Fuel: Mind the Gap

"Wobbles the Mind" (wobblesthemind) 09/19/2019 at 09:11 • Filed to: Fuel

2

30

This escalating price gap between 87 and 93 octane is out of hand. The luxury car brands are going to need to rate their cars on regular unleaded in the US rather than requiring premium at these rates.

Let’s say I wanted a fuel efficient luxury utility. I like the Lincoln Aviator but 20 mpg combined isn’t going to cut it so I purchase a Lexus RX hybrid expecting to get 28 mpg combined.

Averaging 20 mpg over 10,000 miles at $2.869 per gallon, that Aviator (which only needs 87 octane) will cost $1,434.50 to run.

Averaging 28 mpg over 10,000 miles at $3.999 per gallon, that Lexus hybrid (which requires premium fuel) would cost $1,428.21 to run. The price gap kills that 8 mpg gap when it comes to your wallet.

I would double check whether your car requires premium or “only recommends” it for better performance. An engine like Hyundai Group’s Tau V8 still makes 404 hp on regular fuel, which is not that big of a performance drop from the 420-429 hp the engine makes on 93 octane.

Driving 10,000 miles, at $2.869 per gallon, averaging 16 mpg will cost you $1,793.13.

Driving 10,000 miles, at $3.999 per gallon, a veraging 19 mpg will cost you $2,104.74.

Even if you notice better fuel economy when you use premium over regular, unless you’re getting your moneys worth in power, you may be better off puttering around in town on the cheap stuff. But that’s only if your engine is fine pouing wine out the box instead of the bottle.

Automakers will need to adjust to this price gap in the US because once people realize that their new car is fuel efficient but their wallet isnt showing it, all of a sudden that 20 mpg big, regular truck really looks like a hero compared to that 28 mpg little premium sedan next to it at the pump.

themanwithsauce - has as many vehicles as job titles > Wobbles the Mind 09/19/2019 at 09:15

3

I know the 2.0 ecoboost in the FoST “only recommends” premium, but I suspect the carbon fouling of the injectors has a lot to do with people running regular and still tearing around town in boost. 

MasterMario - Keeper of the V8s > Wobbles the Mind 09/19/2019 at 09:17

0

An engine like Hyundai Group’s Tau V8 still makes 404 hp on regular fuel, which is not that big of a performance drop from the 420-429 hp the engine makes on 93 octane.

Aspects of the KIA K900/Genesis G80/90 keep popping up in Oppo lately. It’s definitely moving them more towards the top of my next vehicle list more and more. I noticed that it said premium for the fuel on these so it’s good to know that regular is fine as well with only a minimal performance loss.

Ash78, voting early and often > Wobbles the Mind 09/19/2019 at 09:18

1

Our gaps sometime hit a dollar, but this is the biggest I’ve seen.

I’ve theorized for years that a lot of European cars would struggle here on the fuel price alone — most European fuel stations have one grade, which is at least 91 octane on the US measurement (~95 on the Euro version).

Ford was pretty ingenious in introducing their Ecoboost engines to run on 87. As petty as it sounds, “This car runs on regular gas” is a major selling point to a lot of people. And if you drive a lot, after paying $50k for a luxury car and THEN having greatly increased operating costs is salt in the wound.

Most companies have followed suit by now, which is wise. You get a little less power and detergents, but hey.

davesaddiction @ opposite-lock.com > Wobbles the Mind 09/19/2019 at 09:18

0

Yeah, that’s crazy. Around here I think it’s more like a 40-50 cent premium.

Tripper > Wobbles the Mind 09/19/2019 at 09:22

0

So I’m sure a lot of car peeps have a story where they had to bail a friend out who’s filled their petrol car up with diesel...right?

I have two! How TF do you do that? The nozzles are different sizes you’d have to jam a diesel pump into a petrol filler.

Ash78, voting early and often > Wobbles the Mind 09/19/2019 at 09:24

5

89 is a ripoff, as always. I still wonder why they couldn’t just bump it up to 91, which is the normal threshold for cars requiring premium fuel.

Fun fact: There are only two tanks under most stations (low and high octane) . Midgrade gets mixed on the spot.

