60 cents for a tank of premium. If you can't afford that, start walking!( I do agree that gas prices in general suck, though)
06-07-2004, 05:36 AM
#45
Originally Posted by FNG
Here's what I finally realizedkeep in mind I live in Canada) 87 is .88c a litre, 93 is 98c a litre. Figure my Max has a 60 litre tank, so at 10c more, it costs me an extra 60 cents for a tank of premium. If you can't afford that, start walking!( I do agree that gas prices in general suck, though)
keep in mind I live in Canada) 87 is .88c a litre, 93 is 98c a litre. Figure my Max has a 60 litre tank, so at 10c more, it costs me an extra 60 cents for a tank of premium. If you can't afford that, start walking!( I do agree that gas prices in general suck, though)Oh I totally agree! Gas prices absolutely blow, but I have to drive, so...
Also, for those that think saving $.20 a gallon for a fillup of 16 gallons is worth it (for a savings of $3.20), your decreased mileage by 2-3 MPG is causing you to use more regular gas! If you loose 48~ish miles per tank driving on regular, have you really saved anything at all?
06-07-2004, 05:57 AM
#46
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,836
Originally Posted by FNG
( I do agree that gas prices in general suck, though)
06-07-2004, 06:11 AM
#47
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 491
Originally Posted by charliekilo3
If you were in Iraq, you could get gas for 5 cents a gallon.
06-07-2004, 08:44 AM
#48
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,836
Originally Posted by FNG
What really ****es me off, is that Canada is a net exporter of Oil, just like the members of OPEC. Current estimates are that we have enough oil on hand to last at least 100 years. So where's the shortage? The OPEC countries pay next to nothing for gas, so why should we have to pay "market prices" that they determine? Our Govt. really screws us with taxes too.
06-07-2004, 09:21 AM
#49
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 491
40% of our gas price is tax. 15% of that is federal, the rest is Provincial. The worst part is that it's a floating tax, the higher the price, the more tax revenue. Greedy bastards! Even worse than that, they quit lying and making excuses, now they just tell us: " Yes, were making billions off it, and no we don't care what you think".
06-07-2004, 10:45 AM
#50
Junior Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 29
I'm using mid-grade (89 Octane) and have no pigning. Runs great.
06-07-2004, 11:07 AM
#51
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 491
Originally Posted by JimmyH
If that is true, why isnt Ford? My stepdad had a Lincoln Mark VIII, which required 91 octane minimum due to its compression ratio.
dont get me wrong, I agree with you. I use premium, and I think it is worth it. Not everyone agrees with me, including my mom. She thinks it a waste of money. And no charliekilo3, your right, she is far from an aggressive driver. But my point is I never experience any pinging in her car at all, even when I push it.
I am not an expert in this matter. Just relating my experiences for those keeping score.
dont get me wrong, I agree with you. I use premium, and I think it is worth it. Not everyone agrees with me, including my mom. She thinks it a waste of money. And no charliekilo3, your right, she is far from an aggressive driver. But my point is I never experience any pinging in her car at all, even when I push it.
I am not an expert in this matter. Just relating my experiences for those keeping score.
06-07-2004, 11:24 AM
#52
Guest
Posts: n/a
90% of drivers have no clue about maintenance.
90% of those 90% have never seen the underside of their cars
90% of those 90% go to a mechanic to change their bulbs and wipers and so on.
90% of those will trade the car in a year so why they care?
That leaves us at what?
10% of people that know what they are doing. I'll stick to being a minority, but thanks for all the irrelevant comments of "i run 87 and i don't beleive some idiot will tell me it is bad because i am so poor and save 10$ a month in gas".
90% of those 90% have never seen the underside of their cars
90% of those 90% go to a mechanic to change their bulbs and wipers and so on.
90% of those will trade the car in a year so why they care?
That leaves us at what?
10% of people that know what they are doing. I'll stick to being a minority, but thanks for all the irrelevant comments of "i run 87 and i don't beleive some idiot will tell me it is bad because i am so poor and save 10$ a month in gas".
06-07-2004, 12:49 PM
#53
Member
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 82
Originally Posted by charliekilo3
The state where I live charges 14 cents tax on a gallon of gas. I don't know what the federal and other local agencies charge but I know that gas is a cash Cow for generating revenue.
