Never mind horsepower that you must wind up the motor to get it.
Give me usable torque anytime! :surprise:
Cases in point:
My 2002 TDI that was chipped and had bigger injectors. There was no need to "drop a gear" for instant acceleration. Why? Because the car was always revving right there in the middle of the fat torque curve. We estimated the torque to be over 265 ft/lb. Not to bad for a 1.9L four banger.
Same with my '99 E-300 DT. Never had to wind it up to get performance, as it was always right there where the torque was (1600-3000 RPM.) That is one of the reasons they will get over 30 mpg all day long out on the freeways.
and we'll agree on this comment - except that it is the 50 or 60 hp that the engine picks up that gets rid of the 'slug', more so than it is 20 or so lb. ft. of torque. Was not aware that the VVT in the GM engine actually had the 'i' - required for that 'mapping' you are talking about?
But NONE of the cars in this group have what you call "a simple thing called HP", because HP is just another label for TORQUE over time. Without torque there can be no horsepower. But yes, over most terrain and with other things being equal, the higher horsepower car will be faster. Throw in some inclines or heavy loads; the winner may change. Say what you want, but if you ain't no way got no torque, you ain't no way got no horsepower.
diesels, with ludricrous amounts of torque and a serious reticence to rev, generally also produce SLOW cars relative to their higher revving gas cousins. A good example of this is the current rendition of that E300 (the E320CDI) you mention - logically never having to downshift in exchange for some bothersome compression braking but also great FE, but also substantially SLOWER than the E350 V6 despite 400 wonderful lb./ft (but, only about 200 hp or so). Diesels or even diesel hybrids will be making a big time comeback (a prediction), however, especially in vehicles this size. Fuel just costs too much for them to be ignored (or legislated against) much longer.
Aren't engines built for different purposes? For example I certainly wouldn't want a Duramax or Powerstoke in my Avalon and no way would anyone hauling a trailer want my high revving 3.5. It's all relative to what you drive. IMO most people look at 0 - 60 times (prob 40 - 60 too) and couldn't care less what RPM the peak torque is. All things being equal I'll take the faster car rather than the one with more torque.
tjc78 - since I'm guessing here that we see eye-to-eye on this and i agree with what you said - would like to add one thing: most people look at 0 - 60 times (prob 40 - 60 too) and couldn't care less what RPM the peak torque is yes, in those conditions that the RPM is easily and transparently achieved. There is a whole lot of difference in the sound, feel (and in the ease with which the engine spped increases) of a Toyota 2GR V6 at 4 or 5000 rpm, than there is, for example, with a Ford 3 liter or a GM 3.8 pushrod at the same speed.
Correct tjc! Different torque curves suit different conditions. And if you want the highest top speed with relatively light loads on level ground then go for the high peak horsepower car (with enough transmission gears to make it practical) instead of the one that has a higher peak torque than horsepower. But no matter what conditions under which a person drives, relatively high levels of usable torque is what all drivers love. To deny that is being dishonest.
Okay, okay...it's understood that hp and torque must coexist.
However...goo-goo gobs of torque and no hp will only get you off the line, up steep hills and give you the ability to climb rocks. I mean...sure you can fire off the line, but what about maintaining that speed?
On the flip side, huge doses of hp and low torque will do nothing for getting you off the line, up hills or anything that requires that punch from a downshift. So you'll be a turtle coming off the line, however...once you get speed built up, you'll be able to roll. However, if you need to downshift for more power, you can fuggidabowdit!
So...what is needed, IMO, is a happy medium of torque AND hp. Considering the weight of the vehicle (in this case we're talking cars) and what you might possibly be carrying (a family and luggage)...a good amount of torque would be nice to have on hand. BUT...you also want the hp to keep you rolling once you've got all that going on the road, right?
You know...there are times in this forum where people want to be so technical just to prove a point. :mad:
If you go back and follow the argument...it's clear to understand why I made the statement I made and asked the question I asked.
This whole thing is about hp and torque existing IN a vehicle...DUUUUHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!
Are you THAT pressed to be right that you have to resort to being so literal and so technical? However, the last line in your response is exactly what I was getting at. :P
To be honest...the argument is a dumb arguement as BOTH are necessary when it comes to DRIVING A VEHICLE, regardless of what vehicle it is...it's necessary.
