It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
- Last Active
@elias said: firstly, cryoforklift, it is wrong to assume that it's only expensive cars which are designed to run optimally on premium fuel, whether recommended or required.
second, 87 octane performs equally well as premium in normally aspirated cars for which premium is recommended, under many conditions, including extended highway cruising, where it returns more mpg than premium.
So far i've driven about 500,000 miles on premium-recommended cars, at least half of it with 87 octane. The math says i saved a couple grand by running the 87 half the time over half a million miles, in ~6 of the >25 vehicles I've owned.
Does $2000 help anyone understand why people use 87 octane even when premium is recommended? Happy/safe/enjoyable motoring to all, regardless of chosen octane or fuel type or vehicle.
question: what would it take me to buy a diesel? answer: a legal way to remove the DPF/SCR/regen systems that reduce diesel mpg by 25%. Until then, it will be all gassers for me ! :/
While I agree cryofork sets up some false assumptions, really the optimum is to get a vehicle that runs the "correct" recommended octane. Then BOTH sets of the equation, so to speak are optimized. Indeed, one would also save even more monies not getting a premium recommended to required vehicle . Premium is normally used in cars that have the so called "performance" component. So if one practically does not use it to be ok with lesser performance, then savings on the cost of acquisition makes even more sense, be it new or used.
While I am sure a lot of folks have had passing thoughts of removing emissions equipment, the other side of one hand clapping (truth) is emissions equipment on gassers be they RUG/PUG also reduces mpg. Ethanol FURTHER reduces mpg and for a MUCH greater portion, for the overwhelming majority of passenger vehicles (95% +) that do the overwhelming percentage and number of miles. One check the NHTSA site to see the "Carl Sagan like" numbers. Defacto, RUG/PUG fuel consumption/miles are FAR and away WAY WAY WAY larger than passenger car diesel fuel consumption/miles miles.
So for example if you are asking me if I would rather get 25% more mpg over 50/41/31 mpg on TDI's TO 62.5/51.25/38.75 mpg, YES and ABSOLUTELY !!!
You can NOT help but notice the systems and requirements prevent that from happening in ALL fuel choices. This includes the "latest and greatest " plug in electrical.