Jump to content

New here!! Regular gas or Premium??


Jspeed

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, HofstraJet said:

 

As stated above, why spend money for something you will never use or notice? Just because you can afford it doesn't mean you should throw it away.

 

And sometimes, saving $3 on a tank of gas is indicative of habits which allow one to purchase a $100k vehicle.

Your response is perfect.  You don't even get the irony of spending tens of thousands of extra dollars for luxury but you balk at 3 bucks that is BETTER for the vehicle.  And yes an average person can notice it- the few places that have done comparisons have explicitly said it becomes quite noticeable across the whole rev range even at part throttle (which make s a lot of sense with a turbo engine).  If saving 3 bucks on a tank of gas in a Navigator will in some way improve your life you have made terrible decisions up to this point...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Emilner said:

Your response is perfect.  You don't even get the irony of spending tens of thousands of extra dollars for luxury but you balk at 3 bucks that is BETTER for the vehicle.  And yes an average person can notice it- the few places that have done comparisons have explicitly said it becomes quite noticeable across the whole rev range even at part throttle (which make s a lot of sense with a turbo engine).  If saving 3 bucks on a tank of gas in a Navigator will in some way improve your life you have made terrible decisions up to this point...


It’s NOT “Better” for the vehicle and I guarantee you that the majority of drivers won’t notice it even at part throttle.  If you care then go for it but stop telling other people what they should or shouldn’t feel or how they should spend their money.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, akirby said:


It’s NOT “Better” for the vehicle and I guarantee you that the majority of drivers won’t notice it even at part throttle.  If you care then go for it but stop telling other people what they should or shouldn’t feel or how they should spend their money.

Wouldn't that depend on what we mean by better?  And then isn't everyone here with an opinion, including you, telling others how they should spend their money?   Just sayin.

 

Lincoln is clearly recommending 91+ Top Tier, and believes the difference is notable :

 

For best overall vehicle and engine

performance, premium fuel with an octane

rating of 91 or higher is recommended. The

performance gained by using premium fuel

is most noticeable in hot weather as well as

other conditions, for example when towing

a trailer. See Towing (page 315).

 

We recommend Top Tier detergent

gasolines, where available to help minimize

engine deposits and maintain optimal vehicle

and engine performance. For additional

information, refer to www.toptiergas.com.

 

Thus Lincoln believes 91+ and Top Tier are "better" for your vehicle and your experience; maybe we should leave the recommendation there?

Edited by GrussGott
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, HofstraJet said:

 

As stated above, why spend money for something you will never use or notice? Just because you can afford it doesn't mean you should throw it away.

 

And sometimes, saving $3 on a tank of gas is indicative of habits which allow one to purchase a $100k vehicle.

 

Lincoln says you will notice the difference with premium fuel:

 

The performance gained by using premium fuel
is most noticeable in hot weather as well as
other conditions, for example when towing
a trailer

Edited by GrussGott
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, GrussGott said:

Wouldn't that depend on what we mean by better?  And then isn't everyone here with an opinion, including you, telling others how they should spend their money?   Just sayin.


Nope not at all.  What I’m saying is the gain in performance is real but something that most drivers won’t notice based on how they drive.  It provides better performance but it is not “better” for the engine than 87 in any other aspect other than the specific cases mentioned in the manual - extreme hot weather or heavy towing.

 

I never said it wasn’t worth it IF the difference matters to you.  If you like the added power or need to use it due to hot weather or towing then go for it.  
 

What I objected to is saying that everybody should always use premium because it’s “better”.  If I’m not towing or in extreme hot weather and I either don’t care or can’t feel the extra power then there is no reason to waste money on premium.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, akirby said:


Nope not at all.  What I’m saying is the gain in performance is real but something that most drivers won’t notice based on how they drive.  It provides better performance but it is not “better” for the engine than 87 in any other aspect other than the specific cases mentioned in the manual - extreme hot weather or heavy towing.