The fact of the matter is, there are cars that could use a nice dose of torque, some could use an infusion of hp and then there are those that could just use a whole new powerplant that would provide better numbers in both torque and hp.
So, to reiterate my previous statment and to add...
In a vehicle, hp and torque MUST co-exist!!! :shades:
Here, I'll do it for you, in your own words: "In a vehicle, when it comes to DRIVING A VEHICLE hp and torque are necessary and just to prove a point MUST co-exist!!!"
High torque? A check of the Buick website listed the torque for the 3800 at 227 foot pounds. The Azera, also a 3.8 liter, has 257 foot pounds, and burns regular gas at the same rate (19/28). By the way, that 3800 ( in the Lucerne )is rated at 197HP versus 263HP. So where's the benefit of the Buick 3800? By the way, the Buick torq peak is at a lower RPM ( 3800 versus 4500 RPM ), but I would bet that even at 3800 RPM the Azera still has more than the Buick. Modern technology.
AMEN!!!! This mindless blathering of those with too much time on their hands arguing and trying to prove a point is mind numbing! Can someone PLEASE get this thread back on topic!?!
Enough torque and horsepower. Several people have made the reasonable and appropriate suggestions that we get back on topic and drop the continuing back and forth which, by the way, happens to be pretty much off-topic.
WHY ???? Is it necessary to keep up this nonsense?? Lets just say the car has enough power to go. Period. We don't have to get so technical about it. :mad: :mad: van
at least buick will get you and 4 or 5 of your buddies from point a to point b. sorry still cannot accept reliability of azera. Also since its all new car there are no 3+ yr old cars.
BTW I always wanted to know is Hyundai warranty fully transferable without any changes?
Am I remembering correctly here? Has someone claimed Azera was unfairly tested against some of the other cars in here by some car magazines? Maybe Azera was tested with regular gas in the tank, while others had premium? Anyone know for sure what grade of gas is used to produce the advertised horsepower in these cars? And does anyone know what grade was used in the various published road tests and comparison tests?
Azera recommends regular. From what I have read Avalon recommends premium, but many use regular. I am fairly confident that when Motor Trend did the comparison with Azera, Avalon, and Passat, that the Azera was on regular, with the other two on premium.
I don't know how much,if any, difference, putting premium in the Azera would make or vice versa for the Avalon. If the programming chip doesn't recognize premium and make timing and other engine management changes, then it should be the same as regular. I have read a lot of different 0-60 times on the Azera, from 6.1 to 7.0, and I believe that the Avalon is very little, IF ANY, quicker, even with premium. Now when it comes to MPG, the Avalon is usually the winner (my AZZY tho is now at 24.0 mpg for almost 3,500 miles).
Maybe it was not under this title, but in one of these forums owners were gushing about increased horsepower from their Azeras' motors when they fed them premium. I take it you have never used premium in your Azera, right? Anyone else have experience with that?
Perceived hp increases don't equate to actual hp increases. Some people think their cars drive better after having them washed. I'll even admit to that one even though I know it's all in my head. If the vehicle isn't tuned to use premium fuel, you won't see any benefit by using it.
If a car is supposed to use premium as is the requirement for the Avalon, there will be a reduction in performance when regular is used. Why?
The knock sensor(s) will detect pinging even though you will not (and cannot) hear it, and the engine management computer will retard the timing quite a bit to prevent damage, and this does reduce not only performance, but also fuel economy. :surprise:
Since the Azera is originally set up to run regular, I seriously doubt that there will be much if any gain by using premium fuel. Why?
Because the computer is not programmed to advance the timing when premium fuel is used.
I have seen the knock sensors pull 14 degrees of basic timing out of a '95 Impala SS even when the car was tanked with premium, and it did drop not only the E T but the miles per hour at the end of the quarter mile.
If the sensor(s) in an Azera were detecting detonation when regular is being used, this most likely would not occur if premium were to be used, and performance just might be improved ever so slightly.
Someone will have to run some tests with the proper laptop computer with the correct program installed.
You have misstated the fuel requirement for the Avalon (at least for 2005 - 2007). The Owner's Manual clearly states that regular unleaded fuel should be used.
When the Avalon was introduced in '05 Premium was recommended and HP was 280. In '06 HP was bumped down to 268 and regular was recommended and "for enhanced performance" premium could be used. I tried a few tanks of premium and really couldn't tell a difference in power or MPG.