Alabama is the lowest at 26.4 cents/gallon, and Hawaii (predictably) is highest at 54.7 cents/gallon.
06-07-2004, 09:32 PM
#54
Junior Member
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 20
I've owned 3 Maxima's. 1987, 1995, 2002. I've used 87 grade in all of them. I drove the 1987 for 237,000km (142,000 miles) without any engine problems. I drove the 1995 for 249,000km (149,000 miles), also no engine problems. I still have the 2002, it just has 74,000km (44,000 miles). I haven't noticed any problem with gas mileage. I did have some pinging one time when i bought some off brand gas, but otherwise no problems with any of the other gas suppliers.
06-08-2004, 05:24 AM
#55
Apparently nobody reads the owners manual which they like to quote...It does recommend 91 or higher however it says it is ok to use 87 and then it even goes to say you can use 85 in certain areas at higher altitudes and that slight engine pinging is the result of maximum fuel benefit under hard acceleration. I decided to take the middle road and go with Special (89), however I never had any trouble with regular and the spark plugs etc are just fine after checking. Who here actually keeps their Max long enough to have long term engine damage be an issue...i'd say MAYBE 10% for those who liked to use %'s earlier in this thread
06-08-2004, 06:16 AM
#56
Originally Posted by Kruppa
Apparently nobody reads the owners manual which they like to quote...It does recommend 91 or higher however it says it is ok to use 87 and then it even goes to say you can use 85 in certain areas at higher altitudes and that slight engine pinging is the result of maximum fuel benefit under hard acceleration. I decided to take the middle road and go with Special (89), however I never had any trouble with regular and the spark plugs etc are just fine after checking. Who here actually keeps their Max long enough to have long term engine damage be an issue...i'd say MAYBE 10% for those who liked to use %'s earlier in this thread
How would you typically describe your driving style? Do you frequently see RPM levels above 3500?
06-09-2004, 08:11 AM
#57
Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 290
I'm not standing here and backing up using gas other than premium. The interesting thing i've noticed as the first post wrote. The super (93 premium) gas I get from Mobil actually has lower gas milage than their special (89), I did not yet try their regular. I don't know why, but this is ture from my real experience.
06-09-2004, 08:21 AM
#58
Originally Posted by 00Max00
I'm not standing here and backing up using gas other than premium. The interesting thing i've noticed as the first post wrote. The super (93 premium) gas I get from Mobil actually has lower gas milage than their special (89), I did not yet try their regular. I don't know why, but this is ture from my real experience.
How many tanks of gas are you talking about? One, or months and months worth? I did the comparison in my Contour SVT and my 2002 Dodge Dakota (modified), and the wrong octane always got worse mileage and less power. Even dynoed to prove it.
06-09-2004, 09:07 AM
#59
Supporting Maxima.org Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 1,815
BTW if you take your car in for major service and they find signs of pre-ignition they will test the gas in the tank, so a receipt for 91+ from last week or month is worthless...
06-09-2004, 10:12 AM
#60
Originally Posted by maximaman777
BTW if you take your car in for major service and they find signs of pre-ignition they will test the gas in the tank, so a receipt for 91+ from last week or month is worthless...
Believe me, I've been trying to tell them. But I guess some of them think they know something more than we who have actual experience do...
06-09-2004, 10:34 AM
#61
Originally Posted by FNG
Here's what I finally realizedkeep in mind I live in Canada) 87 is .88c a litre, 93 is 98c a litre. Figure my Max has a 60 litre tank, so at 10c more, it costs me an extra 60 cents for a tank of premium. If you can't afford that, start walking!( I do agree that gas prices in general suck, though)
keep in mind I live in Canada) 87 is .88c a litre, 93 is 98c a litre. Figure my Max has a 60 litre tank, so at 10c more, it costs me an extra 60 cents for a tank of premium. If you can't afford that, start walking!( I do agree that gas prices in general suck, though)
We really get screwed for gas prices here in Canada. I paid $65 to fill up my Max the other day, and that's with crappy 91, which is my only option unless I want ethanol loaded 92. No such thing as 93 or higher here.
06-09-2004, 10:51 AM
#62
Supporting Maxima.org Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 1,815
There are some exceptions to this, if say you're in an area that is over 2000 feet or more above sea level you might get away with a lower grade. But those type places aren't the rule for major cities (1000m+). Atlanta, at a mean altitude of 1060 feet, is in the top 5 in the nation.