 

I never said it wasn’t worth it IF the difference matters to you.  If you like the added power or need to use it due to hot weather or towing then go for it.  
 

What I objected to is saying that everybody should always use premium because it’s “better”.  If I’m not towing or in extreme hot weather and I either don’t care or can’t feel the extra power then there is no reason to waste money on premium.

But you, and all the others discussing this skip over the tremendous irony of spending $100k on a truck (an extra $20-30k over the equivalent espy) to gain luxury and performance to then balk at spending $3 to get that performance you paid for.  If you are, let's face it, overspending on a truck (we all did, none of these are worth $100k, that's why they are mega profit machines) then a 3 dollar decision doesn't enter your everyday life.  If it does, you are way over stretched.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And 91/92 Octane isn't "better" gas than 87.  It's like me saying the dark beer is better than an IPA.  It's just a different formulation.

 

Too many people have been brain washed into thinking the higher octane fuel is somehow extra refined or something making it a better grade fuel.  It's not.  Just has more anti-knock fuel in it than the 87 has.  Nothing more.

 

I have a 2.0 EB in my Escape.  I tried 87, 89, 91, ethanol free all for trials.  I noticed no power differences between them all.  And 87 WITH ethanol actually resulted in the best fuel economy for what I drive.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi gang. Several points here: First, this "One size fits all" approach is not a good one. Here is what my Owners Manual states concerning fuel octane:

 

"We recommend regular unleaded gasoline
with a minimum pump (R+M)/2 octane rating
of 87. Some stations offer fuels posted as
regular with an octane rating below 87,
particularly in high altitude areas. We do not
recommend fuels with an octane rating
below 87. To provide improved performance,
we recommend premium fuel for severe duty
usage such as trailer tow.
Do not use any fuel other than those
recommended because they could lead to
engine damage that may not be covered by
the vehicle Warranty.
Do not be concerned if the engine
sometimes knocks lightly. However, if the
engine knocks heavily while using fuel with
the recommended octane rating, contact an
authorized dealer to prevent any engine
damage."

 

So telling people that only one octane is the right one is the wrong advice. Premium will improve performance for those who need improved performance However, not everyone needs top horsepower at the expense of extra cost (see my personal experiences below)

 

Next: Therefore, no one is ignoring any irony, because there is no irony. We spend money on a vehicle, perhaps lots of money. However, that does not mean we have to spend unnecessary money for a higher octane fuel that gives us no benefit in our own particular driving circumstances.

 

Next: The difference between 87 octane and 93 octane in my area is in the $0.40 to $0.60 range per gallon. So if I am at 1/4 tank in my 2018 MKZ, it will cost me ~$5.60 to ~$8.50 more to fill with 93 octane premium. Not $3.00

 

I have owned 5 Mustang GT's in my long car career (all factory ordered new) and am performance oriented in my driving. Less so now with my 3.0T AWD MKZ, but still attuned to the behavior of my car and its driving characteristics.

 

In my normal everyday driving (no stoplight drag racing, towing, highway hero driving etc.) I can feel no difference between 87 octane regular and 93 octane premium. I have used both and also keep a fuel mileage log.

In addition, I use only Major name brand, Top Tier fuels. There is no difference between additive/detergent packages between Major Brand/Top Tier 87 octane and 93 octane fuels. So in my case, I do not need the full 400HP/400 lb-ft of torque in my driving. I can get along just fine with ~380/380 or whatever regular may give me.

 

Don't get me wrong..Yes,. my car does produce top horsepower/torque with premium. But i don't feel or need it in my own daily driving environment. So premium is a waste of money for me. Even if it is only $5-$9 a fill-up.

