'06 Toyota Tacoma - Premium Gas

[NewGuy]

I am considering the purchase of an '06 Toyota Tacoma. I might pass the Tahoe along to the wife and kids for a good truck. The Toyota Tacoma double cab is on the short list of options, but Toyota is recommending premium gas.

Why would a company offer a truck that requires premium gas? It lists 21 as the mpg on the highway, but I assume that is with premium? What would be the negatives if regular 87 octane is used? Does anyone on BITOG have one of these trucks? Any thoughts or feedback.

Thanks in advance.

 

[Bryanccfshr]

The Knock sensors would retard the timing for lower octane giving a little less power. The nice thing about fully integrated VVTi, knock sensors and fuel mapping is you can get away with running lower octane. You may or may not find that it is more economical to run the premium from a performance and efficiency standpoint.

I am holding out for the new FJ cruiser to come out before I get into the latest generation of Toyota motors myself so I have been paying attention./

 

[jtantare]

The 4 cyl tacoma runs on 87. But im sure you'll get the same fuel economy with the 4.0 if you just drive it normal. Octane only becoes a factor at or near full throttle.

 

[ARB1977]

The book calls for 91 but you can run 87. 91 gives better performance.

 

[sunruh]

i have an 05 Tacoma double cab pre-runner sr5. i've only put 87 in it and get 21.2mpg with my dirtbike in the back going to races. i am getting about 20.1 mpg around town (12 miles from home to work). all i can say is this: there *IS* a reason it was motor trend's truck of the year. you would love an 06.

using Mobil Clean 5000 filtered by a Purolator Pureone.

 

[ekpolk]

On these cars that are designed to run on either regular or premium, and adjust via the knock sensors and ECU, if you're at all sensitive, you will notice the performance difference clearly across the throttle and rpm band. Both my present G35, and my V-6 Camry before it are "87 is OK but premium is recommended for improved performance" cars. On those occasions when I've either experimented with, or been forced to use, 87 octane, the difference was obvious. If you can live with that, fine. If not, then be prepared to buy premium or pick another vehicle. By the way, in contrast, my wife's Sequoia is designed for regular gas, period. You don't get any timing advance when you run premium (I've tried a couple times just to see what happens), and the performance stays the same -- in short, premium is a huge waste in that truck.

 

[Bryanccfshr]

On engines that require premium do to compression and forced induction, running too low an octane can cause damage do to preignition. THe type of engine being discussed is a new, differnt animal.

 

[jtantare]

94 Volvo with 10.7:1 CR calls for 91 but runs just as well on 87. It has less power at the top end, but in normal driving it returns the same fuel economy on 87 and 91. It is well past 130k miles mostly run on 87 so I don't think octane has any bearing on longevity. An important factor is in this is coil on plug ignition with multiple knock sensors. The engine management can adjust spark timing for each cyl separately. This is common place in current engines but but very rare 11 years ago.

Also keep in mind that octane requirement on naturally aspirated engines is dependent on temperature and altitude. At sea level your engine need more octane than in Denver for example. Also you are safe running 87 octane in any engine in the winter.

 

[Winston]

quote:

---

On engines that require premium do to compression and forced induction, running too low an octane can cause damage do to preignition.

---

There are various ways to prevent preignition on higher compression engines. Higher Octane, retard spark timing, alter valve timing, others. This newer engine will alter valve and spark timing to prevent preignition. Engines without variable valve timing (mine) will adjust spark timing. This will not "Hurt" the engine.

 

[Boaz]

It does not REQUIRE Premium. I have 36k on my 04 4Runner with the 4.0 V-6. I have run it on 87 and 93 octane. No difference in power or MPG. It gets a consistant 18-19 MPG city and 22-23 MPG highway with 32" tires on it. The 4.0 is a pretty nice engine, easy on oil, fuel efficent and powerful. Buy the Tacoma, you won't regret it!

 

[Bryanccfshr]

It will not hurt an engine if it is in that engines abilities to adjust as described. However if pinging occurs then octane needs to be increased. I stated this in my second post in this thread soley for those who may read this thread and try to run 87 in a supercharged nissan frontier for example and ignore the marbles in a can noise during low rpm high load boost, like lugging it up hill in top gear.
If the ECU can adjust for lower octane I am a big advocate of running as low an octane as the driver can accept the performance. But if the ECU is bottomed out(retard and valve timing at that limits) it cannot adjust any further and pinging is occuring the only solution is in the fuel.

