Using 89 Octane Fuel (10% ethanol blend)
05-29-2008, 10:46 AM
#1
Using 89 Octane Fuel (10% ethanol blend)
I've resisted posting this for a while....but I couldn't resist any longer!
After five years of using NOTHING but premium 92/93 octane fuel in my max - I recently experimented with 89 midgrade, and more specifically 10% ethanol blended fuel avail. here in the midwest.
Given, I see about a 5-10% loss in avg. fuel ECONOMY, I don't seem to have ANY loss in power, driveability, or reliability.
I am astonished!
At this point - I'm seeing an avg. savings of .15 per gallon vs. the premium fuel, with no apparent ill-effects.
The other thing that has happened, is that my OIL CONSUMPTION has been cut IN-HALF.
I have no evidence supporting this....but I haven't changed ANYTHING ELSE in my driving habits or operating/service regimen.
I'd be interested in hearing if anyone else has any empirical data or evidence to support the efficacy of the performance of blended ethanol fuels in our vehicles??? Particularly in relation to operating temperatures, and burn/mix ratios.
I'm also curious to know what sort of short & long-term effects running this fuel might have on any other systems inmy car - like the catalyst and or EFI???
Okay - opinions are welcome as well....
I have to say - I was a staunch advocate of using ONLY Premium fuel in my Max - but now....I have 4 tankfulls that are telling me otherwise!
gr
After five years of using NOTHING but premium 92/93 octane fuel in my max - I recently experimented with 89 midgrade, and more specifically 10% ethanol blended fuel avail. here in the midwest.
Given, I see about a 5-10% loss in avg. fuel ECONOMY, I don't seem to have ANY loss in power, driveability, or reliability.
I am astonished!
At this point - I'm seeing an avg. savings of .15 per gallon vs. the premium fuel, with no apparent ill-effects.
The other thing that has happened, is that my OIL CONSUMPTION has been cut IN-HALF.
I have no evidence supporting this....but I haven't changed ANYTHING ELSE in my driving habits or operating/service regimen.
I'd be interested in hearing if anyone else has any empirical data or evidence to support the efficacy of the performance of blended ethanol fuels in our vehicles??? Particularly in relation to operating temperatures, and burn/mix ratios.
I'm also curious to know what sort of short & long-term effects running this fuel might have on any other systems inmy car - like the catalyst and or EFI???
Okay - opinions are welcome as well....
I have to say - I was a staunch advocate of using ONLY Premium fuel in my Max - but now....I have 4 tankfulls that are telling me otherwise!
gr
Last edited by ghostrider17; 05-29-2008 at 10:52 AM.
05-29-2008, 11:13 AM
#2
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 41
I've resisted posting this for a while....but I couldn't resist any longer!
After five years of using NOTHING but premium 92/93 octane fuel in my max - I recently experimented with 89 midgrade, and more specifically 10% ethanol blended fuel avail. here in the midwest.
Given, I see about a 5-10% loss in avg. fuel ECONOMY, I don't seem to have ANY loss in power, driveability, or reliability.
I am astonished!
At this point - I'm seeing an avg. savings of .15 per gallon vs. the premium fuel, with no apparent ill-effects.
The other thing that has happened, is that my OIL CONSUMPTION has been cut IN-HALF.
I have no evidence supporting this....but I haven't changed ANYTHING ELSE in my driving habits or operating/service regimen.
I'd be interested in hearing if anyone else has any empirical data or evidence to support the efficacy of the performance of blended ethanol fuels in our vehicles??? Particularly in relation to operating temperatures, and burn/mix ratios.
I'm also curious to know what sort of short & long-term effects running this fuel might have on any other systems inmy car - like the catalyst and or EFI???
Okay - opinions are welcome as well....
I have to say - I was a staunch advocate of using ONLY Premium fuel in my Max - but now....I have 4 tankfulls that are telling me otherwise!
gr
After five years of using NOTHING but premium 92/93 octane fuel in my max - I recently experimented with 89 midgrade, and more specifically 10% ethanol blended fuel avail. here in the midwest.
Given, I see about a 5-10% loss in avg. fuel ECONOMY, I don't seem to have ANY loss in power, driveability, or reliability.
I am astonished!
At this point - I'm seeing an avg. savings of .15 per gallon vs. the premium fuel, with no apparent ill-effects.
The other thing that has happened, is that my OIL CONSUMPTION has been cut IN-HALF.
I have no evidence supporting this....but I haven't changed ANYTHING ELSE in my driving habits or operating/service regimen.
I'd be interested in hearing if anyone else has any empirical data or evidence to support the efficacy of the performance of blended ethanol fuels in our vehicles??? Particularly in relation to operating temperatures, and burn/mix ratios.
I'm also curious to know what sort of short & long-term effects running this fuel might have on any other systems inmy car - like the catalyst and or EFI???
Okay - opinions are welcome as well....
I have to say - I was a staunch advocate of using ONLY Premium fuel in my Max - but now....I have 4 tankfulls that are telling me otherwise!
gr
05-29-2008, 11:14 AM
#3
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 187
so you believe that saving the .15/gallon is worth it when considering the 5-10% loss in economy? I've got to investigate this in relation to our Canadian prices
05-29-2008, 12:14 PM
#4
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 1,861
Let's say you fill up with 14 gallons each time and averaged 22mpg using 93 octane.
22mpg x 14 gal = 308 miles/fill up
Using midgrade your mileage decreases 7%.
20.46mpg x 14 gal = 286 miles/fill up
That’s a difference of 22 miles or one gallon if you used 93 octane.
Does that justify saving $0.15/gallon or about $2.10/fill up? I’d rather use the good stuff.