 

The Owners Manual simply states that the vehicle will get the full advertised power with premium fuels (notice it does not even specifically state 93 octane at all). If an owner does not need top performance power, then paying for it is a waste of money. Yes, we paid a lot of money for vehicles, but that does not mean we need tip-top horsepower/torque and its resulting costs, on an everyday basis 

 

If an owner does not need top performance in their daily driving (or does not care) then using 87 octane has no drawbacks and saves money. If there is no benefit, it is a waste of money. In my opinion, smart people (and smart rich people) do not walk into the club and start "making it rain" with dollar bills.

 

i will take the advice of automotive experts before the opinion of myself or anyone on an anonymous automotive forum. For expert advice instead of partial quotes and opinions (including mine), Google the subject of regular fuel versus premium and see below:

 

https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a28565486/honda-cr-v-vs-bmw-m5-ford-f-150-dodge-charger/

 

https://www.roadandtrack.com/about/a31295/high-octane/

 

https://cars.usnews.com/cars-trucks/best-cars-blog/2016/08/premium-vs-regular-gasoline

 

https://www.aaa.com/autorepair/articles/don%27t-confuse-gasoline-octane-and-quality

 

https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/octane.shtml

 

Or, as this paragraph in the Fueleconomy.gov link states (and most of us are stating):

"Is higher octane fuel worth the extra cost?

If your vehicle requires mid-grade or premium fuel, absolutely. If your owner's manual says your vehicle doesn't require premium but says that your vehicle will run better on higher octane fuel, it's really up to you. The cost increase is typically higher than the fuel savings. However, lowering CO2 emissions and decreasing petroleum usage by even a small amount may be more important than cost to some consumers."

 

Our vehicles do not "require" premium fuels. So the choice is up to the individual driver as to what is best for their own particular driving situation and environment.

 

Bottom line (in my opinion): We should all do the research and get our information from expert sources, instead of opinions from a bunch of anonymous Internet mooks like us. ?

 

Good luck.

Edited by bbf2530
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can give another example of my personal experience.  I have a 2015 BMW R1200RT motorcycle.  BMW manual states 89 octane minimum.  So right there 87 is out the window for me.  In my area, most stations have switched from 87/89/91 to 87 ethanol/87 no ethanol/91.  Some stations are ethanol 91, some are not.  I have to watch that.

 

When I could still get 89, it was always ethanol blended.  What I noticed is I get better fuel mileage with 91 non-ethanol than I did with 89 ethanol.  Since fuel range is important to me on a motorcycle, it was worth it to me to get the 91 octane.  Even when I can only get ethanol blended fuel at a remote gas station, I still got better fuel mileage with 91 vs 89.  So the 91 octane fuel is worth it, for me.  I do NOT however feel a power difference.  Just fuel range.

 

Now I know from other BMW riders, in an emergency, I can drop down to 87.  The bike will adjust and be down on power.  But it'll work.  I just like to avoid that situation.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, 92merc said:

I can give another example of my personal experience.  I have a 2015 BMW R1200RT motorcycle.  BMW manual states 89 octane minimum.  So right there 87 is out the window for me.  In my area, most stations have switched from 87/89/91 to 87 ethanol/87 no ethanol/91.  Some stations are ethanol 91, some are not.  I have to watch that.

 

When I could still get 89, it was always ethanol blended.  What I noticed is I get better fuel mileage with 91 non-ethanol than I did with 89 ethanol.  Since fuel range is important to me on a motorcycle, it was worth it to me to get the 91 octane.  Even when I can only get ethanol blended fuel at a remote gas station, I still got better fuel mileage with 91 vs 89.  So the 91 octane fuel is worth it, for me.  I do NOT however feel a power difference.  Just fuel range.

 

Now I know from other BMW riders, in an emergency, I can drop down to 87.  The bike will adjust and be down on power.  But it'll work.  I just like to avoid that situation.

 

Hi 92merc. Yes, and your experience brings up another good point for others to remember: Generally speaking (there will always be outliers). in an apples to apples comparison, ethanol lowers fuel mileage, and ethanol fuels will give lower mpg's than non-ethanol fuel. The main factor is the presence of ethanol, not the octane rating.