Maybe if premium is used in the Azera the motor will adjust to it and make more power than if regular is used but for marketing purposes they like to advertise regular gas is recommended. That seems to be what one poster said about Avalon earlier today. Anyone know for sure?
I don't know the validity to this claim, but when I was speaking to a Hyundai rep., he stated that the 264 hp the Azera is rated at is with premium gas in the tank. I'm not sure how much of a drop off there is when using regular...if any at all. The cool air intake on the Azera would seemingly make it perform well with regular as well.
Some engines, a few, are actually designed to run on variable fuel grades meaning they can adjust their timing based on the fuel you put in the tank. If you buy premium fuel, they can advance the timing to take advantage of it to improve power and also possibly improve economy (provided you aren't too tempted to hot rod the car). Likewise, if you go cheap and put regular fuel in the tank, the computer will retard the timing to prevent knock (damage) consequently reducing power (and possibly efficiency).
If you have an engine that is tuned for a specific grade of fuel (the majority of cars), you are best off using that grade. If you use a lower grade, you risk engine knock which could cause damage to your engine. If you use a higher grade of fuel than what is called for, you are simply wasting money as your engine can not make use of the higher octane.
Read your owners manual. It should tell you what fuel grade your engine is designed to use. Unless the manual has been superseded by an update, disregard what all the other "experts" out there are telling you.
1) It's HORSEPOWER that you want to maximize if you're trying to accelerate fastest (not engine torque). Or, if you just must use torque, then you need to use torque at the wheels (engine torque times the gear ratio). Note: this ignores losses
2) This one is copied directly from that last link, and it's important for those who say that torque is more important: "So, those riders who claim to prefer torque over horsepower really mean they prefer engines with power at low rpm."
Read that quote again, and read the articles to understand it.
Again, bottom line: It's horsepower that matters . . and if you think you prefer torque, it simply means that you like your horsepower at lower rpms.
It's all about torque and rpm. Together they allow a calculation resulting in a thing named horsepower. But TORQUE is the mother of all horsepower!
Accurate info in those articles was already stated by me in posts. The inaccurate info in the articles are just more wrong interpretations and imprecise definitions.
Again . . . it's about horsepower. Whether you get that via more torque or more rpm is immaterial. It's the product of the two that matter.
If you maximize torque at the expense of horsepower, you lose. Basic physics.
Obviously, without torque you have no horsepower. But just as obviously, without rpm you have no horsepower. It's the product of rpm and torque that matter, not either one as an individual item.
You cannot maximize torque at the expense of horsepower.
Sure you can . . . lower your rpm to get a higher torque number. Now caculate the horsepower . . is it lower than what you just had? If so, you've just maximized torque at the expense of horsepower. QED
I'm sure the moderator will delete these last few posts . . but I hope he'll at least keep up the post with the links in it . . . if people READ and UNDERSTAND, they'll finally get the idea.
Hahahaha! Did you read what you just typed? "You cannot maximize torque at the expense of horsepower.
Sure you can . . . lower your rpm..."
YOU JUST SAID LOWER YOUR RPM. THAT IS WHAT I JUST TOLD YOU ABOVE!
Without changing some other variable, every time you increase torque, horsepower also increases; and, every time you decrease RPM, horsepower decreases. But, if you decrease RPM, it does not necessarily mean torque will increase when comparing torque at the higher rpm to torque at the lower rpm. Sometimes yes, sometimes no.
(Oh yeah, you are the guy who knows he can blow past 99% of all the Corvettes on the road in your 3.0 liter Ford 500. Not exactly one from whom I want to learn basic physics. So, nevermind.)
" If you have an engine that is tuned for a specific grade of fuel (the majority of cars), you are best off using that grade.
If you use a lower grade, you risk engine knock which could cause damage to your engine. :confuse:
If you use a higher grade of fuel than what is called for, you are simply wasting money as your engine can not make use of the higher octane. "
That middle point is where I differ!
Most late model cars that have high compression ratios and where premium is specified must have a means of protecting that motor from being damaged by the use of a lower grade (octane) fuel.