Any math majors out there want to check my math? I hate math…
05-29-2008, 12:36 PM
#6
Let's say you fill up with 14 gallons each time and averaged 22mpg using 93 octane.
22mpg x 14 gal = 308 miles/fill up
Using midgrade your mileage decreases 7%.
20.46mpg x 14 gal = 286 miles/fill up
That’s a difference of 22 miles or one gallon if you used 93 octane.
Does that justify saving $0.15/gallon or about $2.10/fill up? I’d rather use the good stuff.
Any math majors out there want to check my math? I hate math…
seeing how gas prices are and you are just missing one gal opposed to filling up at the current ridiculous gas prices..i think i'd do the 89...this is my first tank of 89...but its mixed with 93..we'll see the results
05-29-2008, 12:55 PM
#7
Why, you are waisting money with the above math, you saved $2.10 and lost a gallon worth of gas (in regards to miles), not sure about you but gas here for 93 is $4.19, so simply you lose 1 gallon of gas yet save half a gallon of gas in cash... thus, you are losing $2.09.
05-29-2008, 02:53 PM
#14
Insurance Rates
Gas Prices (Rise of Gas Prices)
Cost of Maintenance
It is the simple truth, if you want good gas millage buy a Civic, CRX, Hybrid etc... don't buy a 3.5L V6 and then try to figure out how to get better gas mileage, the car is not a fuel saver...
05-29-2008, 03:20 PM
#18
he's right, if you complain about the fuel mileage of this car, then GTFO. I get 24-25mpg with all my mods.
some of us though have a timing advance and can't go back to anything less
Last edited by DrunkieTheBear; 05-29-2008 at 03:24 PM.
05-29-2008, 04:04 PM
#20
ive got 142k on my 2000 se and if i dont use premium it knocks like a mother. considering the mpg decrease it doesnt make sense to not use premium. we dont really get good mpg to begin with, theres no point in lowering it further.
05-29-2008, 06:28 PM
#24
I've used 87 octane in my 2000 max since day one and it is at 149,000 miles. Sure it may not have all the power of 91 or 93, but it doesn't hurt the car. The knock sensor compensates for the lower octane changing your timing. Don't tell someone they shouldn't by the car b/c they don't want to get premium when the car will run just fine. Obviously if you have the money or don't mind to spend the money on premium gas(which I will on my new max) then it is recommended, but not neccessary
I don't get why you even post sooner. You never have anything informative to say other then short common sense answers. You say you are sick of these threads...MAYBE YOU SHOULDN'T OPEN THEM AND POST
I don't get why you even post sooner. You never have anything informative to say other then short common sense answers. You say you are sick of these threads...MAYBE YOU SHOULDN'T OPEN THEM AND POST
05-29-2008, 07:10 PM
#25
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 1,767
I also have used 87 since buying my Max (2003). I just rolled over 80k miles and no knocking, good power, and about 300+ miles to a tank. It all depends on driving habits, specific vehicle mechanical condition and location. I've ran 91 quite a few times to determine any advantages, I noticed nothing. I can't justifiy paying $3.90/gal for 91. IMO
05-29-2008, 07:27 PM
#26
Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 52
I have used both 87 and 91/93 octane. If I use 87 then my hwy is 26 mpg. If I use 91/93 then my hwy is 29 mpg which is 10% better. At current fuel prices 91/93 costs 5% (20 cent/gal diff @ $4/gal) more so it costs me less per mile to use 91/93 than 87. In town the difference is not as much so using either is a wash.
05-29-2008, 07:28 PM
#27
wow, a lot of replies in this thread show that nissan engineers are stupid especially when designing engines.
this kinda thread has been talked to the hell, why don't these people who use 89 trying to put some 83 and see what will happen in order to "save" more money?
oh, btw, using mobil1 can gain more mpg than using castrol gtx.
this kinda thread has been talked to the hell, why don't these people who use 89 trying to put some 83 and see what will happen in order to "save" more money?
oh, btw, using mobil1 can gain more mpg than using castrol gtx.
Last edited by jasonmax; 05-29-2008 at 07:31 PM.
05-29-2008, 07:47 PM
#29
even comparing the various grade prices at this point is totally pointless, I know my car requires 93 so it's not even a question and I'm going to put it in no matter what.
05-29-2008, 08:06 PM
#30
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Staten Island,NY
Posts: 700
you know sooner is right. i cant believe im taking his side bcus he usually **** me off but when you think ab8 it he is kinda right.
i really wanted a maxima but here in ny, a 2k maxima with the same mileage cost more than a 2k i30 so i had to get an i30. but it gets horrible gas mileage and starting to get tranny problams and i think its not worth it to fix it. so as sooner said im silently looking for a 4cyl car ( something like a sentra spec-v, civic si or reguler civic, prelude, celica, rsx) with a manual tranny.
i really think, if you cannor afford 93 to put in your maxima why bother its engine by putting something low grade? get something with a smaller engine ( you will go just as fast around town but will just rev more)
.
05-29-2008, 09:22 PM
#38
That is all I've used since I got mine. Mobil1 and 93 octane premium. Last two tanks on my trip to Kentucky and back were 27.2 and 27.6 (doing the math) which is pretty good for a car the EPA rates at 26 mpg freeway. Kept the cruise on around 75 mph, kicked it up to 85-90 a few times to get around trucks before they started passing each other on hills.
05-29-2008, 09:27 PM
#39
That is all I've used since I got mine. Mobil1 and 93 octane premium. Last two tanks on my trip to Kentucky and back were 27.2 and 27.6 (doing the math) which is pretty good for a car the EPA rates at 26 mpg freeway. Kept the cruise on around 75 mph, kicked it up to 85-90 a few times to get around trucks before they started passing each other on hills.