 

Good luck.

Edited by bbf2530
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Advancing the timing (which is what provides the added power and what higher octane enables) also increases fuel economy slightly.  Not enough to offset the higher fuel cost by itself, but there is some improvement.

 

As pointed out 100% gas will also help fuel mileage- probably more than higher octane.  Again probably not enough to cover the added cost but a benefit if you’re using it anyway.

 

Side note - did you know all EPA testing is done with pure gasoline not E-10?  Seems like they should be using E-10 since pure gas can be hard to find in most areas.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just from my data gathering on my Expedition, I have seen a slight overall increase in MPG with 91 octane, however it isn't big enough to justify the added expense.  My differential is $0.30 (Sam's Club) to $0.50 (all others) per gallon.  The one thing I did notice was that the power delivery was much smoother and the engine was more responsive in my day to day driving.  I drove the first 6000 miles or so with 87, the rest have been with 91.  Around here it is very hard to get non-ethanol gas and in some areas ethanol blend is required due to emissions.  In our MkC I never noticed any difference in power or responsiveness between 87 and 91, so we have stuck with 87 for it.

Edited by Flying68
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, akirby said:

Advancing the timing (which is what provides the added power and what higher octane enables) also increases fuel economy slightly.  Not enough to offset the higher fuel cost by itself, but there is some improvement.

 

Lincoln is very clear on its recommendation:

 

"For best overall vehicle and engine performance, premium fuel with an octane rating of 91 or higher is recommended. The performance gained by using premium fuel is most noticeable in hot weather as well as other conditions, for example when towing a trailer."

 

(1.) If one desires the best over overall vehicle & engine performance then use 91 or higher.

 

(2.) Lincoln explicitly says the performance gain is noticeable, AND gives two examples where it's MOST noticeable.  Lincoln is NOT saying those are the only examples where the performance gain is noticeable, rather, simply providing examples where the performance gain is MOST noticeable.

 

In short, Lincoln specifically recommends using 91 or higher AND says the derived performance gains are noticeable. period.

 

To the extent anyone here is recommending people NOT use 91 or higher, they are contradicting Lincoln's written recommendation ... doesn't make it wrong or bad, just a deviation from Lincoln's operational recommendation.

Edited by GrussGott
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, akirby said:

Because some of us don’t like throwing money away even if it’s just a few dollars.  I tried it on my F150 and could not tell the difference, so for me to buy premium would literally be throwing money away for no reason.

I always love the argument "I couldn't tell the difference so you shouldn't waste your money".  It's like "I can't tell the difference between first growth Bordeaux and 2 buck chuck, so you should buy the cheapest wine you can"

Do you have a Navigator or Raptor?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok guys - NOBODY here said that you shouldn’t buy premium IF that’s what you want to do.  EVERYONE acknowledged you get more power,  So stop making stuff up that wasn’t said,

 

The gains are only noticeable depending on how you drive.  If you do WOT runs you’ll probably feel it.  If you drive like a granny you won’t.  It totally depends on how you drive.

 

You guys are the ones trying to tell everyone that they should buy premium.  What everyone else said is very very clear:

 

There are real performance gains

Premium is more expensive

You may or may not notice the difference

If you don’t notice the difference or you don’t care then you can save money by using 87

If you notice the difference and/or don’t mind spending more then buy premium.

 

Period end of discussion.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, akirby said:

Ok guys - NOBODY here said that you shouldn’t buy premium IF that’s what you want to do.  EVERYONE acknowledged you get more power,  So stop making stuff up that wasn’t said,

 

The gains are only noticeable depending on how you drive.  If you do WOT runs you’ll probably feel it.  If you drive like a granny you won’t.  It totally depends on how you drive.