This is done by the use of knock sensors that 'hear' detonation that is detected before we can hear it (you never will) and the computer 'adjusts' the timing by retarding the ignition timing. When these higher compression ratios are used, this must be done, or someone would wind up destroying his motor because of their use of the damaging lower octane fuel.
When a person uses a lower octane fuel (regular) when the motor is set up for premium, not only will performance be less, but fuel economy also will suffer slightly. I proved it to myself last summer while driving my daughters' 6.0L 345 HP Escalade on a 5K mile trip to the Lake of the Woods country in Canada (Minaki Ontario.) It is reported that the horsepower is dropped to only about 300 hp when regular is used, and in that heavy truck, it is enough difference in performance that can be felt an demonstrated.
Now the question is:
What octane fuel was used to arrive at the Azeras' rated horsepower by the factory? :confuse:
Joe131 and barnstormer64, you need to agree to disagree and move on. If you cannot do that, please take your dispute offline. Please do not post anything else about your disagreement here.
I am not a professional, but in my personal opinion you should use whatever manufacturer recommends. Though all gas from different stations of the same grade is considered the same, since some companies use different additives I get different performance and FE from my car.
Well...the Azera's engine is designed to run on regular, however...with some gas companies putting the cleaning agents in their mid or premium level gases...a tank of either from time to time isn't bad to help clean the fuel system.
Personally, I don't do that...I use a can of Berryman's Chem-tool in my gas tank with each oil change to keep my fuel system clean.
I also don't really think there would be a significant gain in hp if I jumped up to a premium tank of gas either(just my opinion). At least not enough of a difference to warrant a $10 difference in a fill up.
Comments
Give me usable torque anytime! :surprise:
Cases in point:
My 2002 TDI that was chipped and had bigger injectors. There was no need to "drop a gear" for instant acceleration. Why? Because the car was always revving right there in the middle of the fat torque curve.
We estimated the torque to be over 265 ft/lb. Not to bad for a 1.9L four banger.
Same with my '99 E-300 DT. Never had to wind it up to get performance, as it was always right there where the torque
was (1600-3000 RPM.) That is one of the reasons they will get over 30 mpg all day long out on the freeways.
But yes, over most terrain and with other things being equal, the higher horsepower car will be faster. Throw in some inclines or heavy loads; the winner may change.
Say what you want, but if you ain't no way got no torque, you ain't no way got no horsepower.
Diesels or even diesel hybrids will be making a big time comeback (a prediction), however, especially in vehicles this size. Fuel just costs too much for them to be ignored (or legislated against) much longer.
It is not a chicken/egg puzzle at all.
2025 Ram 1500 Laramie 4x4 / 2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic
most people look at 0 - 60 times (prob 40 - 60 too) and couldn't care less what RPM the peak torque is
yes, in those conditions that the RPM is easily and transparently achieved. There is a whole lot of difference in the sound, feel (and in the ease with which the engine spped increases) of a Toyota 2GR V6 at 4 or 5000 rpm, than there is, for example, with a Ford 3 liter or a GM 3.8 pushrod at the same speed.
And if you want the highest top speed with relatively light loads on level ground then go for the high peak horsepower car (with enough transmission gears to make it practical) instead of the one that has a higher peak torque than horsepower.
But no matter what conditions under which a person drives, relatively high levels of usable torque is what all drivers love.
To deny that is being dishonest.
However...goo-goo gobs of torque and no hp will only get you off the line, up steep hills and give you the ability to climb rocks. I mean...sure you can fire off the line, but what about maintaining that speed?
On the flip side, huge doses of hp and low torque will do nothing for getting you off the line, up hills or anything that requires that punch from a downshift. So you'll be a turtle coming off the line, however...once you get speed built up, you'll be able to roll. However, if you need to downshift for more power, you can fuggidabowdit!
So...what is needed, IMO, is a happy medium of torque AND hp. Considering the weight of the vehicle (in this case we're talking cars) and what you might possibly be carrying (a family and luggage)...a good amount of torque would be nice to have on hand. BUT...you also want the hp to keep you rolling once you've got all that going on the road, right?
Unless I'm just missing something here. :confuse:
Torque can exist without horsepower, but horsepower cannot exist without torque
But that is false, even in a car.
To ask what good torque is without horsepower in a car or anywhere else is a different issue.
If you go back and follow the argument...it's clear to understand why I made the statement I made and asked the question I asked.
