Interesting performance results on different vehicles with regular and premium gas

"KingT- 60% of the time, it works every time" (kngt) 06/16/2019 at 13:49 • Filed to: premium gas, regular gas, Fuel Economy, fuel, Gasoline

2

33

From this month’s Car & Driver test feature

Impressed by the Charger R/T. 87? 93? Don’t care does 4.9s 0-60 all day every day.F150 3.5 EB shows the biggest gains apparently .

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

BrianGriffin thinks “reliable” is just a state of mind > KingT- 60% of the time, it works every time 06/16/2019 at 13:56

3

Really for all of them, the difference is basically a rounding error. Especially when it comes to fuel economy, I had always heard that engines designed for premium would get 2-3mpg worse on regular.

I would have liked to see them do a “normal” BMW and run 87 vs 93 to see the difference. 

BlueMazda2 - Blesses the rains down in Africa, Purveyor of BMW Individual Arctic Metallic, Merci Twingo > KingT- 60% of the time, it works every time 06/16/2019 at 13:56

6

7.3-7.4 to 60?

That’s almost 2 seconds slower than the last gen CR-V.

mXxxxXm24 /O/ /O/ > KingT- 60% of the time, it works every time 06/16/2019 at 14:01

0

One thing I’ve been curious about is difference in performance with ethanol to ethanol free fuel.

Highlander-Datsuns are Forever > KingT- 60% of the time, it works every time 06/16/2019 at 14:05

0

As far as I know higher octane ratings are better for higher compression engines so the 3.5L EB ford and 1.5L honda being the the only boosted and probably the highest cylinder pressure out of all of these cars hence the biggest gains as a % of overall HP, the honda would be at about a 20 HP gain if it started at 360.

HondoyotaE38: A Japanese and German Collab...wait a minute > BlueMazda2 - Blesses the rains down in Africa, Purveyor of BMW Individual Arctic Metallic, Merci Twingo 06/16/2019 at 14:07

1

My God I thought this was long  dead that's an oof

DipodomysDeserti > mXxxxXm24 /O/ /O/ 06/16/2019 at 14:09

3

You can build more power running ethanol (E85)  if your engine is tuned for it as it usually has a much higher octane rating. E10 or E15 isn’t going to make a difference if the octane rating is the same.

M.T. Blake > KingT- 60% of the time, it works every time 06/16/2019 at 14:11

0

I’d be feeding my Charger kerosene right now after reading this  

DipodomysDeserti > KingT- 60% of the time, it works every time 06/16/2019 at 14:11

2

Does it say how long they drove the cars around on the different fuels before dynoing them? It’s going to take a bit of time for the ECU to adjust the timing tables when switching between octanes.

Discerning > KingT- 60% of the time, it works every time 06/16/2019 at 14:13

2

Im not surprised by the EB. Even the 5.0 shows decent gains when using 93 or e85. Ford uses a pretty mild tune from the factory to work with the 87 but things heat up when the octane increases.

Spanfeller is a twat > Highlander-Datsuns are Forever 06/16/2019 at 14:19

4

The BMW is twin turbo

jimz > DipodomysDeserti 06/16/2019 at 14:21

3

this.  there might be a slight measurable difference under lab conditions due to ethanol’s lower energy density (a little over half that of gasoline.)  but ethanol’s stoichiometric air:fuel ratio is 9:1 compared to 14.7:1 for gas, so you negate most of the difference by having to use more ethanol in order to maintain stoichiometry. 

jimz > Highlander-Datsuns are Forever 06/16/2019 at 14:24

0

it depends on how they calibrated it for 87.  That particular EcoBoost in the F-150 Limited is the high-output one from the Raptor, and they make it clear that rated horsepower and torque are only guaranteed when you run premium.  

jimz > M.T. Blake 06/16/2019 at 14:25

0

nitpick- kerosene would be lower  octane than gasoline, if you could reliably get it to spark ignite.  

fhrblig > KingT- 60% of the time, it works every time 06/16/2019 at 14:26

0

Just for shits and giggles I ran a tank of super (91 in Colorado ) unleaded through my truck. There was no noticeable difference in performance between the 91 and the 85 that it normally takes. I also didn’t expect there to be, really. I just had a bunch of fuel points I was going to lose if we didn’t use them.

ITA97, now with more Jag @ opposite-lock.com > DipodomysDeserti 06/16/2019 at 14:28

4

That may not be quite as much the case as it once was. Many newer cars these days have an engine management strategy of near constantly probing the limits of timing advance. Apparently we’ve gotten a lot more confidence in our knock detection algorithms , especially in part-throttle and transient conditions, than we once had .

ITA97, now with more Jag @ opposite-lock.com > KingT- 60% of the time, it works every time 06/16/2019 at 14:39

0

This tracks with my experience in my 2.7 ecoboost F-150. The manual allows for 87 in normal driving and requires 91 for any towing or hauling work. I experimented a bit the first few months I had the truck and saw a consistent 1 mpg gain running premium in it. Beyond feeling like it might have a had bit more power overall, the real difference generally felt like a considerably more aggressive boost and timing strategy in normal, part-throttle driving.

