 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Lexus Cars / May 2006gas questions for LS430
Do any Lexus cars take E85 gas? What is the lowest octain that will work in Lexus cars? Thanks. > Do any Lexus cars take E85 gas? Not yet. > What is the lowest octain that will work in Lexus cars? 87  SignatureRay O (correct punctuation to reply) > Do any Lexus cars take E85 gas? > > What is the lowest octain that will work in Lexus cars? > > Thanks. You can use regular (87 octane), but the engine anti-knock sensor will retard the timing to avoid detonation (pinging) which would be hard on the pistons and connecting rods. This will result in lower gas mileage, and in fact will cost you more than using the recommended octane level, as the reduction in mileage is greater than the increase in gasoline cost. Using gas rated lower than 87 will also work --I've never seen any published limit, but performance will really suffer, and you will probably void your warranty. On Fri, 19 May 2006 17:45:17 -0400, Jay Somerset <<jay-1941-@hotmail.com>> graced this newsgroup with: >> Do any Lexus cars take E85 gas? >> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >published limit, but performance will really suffer, and you will probably >void your warranty. oddly enough, I get the same lousy mpg (18.5) on my 02 LS430 regardless of the octane level I fill the car with. >Do any Lexus cars take E85 gas? > >What is the lowest octain that will work in Lexus cars? Premium is recommended. Why would someone buy a Lexus and be cheap on the fuel? For those people, I would recommend the Avalon. >Thanks. > Premium is recommended. Why would someone buy a Lexus and be cheap on > the fuel? Ummmmm....maybe because the "premium" recommendation isn't based on an engineering requirement but instead on a marketing perception? It's legitimate to ask if the engine and its management system is designed around premium fuel, or if it's just something that marketing came up with to try to distinguish the brand. It's not a matter of being "cheap" on fuel. It's a matter of using the fuel that the engine and its management system were designed for--not the fuel that the marketing people want to convince their buyers should use. >> Premium is recommended. Why would someone buy a Lexus and be cheap on >> the fuel? [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >the fuel that the marketing people want to convince their buyers should >use. Toyota does not market premium fuel. They market the cars that they produce. They engineered the engine with the high octane. The false marketing you're speeking of is something totally different. Oil companies do market "superior" cleaning with their premium fuels and never indicate anywhere that the same detergent is on the 87 octane fuel. In that regards, noone will benefit from putting premium fuel on a car designed with 87 octane in mind. When a vehicle is specifically engineered for premium fuel and recommends it, going against that is being merely cheap. Toyota knows this. That's why they design certain engines with that in mind. The Camry is an example. > >It's not a matter of being "cheap" on fuel. It's a matter of using the > >fuel that the engine and its management system were designed for--not [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Toyota does not market premium fuel. They market the cars that they > produce. They engineered the engine with the high octane. With Lexus, they market a "lifestyle experience". Absolutely they would tell their customers that the car requires "premium" gas. We all know there's nothing "premium" about the gas, but the gas companies have spent years saying there is and people are buying into it. Witness all the people who come to places like this wanting the "best" for their Hyundai, for example, and tell the world how they therefore use "premium" gas. Lexus marketing wouldn't dare let their customers think there's anything "regular" about the Lexus auto. So it's a legitimate question to ask. "Premium" fuel isn't premium at all; it merely has more anti-knock properties. So, is the ES model that calls for "premium" fuel any different than the Camry model, with the same engine, that *doesn't* call for "premium" fuel? Or is the call for "premium" fuel simply a marketing gag? I work for a very large company in which it's clear that marketing has a very large say in how things are done. Technically, there's no reason why something can't be done--but we don't do it, and it's a disadvantage to our customers, and we create that disadvantage PURELY for marketing reasons and nothing else. It's not uncommon at all. > When a vehicle is specifically engineered for premium fuel and > recommends it, going against that is being merely cheap. Yep. But searching for the truth behind the recommendation for "premium" fuel isn't being cheap; it's being realistic. > > >It's not a matter of being "cheap" on fuel. It's a matter of using the > > >fuel that the engine and its management system were designed for--not [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > Yep. But searching for the truth behind the recommendation for > "premium" fuel isn't being cheap; it's being realistic. Lexus does not specify premium fuel to increase the "feeling of luxury" in being a Lexus owner. Iy probably DOES engineeer the cars to use premium fuel, as it (rightly) assumes