The people with 1 tank tests crack me up though. All this to save $3.20 per fill up and have to stop at the pump sooner in the long run. They talk about how it adds up over a year, well you'll probably end up spending more over that time because of lower milage.
The ones that have had their timing advanced sould really think twice about this too. You should not only have your timing retarded some, but run 1 step colder plugs as well.
The people with 1 tank tests crack me up though. All this to save $3.20 per fill up and have to stop at the pump sooner in the long run. They talk about how it adds up over a year, well you'll probably end up spending more over that time because of lower milage.
The ones that have had their timing advanced sould really think twice about this too. You should not only have your timing retarded some, but run 1 step colder plugs as well.
06-09-2004, 12:57 PM
#63
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 6,190
My Maxima holds just over 67 litres, so at 10Cents more thats $6.70/tank if bone dry. I use 89 octane, most of the time, which is what the manual calls for. I sometimes run premium when I drive over the Coquihalla highway to the Okanagan. This entails climbing from the east end of the Fraser Valley which is about 1,200 feet to about 4,500 feet then down below that then up to a maximum of about 5,700 before dropping down to about say 2,000 feet. I was under the impression that higher octane would help with all the climbing. Could someone please explain the rationale about being able to use lower octane at altitude. Does this also hold true for climbing from say 2,000 feet to 5,000 feet? It strikes me that higher octane gas would help in that regard.
A local Nissan dealership also told me that gas in Canada has more additives than gas in the US. People who run regular gas in their cars in the U.S. apparently notice an improvement in performance when they fill up with regular gas in Canada, which is 87 octane. I have never seen 85 octane in Canada.
A local Nissan dealership also told me that gas in Canada has more additives than gas in the US. People who run regular gas in their cars in the U.S. apparently notice an improvement in performance when they fill up with regular gas in Canada, which is 87 octane. I have never seen 85 octane in Canada.
06-09-2004, 01:54 PM
#64
Donating Maxima.org Member
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 787
Originally Posted by rmurdoch
My Maxima holds just over 67 litres, so at 10Cents more thats $6.70/tank if bone dry. I use 89 octane, most of the time, which is what the manual calls for. I sometimes run premium when I drive over the Coquihalla highway to the Okanagan. This entails climbing from the east end of the Fraser Valley which is about 1,200 feet to about 4,500 feet then down below that then up to a maximum of about 5,700 before dropping down to about say 2,000 feet. I was under the impression that higher octane would help with all the climbing. Could someone please explain the rationale about being able to use lower octane at altitude. Does this also hold true for climbing from say 2,000 feet to 5,000 feet? It strikes me that higher octane gas would help in that regard.
A local Nissan dealership also told me that gas in Canada has more additives than gas in the US. People who run regular gas in their cars in the U.S. apparently notice an improvement in performance when they fill up with regular gas in Canada, which is 87 octane. I have never seen 85 octane in Canada.
A local Nissan dealership also told me that gas in Canada has more additives than gas in the US. People who run regular gas in their cars in the U.S. apparently notice an improvement in performance when they fill up with regular gas in Canada, which is 87 octane. I have never seen 85 octane in Canada.
06-09-2004, 04:11 PM
#65
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 491
Originally Posted by BigFly_2K2SE
Actually, it's $6.00 extra per tank not 60 cents.
We really get screwed for gas prices here in Canada. I paid $65 to fill up my Max the other day, and that's with crappy 91, which is my only option unless I want ethanol loaded 92. No such thing as 93 or higher here.
We really get screwed for gas prices here in Canada. I paid $65 to fill up my Max the other day, and that's with crappy 91, which is my only option unless I want ethanol loaded 92. No such thing as 93 or higher here.
06-09-2004, 07:39 PM
#67
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 491
Hey Bigfly, You live in oil producing country and you can't get higher than 91? Here in Ontario, we can get 91,93, and Sunoco Ultra 94. You guy's are gettin' ripped!
06-10-2004, 05:46 AM
#68
Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 290
Originally Posted by Quicksilver
How many tanks of gas are you talking about? One, or months and months worth? I did the comparison in my Contour SVT and my 2002 Dodge Dakota (modified), and the wrong octane always got worse mileage and less power. Even dynoed to prove it.