I now run 91 full time in the truck. The numbers would show that not being a financial win, but in the end I don’t really notice that $6-8 difference per fill up.

dogisbadob > BlueMazda2 - Blesses the rains down in Africa, Purveyor of BMW Individual Arctic Metallic, Merci Twingo 06/16/2019 at 14:49

2

WAIT, the last-gen CRV 0-60 is in the 5's? WTF??? I know the old one had VTEC, but come on!!! Holy shit that’s fast as fuck

dogisbadob > KingT- 60% of the time, it works every time 06/16/2019 at 14:50

0

They didn’t try the M5 with 87-octane? :p

BlueMazda2 - Blesses the rains down in Africa, Purveyor of BMW Individual Arctic Metallic, Merci Twingo > dogisbadob 06/16/2019 at 14:51

4

Oh no, that’s just an old Oppo inside joke about a CR-V with a claimed “ 5.5” second dash to 60.

KingT- 60% of the time, it works every time > dogisbadob 06/16/2019 at 14:51

2

I’d assume BMW wont send them any M car again if they did ;)

Manwich - now Keto-Friendly > KingT- 60% of the time, it works every time 06/16/2019 at 15:03

0

I’m surprised there wasn’t more of a real-world performance benefit for the CRV.

Dusty Ventures > KingT- 60% of the time, it works every time 06/16/2019 at 15:17

3

How about the fact that we live in a world where a 4x4 F-150 can do 0-60 in just over 5 seconds.

Longtime Lurker > KingT- 60% of the time, it works every time 06/16/2019 at 15:36

1

The Charger sees no difference in 0-60 because it is traction limited. Not horsepower limited.

M.T. Blake > jimz 06/16/2019 at 16:37

0

Exactly! If the Charger doesn’t care about lower grade fuel, let’s run some real crude stuff through it for cheap!

BlueMazda2 - Blesses the rains down in Africa, Purveyor of BMW Individual Arctic Metallic, Merci Twingo > Dusty Ventures 06/16/2019 at 16:53

0

The top of the line high output 450 hp engine takes it to 60 in 5.1 seconds as per a previous road test.  What a time to be alive.

duurtlang > jimz 06/16/2019 at 16:58

0

So when E10 is 1 cent cheaper than normal gasoline with the same octane rating you should pick the non-ethanol fuel because of marginally better fuel economy?

DipodomysDeserti > ITA97, now with more Jag @ opposite-lock.com 06/16/2019 at 17:00

1

Admittedly, the last fuel injected car I tuned was an ‘08 WRX. It’s ECU was constantly probing for knock, but it took a few hits at the same mapping point before timing was pulled. I’d have to go back every few weeks and adjust fueling/boost/timing to adjust for the changes the ECU made on its own. This was using open source software which really let me get into the guts of the programming.

HondoyotaE38: A Japanese and German Collab...wait a minute > BlueMazda2 - Blesses the rains down in Africa, Purveyor of BMW Individual Arctic Metallic, Merci Twingo 06/16/2019 at 17:24

0

I do wonder where that came from

Eury - AFRICA TWIN!!!!!!! > duurtlang 06/16/2019 at 21:52

1

Do the math over a couple tanks. W Hen I lived in IA I could get both. Price difference was 1-2%. Mileage was 7-9% depending on the car. My cost per mile was less on non ethanol, so that’s what I ran. 

mXxxxXm24 /O/ /O/ > jimz 06/16/2019 at 23:39

0

Thanks for sharing your knowledge! How does that translate in comparing e10 0r e 15 to e0 of the same octane? I’ve always felt the ethanol free is better performance and mpg, but maybe I’m just imagining things.  Also, w hich is better for the longevity of your engine? As I understand it you don’t want to leave ethanol fuel in a tank for long due to the ethanol being made with water. So does this in no way matter when you drive your car on a regular or somewhat regular basis?

BigBlock440 > duurtlang 06/17/2019 at 11:49

0

1 cent? Without a doubt. I just ran this experiment 2 weeks ago, I was on vacation, pulled into a gas station and by chance saw one of the pumps was ethanol free. Sure, it was an extra $0.30 per gallon, but I figured what the hell, I’ll give it a go. I ended up realizing a 20% mileage improvement  even with a quarter tank of E10 still in there when I filled up.  Running the numbers, even though it cost a couple dollars more to fill up, the 12% price increase by volume worked out to be about 8% cost decrease per mile.  I wish I was able to find more of it locally, it was nice having that extra range too.

Darkbrador > KingT- 60% of the time, it works every time 06/17/2019 at 12:31

0

To o bad they don’t sell 93 where I live, I could shave three quarters of  a second on my daily commute ! Aaaaaargh !

lscrx > KingT- 60% of the time, it works every time 06/19/2019 at 14:30

0

My Jetta (1.4 TSI) calls for regular, and the last time I saw a test like this they included an Audi and it got worse fuel economy with premium fuel, so I use regular. I enjoy the blend of performance and economy that I get with the 5-speed/1.4 TSI combo, and I don’t think decreasing my MPG’s by 1% to increase my HP by 2% would be worth the extra $.30/gallon.

I cringe when I see people “treating” their car, usually a very standard car that absolutely won’t benefit from high-octane fuel, their heart is in the right place.