Premium V. Regular Gas - not a debate

[spect2k]

Check out this article that I read in the New York Times. Interesting thoughts on premium vs regular gas.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/03/automobiles/03OCTANE.html?ex=1218600000&en=4ae24855f2b5c3bf&ei=5070

[Regal05LGT]

Def interesting read, but I don't mind spendin the extra $3 or $4 for premium, not that big of a difference for me to worry about

[RJS5689]

UUhhhhh, no thanks. The idea of that REALLY doesnt settle well with me. Especially on a forced induction vehicle.

[blackfang]

Garbage. When those who do follow that advice, and have issues with their cars, they will claim about how they read that.

 

Both the Mustang and LS1 get 93 because that is what they are tuned for. Not worth it to me to not run it.

[vr4Legacy]

I read that too... it's laughable. Sure the vehicle will run on the lower octane, but the computer will compensate so much it will end up running less efficiently. I get 27 mpg outta mine, driving normal I on freeways, I don't hesitate to drop in S# for fun or to burn some punk ass, and I usually us S for around town.

 

It's not worth losing the HP, and would probably not get as good of efficiency, for the lower.

 

As REGAL05 said.... not worth it to me... I paid extra for the turbo and performance, I'm not going to be cheap about it now. Max $5 / fillup - one fillup per week, that's what $250 a year for badass performance all the time, at the manufacturers suggestions.....

[lawl]

the difference between premium and regular is about 20 cents here.

 

lets round up and say we fill up 15 gallons. that's a 3 dollar difference.

 

how is this even an issue?

[EquinnoxX]

UUhhhhh, no thanks. The idea of that REALLY doesnt settle well with me. Especially on a forced induction vehicle.

 

Agreed. I saw that article too and no where in there do they talk about turbo'd vehicles. They keep saying 'the majority of newer cars' which we all know are NOT forced induction vehicles.

 

Seeing as how turbos typically = greater performance and their article claims cheaper gas at the expense of performance, it doesn't really apply to us.

[Metal2You]

the difference between premium and regular is about 20 cents here.

 

lets round up and say we fill up 15 gallons. that's a 3 dollar difference.

 

how is this even an issue?

 

EXACTLY!! You spent thousands extra to get the GT and now you're going to sacrifice performance and risk the well being of you engine to save $3?!?!?

[gianspi]

Dexter Ford is a dumbass.

[nm]

If you drive 20,000mi per year, assuming a .$.30 premium, uhm, premium, and 20mpg this will cost you $300 per year.

 

If you can't afford $300/year, you probably need to sell your car and buy a bus pass.

[ShrinerMonkey]

Jebus f'ing Christe people... do what the f'ing manual says to do and not what some knucklehead at the "Old Grey Lady" says.

 

I love his example of a BMW... Someone is going to buy a $40,000+ automobile and worry about an extra $3-4 per tank of gas?!

 

Seriously, does anyone actually read newspapers anymore? Talk about a dead medium.

[Diggs753]

It says to use premium in 04 to 06 Sienna Vans(something like 10.8 :1 comp or higher).Might be able to get away with in these.

[lawl]

bmws are decently accessible if you lease, IIRC.

 

getting regular is not a huge deal. going from 20mpg to 36mpg is.

[NSFW]

“There generally isn’t any harm done to the engine by using lower-octane fuel,” said a BMW spokesman, Thomas Plucinsky. “Because our engines do have very good forms of knock sensing and are able to deal with lower-octane fuels, you will not have any drivability issues. You will, however, lose some of the performance.”

 

--

 

But even those stern words may have some room for interpretation. Dave Schembri, president of Smart USA, told John Schwartz, a reporter who was writing for this section’s blog about his experiences in buying a Smart, that he should not worry.

“You could use regular gas — there’s no damage to the car,” Mr. Schembri said.

 

--

 

Porsche, for example, acknowledges that any of its modern production cars can be run on regular fuel without the risk of damage.

A spokesman for Porsche North America, Tony Fouladpour, added a caveat. “If you want the car to perform at its maximum capability, the best choice would not be 87,” he said. “But we do not forbid it.”

 

Big whoop. Personally I run 92 (highest available in my area) but I just don't see anything here to get excited about. I'm always a little bit amused how worked up some people here get over this issue.

[SuperCleanLGT]

Whow reads let alone can believe any thing the NY Times puts out anyway

[DukeTrout]

If you are a real cheapskate, get tuned to run e85. Less expensive, more torque, and cleaner burning.