ItalianJobR53 - now with added 'MERICA and unreliability > Wobbles the Mind 09/19/2019 at 09:27

0

Thats too much....its around 30 cents in Indiana

facw > Wobbles the Mind 09/19/2019 at 09:29

1

The gas doesn’t cost that much more to produce, so I don’t think car makers need to change. All that’s needed is for consumers to pay attention, since there is pretty vigorous gas price competition. I tend to think the trend towards only listing regular prices and not premium on signs, making it harder for people to tell at a glance what they will pay.

FWIW, per Gas Buddy, my local Shell is currently at $2.45/$2.77/$3.01 (well the one I go to, the closest one is $2.99/$3.29/$3.49, so you can see why I go to the other one when I’m passing by).

gmporschenut also a fan of hondas > Wobbles the Mind 09/19/2019 at 09:30

2

This always bugged me when 2007-8 when gas was $4+ mini kept running commercials that they got 39mpg (on premium) . Meanwhile my crappy cobalt was averaging 36 highway on regular.

Sammyno55 > Wobbles the Mind 09/19/2019 at 09:34

1

I calculate cost per mile in a fuel economy spreadsheet. I have a car that uses premium and one that uses regular. I used to use a diesel truck as well. Working everything out in $/mi always works. 

Snuze: Needs another Swede > Tripper 09/19/2019 at 09:39

2

I’ve never seen diesel in a petrol car (due to the aforementioned nozzle sizes), but you can fit a gas nozzle in a diesel. Know a girl who did that twice... on the same truck!

Snuze: Needs another Swede > Ash78, voting early and often 09/19/2019 at 09:39

2

I’ve also always wondered why it’s 89 and not 90?  Why not just mix ‘em 50/50?

gmporschenut also a fan of hondas > themanwithsauce - has as many vehicles as job titles 09/19/2019 at 09:40

2

I have a deep problem with ignoring the recommended fuel. I’m gonna go out on a limb and say the engineers know a bit more on what the engine should have and base their testing on that expectation

Urambo Tauro > Wobbles the Mind 09/19/2019 at 09:40

0

Pardon my ignorance; I’ve never owned a car that needed anything higher octane than regular unleaded. Is octane booster an acceptable alternative here ? And if so, is it cost-effective?

Snuze: Needs another Swede > gmporschenut also a fan of hondas 09/19/2019 at 09:44

1

Cobalt was a fuel economy hero! I had an LS XFE (manual trans, taller final drive, and low rolling resistance tires). I threw a K&N air filter in it, always changed the oil with Mobil 1 synthetic, and kept those tires aired up to slightly over the number on the placard (37~38 psi) . I did 73k miles in 3 years of ownership, almost all highway, and pulled a consistent 39 mpg.

I’ve done 42 mpg in my Cruze (LT, not the Eco version) but that was with a K&N, tune, and premuim fuel.  But I also had 4 adults and a trunk full of luggage for that trip.  If I’d done it solo I might have done a bit better.  

ShrimpHappens, née WJalopy > Wobbles the Mind 09/19/2019 at 09:48

0

I’m in the category of “Premium Recommended for Maximum Performance” with the 4.7L HO I have in my ‘04 Grand Cherokee. I’ve read on forums that some folks have only ever put 87 in theirs and they claim not to have had any problems.

Yesterday when I filled up, 93 was 80 cents/gal more than 87 at the Shell, and this is about normal. On a 20-gal tank while I’m only getting 13mpg, that really adds up, so I’ve been running 89 octane, which is 40 cents/gal more than 87 . I swear I can feel the power loss, but it’s not terrible.

Snuze: Needs another Swede > Wobbles the Mind 09/19/2019 at 09:49

0

My Cruze has the 1.4 turbo which can run on 87 octane, but it pulls so much timing and cuts boost, so it runs like garbage. Best I could do with it was around 32-33 in mixed driving on regular gas . I got a tune and started running premium (required by the tune) and have seen as high as 42 mpg and routinely pull about 37 in mixed driving.

So $870 per 10k miles driven on regular vs. $1080 per 10k miles on premium.  To me, the extra $200 is worth it because, with the tune, the car drives sooo much better. 