that lexus owners can easily afford it, and won't object to having to pay the extra cost. Is isn't "marketing hype", but it my well be good "marketing strategy". > Lexus does not specify premium fuel to increase the "feeling of luxury" in > being a Lexus owner. Iy probably DOES engineeer the cars to use premium > fuel, as it (rightly) assumes that lexus owners can easily afford it, and > won't object to having to pay the extra cost. I see a lot of "probably" in there; it sounds like you WANT to believe the "premium" hype put onto higher octane fuels. Of *course* the marketing people are creating an image, that of a "feeling of luxury"--and part of that is connecting with the gas marketing of "premium" gas (which isn't premium at all). It makes sense to ask why the ES would ask for premium fuel when the same engine used in the Camry doesn't. Hmmmm...........nah, that would have *nothing* to do with a "lexus=premium, toyota=regular" marketing push from Toyota, would it??? Nah, that would be cynical....<snort> > It makes sense to ask why the ES would ask for premium fuel when the > same engine used in the Camry doesn't. Hmmmm...........nah, that would > have *nothing* to do with a "lexus=premium, toyota=regular" marketing > push from Toyota, would it??? Nah, that would be cynical....<snort> The 3.3 liter 3MZ-FE V6 is used in both vehicles, but as I understand it Toyota tests the Camry with regular and the Lexus with premium, thus the engines have diffferent published power output and fuel requirements. My guess is that if you ran the Camry on premium you'd get the advantage of the additional power, and vice-versa. 2005 ES330 Engine 218 hp @ 5600 rpm / 236 lb.-ft @ 3600 rpm 2006 Camry V6 210 hp @ 5600 rpm / 220 lb.-ft @ 3600 rpm > The 3.3 liter 3MZ-FE V6 is used in both vehicles, but as I understand it > Toyota tests the Camry with regular and the Lexus with premium, thus the > engines have diffferent published power output and fuel requirements. That doesn't make any sense. They "test" it with only one fuel, therefore that's what they put in the owner's manual? The engine management computer has an air/fuel map in it, a map which was designed by engineers. THAT'S a very, very large determinant; in fact, the fuel/air map is designed around certain parameters, the octane level being one of them. So the question is, are the maps the same for both engines, or did Lexus specifically use a higher octane gas when designing its engine management? It's still a legitimate question, one which has never been answered. >> The 3.3 liter 3MZ-FE V6 is used in both vehicles, but as I understand it >> Toyota tests the Camry with regular and the Lexus with premium, thus the [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > >It's still a legitimate question, one which has never been answered. It goes to show what you really know versus what you assume is correct. There is a regulation on horsepower ratings. It must be tested with the fuel that is recommended by the manufacturer. This is even witnessed by a third party to ensure no bias. So Lexus would have to test the ES with premium fuel while the Camry would have to be tested with regular fuel. I will answer your question. Toyota engineers the vehicle with the higher octane they have in Japan. That is why their engines are high compression engines. All one has to do is merely compare it to its competitors engines. Don't take my word for it, do your own research. To ensure that in can run at lower octane, they installed knock sensors to retard timing. This is to the detriment of power. Since the engine has to work harder, the effects would be more apparent in the long term. These are facts and not opinions for those that truly know the automotive industry. Answer this: You exclaim that Lexus markets a "lifestyle experience." Where is it that premium fuel is part of that? What proof do you have? > >It's still a legitimate question, one which has never been answered. > > It goes to show what you really know versus what you assume is > correct. There is a regulation on horsepower ratings. It must be > tested with the fuel that is recommended by the manufacturer. Ummmmm......OK......so? > So Lexus would > have to test the ES with premium fuel while the Camry would have to be > tested with regular fuel. And that has what to do with what the engine's management system was designed for? > Toyota engineers the vehicle with the > higher octane they have in Japan. That is why their engines are high > compression engines. All one has to do is merely compare it to its > competitors engines. Don't take my word for it, do your own research. So what you're saying is that the Camry and the ES, which use the same engine, are both designed for higher octane fuel. But Toyota recommends regular in the Camry, while they recommend higher octane fuel in the ES. Does that make sense? OK, so then you go on to say: > To ensure that in can run at lower octane, they installed knock > sensors to retard timing. This is to the detriment of power. Since > the engine has to work harder, the effects would be more apparent in > the long term. Which makes no sense whatsoever with respect to documenting lower octane fuel in the Camry and higher octane fuel in the ES. Which leads me back to my original proposition: different fuel recommendations for the same engine is a marketing