Not speaking to anyone in particular just narrating for the casual browser who may read on BITOG that it's OK to run a lower octane. If you get consistant pinging go up one grade.

 

[ekpolk]

quote:

---

Also keep in mind that octane requirement on naturally aspirated engines is dependent on temperature and altitude. At sea level your engine need more octane than in Denver for example. Also you are safe running 87 octane in any engine in the winter.

---

You may find that the 87 works well for you in the Volvo, and that's great. In these engines that in effect tune themselves "on the fly" to whatever fuel they're being fed, there's more going on than meets the eye, and it's important to keep this in mind, with regard to "safety". While these engines' timing is quite flexible, it is not, obviously, infinitely variable. All things being equal, such an engine will run significantly retarded when fed 87 vs. 91 or 93 octane. The problem is that if something happens, you step on it hard for example, you may exceed the engine's ability to suppress damaging knock, because there's no more room to retard timing. Also, combusion temps generally increase as ign timing is retarded, so this too may cause or contribute to problems. On the other hand, on higher octane fuel, timing is advanced, combustion is generally cooler, and the ECU has much more room to make adjustments. So, while 87 may be "safe" under given conditions, for engines that can adjust like this, 91 and above will usually be "safer".

 

[Bryanccfshr]

Boaz said It does not REQUIRE Premium. I have 36k on my 04 4Runner with the 4.0 V-6. I have run it on 87 and 93 octane. No difference in power or MPG. It gets a consistant 18-19 MPG city and 22-23 MPG highway with 32" tires on it. The 4.0 is a pretty nice engine, easy on oil, fuel efficent and powerful. Buy the Tacoma, you won't regret it!

I am considering getting the Fj cruiser with that engine when it comes out. All my Toyota truck experiences have been outstanding. Edit

I already said that but it's worth repeating that I am excited.

 

[Winston]

I have an '03 Mitsu Montero that calls for premium. I was cheap for the first couple years and put in 89. I finally splurged for a couple tanks and put in 91. On the second tank I really started noticing a difference, and there is a prounounced difference at mid rpm's. Plus I recorded the best mileage ever with this truck(20mpg).

I remember driving old american V8's that ping. They tend to ping at mid throttle and rpm. This leads me to believe that the timing for these new cars would be affected throughout the rpm range. However, as someone previously mentioned, running 87 will not "hurt" your engine, it will just "hurt" your performance and mpg.

 

[NewGuy]

Thanks for the great comments and feedback. After hearing the discussion I don't think I will dwell on the premium gas issue. I drove the Tacoma again yesterday and might just make it an after-Christmas present to myself.

Thanks for the advice.

 

[sunruh]

just an fyi update.
filled up last night at Randall's grocery store gas pumps. 87 octane. $2.00gal
same place i almost always fill up at.
20.136mpg for around town driving that includes some hiway and some stop-n-go.

only things i wish that were better on the truck:
1) 12v power port is NOT active with key off.
2) steering radius is not all that short
3) cruisecontrol stick is in an odd spot
4) i really like steering wheel controls for air/radio and this doesn't have them.

 

[cousincletus]

Something to consider: I was looking at a Dakota before I bought my fullsize Dodge in 2001. The fuel mileage difference is only 1 or 2 mpg if even that. I get an average of 19 mpg with a fullsize Dodge 3.9 six cylinder. Never gets less than 17 mpg in city only driving and gets 21 or 22 on a trip. An 8 foot bed really comes in handy if you're using your truck as a truck. Also more room inside. Just something to consider. www.fueleconomy.gov.

 

[John K]

I have a 2001 Honda Odyssey that Honda says gets 210hp w premium, 205 with regular. I can't tell the diff, and I don't notice any knocking or pinging, though I have heard other Ody owners claim it pings on reg. I think I would notice if it pinged, and it doesn't even if I really stand on it.......
I think the latest models they don't state any difference in hp, though the engineers claim it runs better on premium, I think they found that it is more marketable to design it for regular.

 

[Dominic]

You can very easily rewire the 12V power

 

[kang]

I agree with all that’s been said above. You “might” get a tiny performance boost or tiny increase in mileage with 91. You may or may not notice it. I doubt the increase will be worth the price difference from 87 to 91.

Get the truck, you won’t regret it, even if you use 87. Try 91 for a tank or two, and if it is worth the price difference to you, go for it, otherwise stick with 87.