Wasting money on premium gas

[chiefsfan1]

Originally Posted By: Wolf359
Originally Posted By: chiefsfan1
I use 91 octane no moonshine added in my OPE. The beater Sable gets 87.
The Camry usually gets 87, although I do run 91 every once in a while.
The manual says 87 is the minimum. That leaves a huge door open on what octane to use.
Now it does have the VVT and a 10.4 compression ratio.
Butt dyno says it runs smoother on 91 octane.


Yeah, there's so many variables that the butt dyno is pretty inaccurate. People don't seem to understand what standard temperature and pressure is. You then adjust performance numbers based on what the current temperature and pressure is. It's worse when it's higher and better when it's lower. So depending on the temperature, humidity, altitude, driving speed, all those factors will affect fuel economy. And it's puzzling why people are doing their own experiments when the manufacturer who designed the engines say otherwise.


I figured it was all in my head. I could NOT see any change in MPG, drive ability etc.

 

[Wolf359]

Yeah, like most manufacturer spend billions and billions developing an engine. They'd know what gas it was designed to run, they're not about to design something that runs better with one kind of gas and recommend something else. Just wouldn't make any sense.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Well, I think your question was sound regardless of location, as ethanol has a higher octane rating than gasoline so your posit about it being used in higher concentrations in higher grades made sense. I find it odd that there is less of it as you go up in grade here as well, as it seems counterintuitive

Yes, the utility of ethanol is what I was getting at, given the comments that ethanol does have some benefit outside the mandate or subsidies. Of course, Husky/Mohawk has been able to make the business case to use ethanol, long before any mandates. We know how the market works, though. If every other refiner decided to jump on it at the same time, business cases might have changed.

I'm pretty sure Ontario is a bit different, but in Saskatchewan, the only premium higher than 91 is what's available at Husky/Mohawk, and that does have ethanol. I assume it's their "normal" E0 premium with ethanol added.

As usual, the way the mandate is written up here is what's counterproductive. If you're required to average 7.5% ethanol content on the sum volume of gasoline sold, that can be fairly easily met by selling E10 regular. Selling E10 premium and only E0 regular probably would fail to meet the target. Husky/Mohawk, before the mandate, simply sold regular E0 87 and midgrade E10 89 at the same price. That is fairly smart from a marketing perspective, since who wouldn't want to pay the same money for a higher grade of gasoline?

 

[Wolf359]

Originally Posted By: Garak
As usual, the way the mandate is written up here is what's counterproductive. If you're required to average 7.5% ethanol content on the sum volume of gasoline sold, that can be fairly easily met by selling E10 regular. Selling E10 premium and only E0 regular probably would fail to meet the target. Husky/Mohawk, before the mandate, simply sold regular E0 87 and midgrade E10 89 at the same price. That is fairly smart from a marketing perspective, since who wouldn't want to pay the same money for a higher grade of gasoline?


It's fairly smart because it's banking on how dumb people are. A higher octane grade isn't a higher grade of gasoline, has the same btu content of a lower grade. However by adding ethanol, you end up with a lower amount of BTU per gallon so the price per btu is actually higher on the E10 89. I think that's the whole premise of this thread, people who don't know any better are wasting their money buying higher octane gas because marketing makes them think it's better gas when it's not. The ultimate in marketing is probably getting people to buy a pet rock or the chia pet. The age old adage about a fool and his money are soon parted is still true.

 

[chiefsfan1]

Sticking with 87 from now on in the Camry. We have a trip coming up tomorrow. Tank is 1/4.
Think I will run Shell 87 and see how it does.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: Wolf359
It's fairly smart because it's banking on how dumb people are. A higher octane grade isn't a higher grade of gasoline, has the same btu content of a lower grade.

One could make the argument that a premium like V-Power NITRO+ gets one extra detergents, but that, of course, is predicated on the refiner actually doing that. In my example of Husky/Mohawk 87 E0 versus 89 ethanol enriched at the same price, there certainly was no such claim. But, the average consumer would naturally assume it to be "better" somehow.

As for my G37, the Audi 200 Turbo before it, and the 1999.5 Lightning before that, they all required premium, so that's what they got.

 

[Wolf359]

I don't know about your country, but in the US, the EPA mandates a minimum amount of detergents and I ran a car up to over 200k with the original injectors on the cheapest 87 gas I could find. Never had a problem. It may be more of an issue these days with direct injection engines. More detergents may be helpful if you need it, but like laundry, adding more detergent if you don't need it doesn't get the wash any cleaner.

 

[Garak]

Oh, certainly. However, at least if a premium is claiming to have more detergents than the minimum (i.e. Top Tier) and more than their own regular and mid-grades, they are differentiating themselves from a marketing position, beyond simply having a higher octane number.

 

[oilpsi2high]

If you want the best for your car, do what the owners manual says. In most cases it'll be to use Top Tier fuel in the correct octane. Don't be that guy who buys a $ 35,000 vehicle and tries to save money by using 87 octane from Big Bob's Gas when the owners manual says top tier midgrade required. Penny wise and pound foolish.

 

[DBMaster]

Better yet, if you don't want to buy premium fuel don't buy a car that requires it.

 

[Wolf359]

Originally Posted By: DBMaster
Better yet, if you don't want to buy premium fuel don't buy a car that requires it.


I believe this whole thread is about the opposite, people who put premium in their car when it only requires regular.

 

[Garak]

Yes, and I'm sure the times that that would actually be beneficially would be rather few. I don't think the old F-150 got a taste of premium ever, and likely isn't going to any time soon, either. The lawnmower gets premium, simply because it's E0, and if I go through $10 a gas a year, that's a miracle. The E0 and Stabil, however, did absolutely nothing to prevent the one year old carb from puking before, but that's another matter.

 

[DBMaster]

Originally Posted By: Wolf359
Originally Posted By: DBMaster
Better yet, if you don't want to buy premium fuel don't buy a car that requires it.


I believe this whole thread is about the opposite, people who put premium in their car when it only requires regular.


True, but there seemed to be a lot of comments from those who didn't want to pony up the extra money. I have an interesting anecdote. My 1989 Honda Accord LXi knocked on regular gas since the day it was new. I was able to get by with 89 octane for years. Around 1996, when E10 became the standard around here, I was able to start using 87 without the knock. I did lose 10% of my fuel economy when the switch occurred so I'm not sure that it ended up being a big benefit, though. I'm talking about the reformulated gas, not dropping to 87 octane.