06-10-2004, 01:36 PM
#69
Originally Posted by FNG
Hey Bigfly, You live in oil producing country and you can't get higher than 91? Here in Ontario, we can get 91,93, and Sunoco Ultra 94. You guy's are gettin' ripped!
06-10-2004, 03:28 PM
#70
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 491
That's okay, I live right in Chemical Valley. Esso, Sunoco, Shell, are all within spitting distance, But I pay more for gas here then in Toronto, cuz that's where they calculate shipping from. Go figure.
06-10-2004, 05:49 PM
#71
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 631
Anybody using FlyingJ 93? We got 3 of them around here and prices are cheap compared to anybody else, and you can actually check them online....
06-10-2004, 06:13 PM
#72
Sorry dawg but i have used reg for 116,000 miles no problem and great performance!
It's all about what you train your ECU to ... Mine rocks on 87 and hesitates with 93
I consistently get 23 MPG with 87 ... and would get nothing better with 93
Sorry bro but your wrong not all cars are the same.
It's all about what you train your ECU to ... Mine rocks on 87 and hesitates with 93
I consistently get 23 MPG with 87 ... and would get nothing better with 93
Sorry bro but your wrong not all cars are the same.
Originally Posted by Quicksilver
That is so cluless and wrong I can't believe it. If you take two exact Maximas and use regular gas in one and premium in the other (both driven the same), the premium one will have less engine problems, have better overall mileage, and have more power on reserve for any situation that comes about. If you think otherwise, you're just lying to yourself. It's been proven by guys who have doctorates in engineering over and over again...and even by some people on this very board. But like you said...it's your car. The difference is only going to be about $12-$15 dollars a month for Pete's sake...so just lay off the junk food and Cokes!
Sometimes the stupidity of this board amazes me...
$12-$15 savings a month, and $1500+ in engine damage 4-5 years later. The numbers do not add up...
Sometimes the stupidity of this board amazes me...
$12-$15 savings a month, and $1500+ in engine damage 4-5 years later. The numbers do not add up...
06-10-2004, 10:41 PM
#73
Mine audibly knocks on 87 or 89. You have to take into account the climate the car is driven in. Therefore, nissan took the most extreme conditions (hot and humid, hard driving, stop and go) and tested which fuel ran the best. This happens to be 91+ octane. The car can run on 87 or 89, but it was engineered to run on 91 and up. It all boils down to this, do you really know if your car is performing well or not. You may think so, but you dont have another maxima to benchmark it against. What you think of as great performance may in fact be only fair.
Also, the fact that you get 23 mpg indicates that you dont drive hard all the time. When I had my 01, i was hard pressed to squeeze 18mpg out of it. Try driving hard on 87 all the time, your knock sensor will be retarding timing all day long.
Also, the fact that you get 23 mpg indicates that you dont drive hard all the time. When I had my 01, i was hard pressed to squeeze 18mpg out of it. Try driving hard on 87 all the time, your knock sensor will be retarding timing all day long.
06-11-2004, 04:52 AM
#74
Originally Posted by DonGfun
Sorry dawg but i have used reg for 116,000 miles no problem and great performance!
It's all about what you train your ECU to ... Mine rocks on 87 and hesitates with 93
I consistently get 23 MPG with 87 ... and would get nothing better with 93
Sorry bro but your wrong not all cars are the same.
It's all about what you train your ECU to ... Mine rocks on 87 and hesitates with 93
I consistently get 23 MPG with 87 ... and would get nothing better with 93
Sorry bro but your wrong not all cars are the same.
Scientific facts vs. your speculation. Actually, you're the one who's wrong in this matter, but as I stated, do whatever you want. Blow your own car up for all I care, but DO NOT state your opinion as fact. My car gets 22-23 MPG in the city (is also an automatic) and I really run her hard (as does my wife). It would not get those numbers with 87 or even 89 octane fuel. I also get 29+ MPG on the highway at all speeds traveled (up to 10 over any speed limit). I also ran a 14.66 at 92.x MPH in the 1/4 mile here in Reynolds, GA bone stock. Do you really think I could pull those numbers off if I was using 87 or 89 octane? No way in hell.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post