[Metal2You]

E85 is only "less expensive" because out tax money subsidises it. Once the subsidies end ethanol will be more expensive than gas, unless they switch to growing hemp and switchgrass instead of corn. Right now we're paying to increase the price of corn and take food odd people's plates. Pure genious.

[ShrinerMonkey]

If you are a real cheapskate, get tuned to run e85. Less expensive, more torque, and cleaner burning.

Don't forget to add much worse fuel economy, environmental impact of chemicals used to grow the corn (not to mention oil used), increased food prices, deforestation caused by countries cutting down forest to grow more "fuel", etc....

[DukeTrout]

Oh, jeez, guys. When you're ready to use your own brain instead of someone else's, do some research.

 

That propaganda has already been thoroughly refuted. The US produces more corn on less acreage right now than ever before, and there is a surplus that is being used to make ethanol. Corn is being used while the infrastructure is being built up to use more efficient sources for the ethanol, and to build up the demand for e85. The US produces enough corn to help Europe and Africa with their food prices and/or starvation issue - they voluntarily refuse it, because our "genetically engineered" corn is somehow "unclean." The amount of corn used to produce ethanol for fuel is so tiny it wouldn't even show up as a blip on the price of food, anywhere.

[Diggs753]

^^^Someones been drinking their own bathwater.Not a surplus,ask the beef industry.

[Metal2You]

GM food can be bad stuff. Do some research on mice studies with GM foods where many of the offspring died. Read up on how bacteria in your gut can be mutated from GM foods. You could have bacteria producing pesticides in your guts. GM food is a total crap shoot. Research why GI tract diseases are so common.

 

Then come back here and explain to me how it makes sense to grow corn for ethanol when switchgrass and hemp require significantly less money to produce more ethanol. The small change in grocery prices with some corn in them can be argued, by why pay more at all? Don't forget the corn ethanol will be more expensive too, lets pay more again!

 

Just because its the status quoe doesn't mean its smart or right.

[Reuben]

Only morons will follow that advise, and they will pay the price! haha

 

Case in point. A few months ago some guy in NZ took his brand new JDM imported 08 STi on a track day. I'll remind you they are 2L's, and run on 100 RON... He was a twat, and ran it on 91 RON. Needless to say his track day came to an end sooner than he expected, with a big end bearing failure!

[NSFW]

Detonation causes bearing failure?

How do his pistons look?

[DukeTrout]

Actually, what I feed my family is almost entirely local and organic, whenever I can. What I feed my car may be genetically engineered, but I doubt my spec.B is gonna die of gas tank cancer.

 

My point is, if one is starving, one doesn't turn one's nose up at a viable food source. Don't bitch about food costs going up while refusing to do anything about realistically increasing the yield per acre, especially with the strength of the Euro right now.

 

I really look forward to when a significant amount of switchgrass can be used for ethanol. It's a crop we can grow much better in Oregon than corn. It's a native plant here, another plus, which requires less irrigation and has a lower impact on the land. The point is, in order to make ethanol biofuels viable long-term, it has to start somewhere. The infrastructure and demand has to develop. The most ready sources of ethanol are corn and sugar cane. then we can move to switchgrass and hemp. Eventually, like a scene from "Back to the Future" or something, we will be making ethanol from organic waste. I doubt I'm the first one to tell you that we will eventually run out of oil. As far as I can tell, we aren't going to run out of organic waste any time soon. Heck, there's plenty just in this thread.

 

GM food can be bad stuff. Do some research on mice studies with GM foods where many of the offspring died. Read up on how bacteria in your gut can be mutated from GM foods. You could have bacteria producing pesticides in your guts. GM food is a total crap shoot. Research why GI tract diseases are so common.

 

Then come back here and explain to me how it makes sense to grow corn for ethanol when switchgrass and hemp require significantly less money to produce more ethanol. The small change in grocery prices with some corn in them can be argued, by why pay more at all? Don't forget the corn ethanol will be more expensive too, lets pay more again!

 

Just because its the status quoe doesn't mean its smart or right.

[DukeTrout]

^^^Someones been drinking their own bathwater.Not a surplus,ask the beef industry.

 

Don't know about the beef industry elsewhere. Out west here, cattle graze on grass, mostly on public lands, and the ranchers are panicking about reintroduced wolves, not the price of corn.

 

And I'm sure that the price of food has nothing to do with the price of the fuel that moves it around. It's all about corn and that evil ethanol.