This whole thing is about hp and torque existing IN a vehicle...DUUUUHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!
Are you THAT pressed to be right that you have to resort to being so literal and so technical? However, the last line in your response is exactly what I was getting at. :P
To be honest...the argument is a dumb arguement as BOTH are necessary when it comes to DRIVING A VEHICLE, regardless of what vehicle it is...it's necessary.
The fact of the matter is, there are cars that could use a nice dose of torque, some could use an infusion of hp and then there are those that could just use a whole new powerplant that would provide better numbers in both torque and hp.
So, to reiterate my previous statment and to add...
In a vehicle, hp and torque MUST co-exist!!! :shades:
Here, I'll do it for you, in your own words: "In a vehicle, when it comes to DRIVING A VEHICLE hp and torque are necessary and just to prove a point MUST co-exist!!!"
However...the original point that I was making is still just as true as when I first stated it as it is when you re-state it for me.
How about we just move along....
Absolutely, in fact the 3.5 continues to amaze me at how fast and smooth it spools up.
2025 Ram 1500 Laramie 4x4 / 2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic
How do I quit having this mis-named forum show up when I view "Toyota Avalon" forums?
Wading through the endless and meaningless blathering is getting to be a pain.
By the way, the Buick torq peak is at a lower RPM ( 3800 versus 4500 RPM ), but I would bet that even at 3800 RPM the Azera still has more than the Buick. Modern technology.
The torque stops here!
:mad: :mad:
van
van
sorry still cannot accept reliability of azera. Also since its all new car there are no 3+ yr old cars.
BTW I always wanted to know is Hyundai warranty fully transferable without any changes?
Guys, if you want to keep posting here, you've got to stay on topic. Take the personal disputes off-line, please.
Am I remembering correctly here?
Has someone claimed Azera was unfairly tested against some of the other cars in here by some car magazines? Maybe Azera was tested with regular gas in the tank, while others had premium?
Anyone know for sure what grade of gas is used to produce the advertised horsepower in these cars? And does anyone know what grade was used in the various published road tests and comparison tests?
I don't know how much,if any, difference, putting premium in the Azera would make or vice versa for the Avalon. If the programming chip doesn't recognize premium and make timing and other engine management changes, then it should be the same as regular. I have read a lot of different 0-60 times on the Azera, from 6.1 to 7.0, and I believe that the Avalon is very little, IF ANY, quicker, even with premium. Now when it comes to MPG, the Avalon is usually the winner (my AZZY tho is now at 24.0 mpg for almost 3,500 miles).
Anyone else have experience with that?
there will be a reduction in performance when regular is used. Why?
The knock sensor(s) will detect pinging even though you will not (and cannot) hear it, and the
engine management computer will retard the timing quite a bit to prevent damage,
and this does reduce not only performance, but also fuel economy. :surprise:
Since the Azera is originally set up to run regular, I seriously doubt
that there will be much if any gain by using premium fuel. Why?
Because the computer is not programmed to advance the timing when premium fuel is used.
I have seen the knock sensors pull 14 degrees of basic timing out of a '95 Impala SS even when the car was tanked with premium, and it did drop not only the E T but the miles per hour at the end of the quarter mile.
If the sensor(s) in an Azera were detecting detonation when regular is being used, this most likely would
not occur if premium were to be used, and performance just might be improved ever so slightly.
Someone will have to run some tests with the proper laptop computer with the correct program installed.
2025 Ram 1500 Laramie 4x4 / 2023 Mercedes EQE 350 4Matic
Anyone know for sure?
Some engines, a few, are actually designed to run on variable fuel grades meaning they can adjust their timing based on the fuel you put in the tank. If you buy premium fuel, they can advance the timing to take advantage of it to improve power and also possibly improve economy (provided you aren't too tempted to hot rod the car). Likewise, if you go cheap and put regular fuel in the tank, the computer will retard the timing to prevent knock (damage) consequently reducing power (and possibly efficiency).
If you have an engine that is tuned for a specific grade of fuel (the majority of cars), you are best off using that grade. If you use a lower grade, you risk engine knock which could cause damage to your engine. If you use a higher grade of fuel than what is called for, you are simply wasting money as your engine can not make use of the higher octane.