 

You guys are the ones trying to tell everyone that they should buy premium.  What everyone else said is very very clear:

 

There are real performance gains

Premium is more expensive

You may or may not notice the difference

If you don’t notice the difference or you don’t care then you can save money by using 87

If you notice the difference and/or don’t mind spending more then buy premium.

 

Period end of discussion.

You missed the part where Ford/Lincoln recommends premium.  

Screen Shot 2022-01-08 at 10.51.42 AM.jpeg

Edited by Emilner
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Emilner said:

I always love the argument "I couldn't tell the difference so you shouldn't waste your money".  It's like "I can't tell the difference between first growth Bordeaux and 2 buck chuck, so you should buy the cheapest wine you can"

Do you have a Navigator or Raptor?

 

Hi Emilner. Or the opposing argument would be: We should all take the time and spend the money to train like an Olympic athlete everyday, because that is what will give us the the best overall physical performance for our bodies, even if we do not need that level of performance. The reality is that many/most of us do not need top performance, so we do what is necessary to maintain and perform how we need to in our lives (not others lives).

Of course, some do train like hell, while others treat their bodies like a garbage can and/or everything in between. Or in the case of our vehicles, do not even perform minimum maintenance, oil changes etc.

 

So you see, silly analogies aside, the argument can be cast either way, since there are holes in any analogy, including the two mentioned here. And using 87-89-91-93 octane does not matter, as far as engine health and longevity, unless premium is required (far different than "recommended for..."). It only matters for "performance" (i.e. power/HP). And not everyone needs or wants top performance to drive to the mall.

So the answer is that everyone needs to use the octane fuel they feel is necessary for their driving desires and environment, as long as it meets the minimum Ford requirements (not "recommendation") for their vehicle.

 

As akirby stated, no one here is telling anyone not to use premium, or 87 octane is the best choice for everyone. We are simply telling everyone to use what the feel is best for their driving environment and situation, as long as it meets the Ford minimum requirement, which is most cases, is a minimum 87 octane fuel (but everyone needs to read their own Owners Manual.

However, some here are certainly telling everyone they need to use premium and it is the absolute best choice,  no matter their driving environment.

And some of those same people, who are telling everyone what is best for them, are the same people saying the other side is telling everyone what to do. Now, that is ironic.

 

And since some here seem to repeatedly state that others are ignoring this or that statement, it seems no proponent of "premium fuel is best for for everybody" will address the fact that virtually all automotive experts state that a driver should use a fuel that meets the minimum octane requirements of their particular vehicle, or a higher octane premium, if the wish or feel the need to. But that for many owners, premium is a waste of money. Even when research that is provided.

Would someone please provide expert sources stating premium fuel is best for everybody, other than a very liberal (and cherry picked) inference that an Owners Manual stating "recommenced" also means "required", or best in every circumstance for everyone? And even when other Owners Manual statements to the contrary have been offered?

 

Let owners read the expert sources and make a decision as to what is best for them on their own. All the rest of this is Internet posturing and babbling.

 

Good luck everyone.

Edited by bbf2530
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi gang. And just for some additional information, with some basic Googling research. Take a look here: https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=recommended+fuel+for+Ford+Raptor

 

As can easily be seen, premium fuel is not even "required" in the Raptor (which keeps being selectivity mentioned). Yes, it is "recommended" for best performance" (again...i.e. horsepower/torque). But "recommend" and "required" are two very different words with very different definitions.

And premium it is not required and gives no other benefits of engine cleanliness, longevity. maintenance etc. Only added power, which some want/need, some do not.

 

So as akirby so succinctly stated above:

 

"There are real performance gains

Premium is more expensive

You may or may not notice the difference

If you don’t notice the difference or you don’t care then you can save money by using 87

If you notice the difference and/or don’t mind spending more then buy premium.

 

Period end of discussion."

 

Let others read and make a decision based on expert sources, not deeply held Internet opinions with little fact basis, no matter which side the opinion is on.

 

Good luck.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • akirby locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...