SilentButNotReallyDeadly...killed by G/O Media > Wobbles the Mind 09/19/2019 at 09:52

0

Non American here: my not very much surprise at your surprise is not that surprising.

thejustache > Wobbles the Mind 09/19/2019 at 09:57

0

It’s definitely pretty bad. A local chain of stations here carries non-ethanol 91 octane so when I tuned my Subaru I tuned it to that fuel and it’s all I’ll run. Of course that was a couple years ago when the gap wasn’t as bad.

I’ve got about a 15 mile each way commute currently, but recently was looking at taking a job in a neighboring city that was about 34 miles each way. I figured out that if I got something like a honda fit that gets 35mpg and uses 87 octane I’d only be paying $100 more per year than what I currently pay driving half the distance. Driving my Subaru would mean $1400 more per year, meaning I could probably recoup the cost of a beater commuter in 2 years, while saving 25k miles of wear per year on the Subaru. I didn’t end up taking the job, but if I do in the future and premium stays this expensive I think I’d almost have to.

450X_FTW > Wobbles the Mind 09/19/2019 at 09:58

1

It’s not just luxury. For example, the new Jeep Wrangler has 2 engine options: NA 3.6L V6 and Turbo 2.0L I4. The Turbo engine requires premium fuel. I’d be very very surprised if Jeep owners are going to be willing to pay that much more for 93 octane for an engine that is marginally better than the base V6

TheTurbochargedSquirrel > Wobbles the Mind 09/19/2019 at 10:06

2

One of my favorite things about the Corolla is that it uses 87 instead of the 93 the Mini took. It also gets 5-8 more MPG around town than the Mini did while also making 60 more HP. Modern engines are great.

Textured Soy Protein > Wobbles the Mind 09/19/2019 at 10:28

0

I’ve been complaining about this for at least 5 years .

merged-5876237249235911857-hrw8uc > Wobbles the Mind 09/19/2019 at 10:38

1

You’re giving US  consumers way to much credit.  I have a feeling most folks just look at the numbers on the window sticker, if even that.  

merged-5876237249235911857-hrw8uc > themanwithsauce - has as many vehicles as job titles 09/19/2019 at 10:40

0

The engine should adjust to the lower octane and retard timing or other such adjustments if it’s only recommended, not required.  

merged-5876237249235911857-hrw8uc > facw 09/19/2019 at 10:43

0

Holy cow, that’s relatively no gap for the different grades.  Wow.

Highlander-Datsuns are Forever > Wobbles the Mind 09/19/2019 at 12:03

0

Interestingly at the Conoco station they have three buttons: 87, 87, and 91. They have done away with 89. 91 is also ethanol free so that’s my go to for my small engines and Datsun (also a small engine I guess) .

UnderSTeerEnthusiast - Triumph Fanboy > merged-5876237249235911857-hrw8uc 09/19/2019 at 12:13

1

It’s not required, but FoST engines are already at risk for LSPI (low speed pre ignition) in certain conditions. Running 87 will only exacerbate that issue. Premium is $.60 extra a gallon where I live. I usually only need to fill up $20-$25 a week in my FoST. At 2.75 vs. 3.35, I’m getting about a gallon and a half  less in gas, or its costing me $5 or so more a week. At ~$20 a month, that’s not terrible but buying 2 less six packs of a craft brew every month makes up for it, I suppose.

UnderSTeerEnthusiast - Triumph Fanboy > Snuze: Needs another Swede 09/19/2019 at 12:14

1

I’m hoping to get my LS XFE back from my brother. It’s  a pile of shit and bad luck but it still gets dat mileage. Averaged 36 mpg at 85 mph routinely.

Full of the sound of the Gran Fury, signifying nothing. > Wobbles the Mind 09/19/2019 at 12:36

0

This reminds me of an old episode of Dragnet that I watched the other day, and there was a three cent difference between premium and regular. OK, it was probably all leaded gasoline, but still...

HammerheadFistpunch > Wobbles the Mind 09/19/2019 at 12:44

0

my lexus “requires” premium...only it doesn’t it runs fine without any danger on 85.  its literally the exact same engine in the tundra and 4runner that don’t require premium, with a little more midrange timing advance for more power.  run regular and its just a 4runner engine again instead of a lexus one.