Read your owners manual. It should tell you what fuel grade your engine is designed to use. Unless the manual has been superseded by an update, disregard what all the other "experts" out there are telling you.
http://www.allpar.com/eek/hp-vs-torque.html
http://dmiessler.com/study/horsepower/
http://www.calsci.com/motorcycleinfo/Horsepower.html
Bottom lines:
1) It's HORSEPOWER that you want to maximize if you're trying to accelerate fastest (not engine torque). Or, if you just must use torque, then you need to use torque at the wheels (engine torque times the gear ratio). Note: this ignores losses
2) This one is copied directly from that last link, and it's important for those who say that torque is more important: "So, those riders who claim to prefer torque over horsepower really mean they prefer engines with power at low rpm."
Read that quote again, and read the articles to understand it.
Again, bottom line: It's horsepower that matters . . and if you think you prefer torque, it simply means that you like your horsepower at lower rpms.
It's basic physics, folks!
Or is it bologna?
It's all about torque and rpm. Together they allow a calculation resulting in a thing named horsepower. But TORQUE is the mother of all horsepower!
Accurate info in those articles was already stated by me in posts. The inaccurate info in the articles are just more wrong interpretations and imprecise definitions.
Case closed.
If you maximize torque at the expense of horsepower, you lose. Basic physics.
Obviously, without torque you have no horsepower. But just as obviously, without rpm you have no horsepower. It's the product of rpm and torque that matter, not either one as an individual item.
IOW, power rules!
You cannot maximize torque at the expense of horsepower. If torque is increased, horsepower also increases.
(Now, if you were to decrease RPM, then you would end up with less horsepower. But that is not what you said.)
Torque has no RPM component to it. Torque ignores RPM.
It's so simple, yet so misunderstood.
Sure you can . . . lower your rpm to get a higher torque number. Now caculate the horsepower . . is it lower than what you just had? If so, you've just maximized torque at the expense of horsepower. QED
I'm sure the moderator will delete these last few posts . . but I hope he'll at least keep up the post with the links in it . . . if people READ and UNDERSTAND, they'll finally get the idea.
"You cannot maximize torque at the expense of horsepower.
Sure you can . . . lower your rpm..."
YOU JUST SAID LOWER YOUR RPM. THAT IS WHAT I JUST TOLD YOU ABOVE!
Without changing some other variable, every time you increase torque, horsepower also increases; and, every time you decrease RPM, horsepower decreases.
But, if you decrease RPM, it does not necessarily mean torque will increase when comparing torque at the higher rpm to torque at the lower rpm. Sometimes yes, sometimes no.
(Oh yeah, you are the guy who knows he can blow past 99% of all the Corvettes on the road in your 3.0 liter Ford 500. Not exactly one from whom I want to learn basic physics. So, nevermind.)
(the majority of cars), you are best off using that grade.
If you use a lower grade, you risk engine knock which could cause damage to your engine. :confuse:
If you use a higher grade of fuel than what is called for, you are simply
wasting money as your engine can not make use of the higher octane. "
That middle point is where I differ!
Most late model cars that have high compression ratios and where premium is specified must have
a means of protecting that motor from being damaged by the use of a lower grade (octane) fuel.
This is done by the use of knock sensors that 'hear' detonation that is detected before we can
hear it (you never will) and the computer 'adjusts' the timing by retarding the ignition timing.
When these higher compression ratios are used, this must be done, or someone would wind
up destroying his motor because of their use of the damaging lower octane fuel.
When a person uses a lower octane fuel (regular) when the motor is set up for premium,
not only will performance be less, but fuel economy also will suffer slightly.
I proved it to myself last summer while driving my daughters' 6.0L 345 HP Escalade
on a 5K mile trip to the Lake of the Woods country in Canada (Minaki Ontario.)
It is reported that the horsepower is dropped to only about 300 hp when regular is used, and
in that heavy truck, it is enough difference in performance that can be felt an demonstrated.
Now the question is:
What octane fuel was used to arrive at the Azeras' rated horsepower by the factory? :confuse:
Thank you.
Personally, I don't do that...I use a can of Berryman's Chem-tool in my gas tank with each oil change to keep my fuel system clean.
I also don't really think there would be a significant gain in hp if I jumped up to a premium tank of gas either(just my opinion). At least not enough of a difference to warrant a $10 difference in a fill up.