move, pure and simple. > Answer this: You exclaim that Lexus markets a "lifestyle experience." > Where is it that premium fuel is part of that? "Premium" cars would NEVER be marketed to use something so mundane as a "non-premium" fuel. It all has to do with tying in to the fuel marketing crap of higher octane somehow being a "premium" fuel. >> >It's still a legitimate question, one which has never been answered. >> [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > And that has what to do with what the engine's management system was > designed for? The engine management system has a lot to do with fuel quality and octane. Some of the variables controlled by the electronic control unit (ECU) include base ignition timing, spark advance, and spark retard in the event knock is detected, injector timing, and injector duration. >> Toyota engineers the vehicle with the >> higher octane they have in Japan. That is why their engines are high [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > But Toyota recommends regular in the Camry, while they recommend higher > octane fuel in the ES. Does that make sense? Even when the same engine designation is used, Toyota/Lexus does have variations among applications. For example, the 3.5 liter engine has direct injection in the IS and conventional in the Avalon. > OK, so then you go on to say: > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Which makes no sense whatsoever with respect to documenting lower octane > fuel in the Camry and higher octane fuel in the ES. The ECU controls base ignition timing. In an engine designed to use higher octane fuel, base ignition timing will be more advanced to take advantage of the higher octane while one designed for lower octane fuel will have less advanced base ignition timing and so it would not take advantage of premium fuel. > Which leads me back to my original proposition: different fuel > recommendations for the same engine is a marketing move, pure and simple. In the case of the 3.3 liter engines used in the Camry and ES, that statement would be true if both cars used the same part number for ECU's and long blocks. In the case of the OP's question about the 4.3 liter engine used in the LS, there is no application in Toyotas sold in the U.S. so there is no direct comparison. >> Answer this: You exclaim that Lexus markets a "lifestyle experience." >> Where is it that premium fuel is part of that? > > "Premium" cars would NEVER be marketed to use something so mundane as a > "non-premium" fuel. It all has to do with tying in to the fuel > marketing crap of higher octane somehow being a "premium" fuel. SignatureRay O (correct punctuation to reply) >> >It's still a legitimate question, one which has never been answered. >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >Ummmmm......OK......so? Since I have to spell things out for you: Lexus has more power because it has to use premium fuel as recommended. >> So Lexus would >> have to test the ES with premium fuel while the Camry would have to be >> tested with regular fuel. > >And that has what to do with what the engine's management system was >designed for? See the response above. >> Toyota engineers the vehicle with the >> higher octane they have in Japan. That is why their engines are high [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >So what you're saying is that the Camry and the ES, which use the same >engine, are both designed for higher octane fuel. They are not the same engine. They are nearly the same but not exactly the same. For example, Lexus tunes their engines more for 91 octane as their primary use. Both engines will have more power with higher octane. >But Toyota recommends regular in the Camry, while they recommend higher >octane fuel in the ES. Does that make sense? Yes it makes sense. Toyota knows that Camry buyers have a tighter budget so they tuned the engine to use 87 octane primarily but engineered it to take advantage of premium fuel. Lexus engineers know the fuel costs isn't as big a factor to their clients. >OK, so then you go on to say: > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >Which makes no sense whatsoever with respect to documenting lower octane >fuel in the Camry and higher octane fuel in the ES. See the responses above. >Which leads me back to my original proposition: different fuel >recommendations for the same engine is a marketing move, pure and simple. Toyota does not benefit from oil company profits. They could care less. They care about their cars and their needs. >> Answer this: You exclaim that Lexus markets a "lifestyle experience." >> Where is it that premium fuel is part of that? > >"Premium" cars would NEVER be marketed to use something so mundane as a >"non-premium" fuel. It all has to do with tying in to the fuel >marketing crap of higher octane somehow being a "premium" fuel. Still no proof...just more biased conjecture. Take this for example, Toyota runs a Celebrity race in California annually. They don't modify the internals of the engines. To give them more power, they use 108 octane fuel on the Celica's the used to use. This is the exact same engine that they use to sell at the dealers. Since you need it spelled out, the engines are built to take advantage of higher octane fuel right from the showroom floor. > Since I have to spell things out for you: Lexus has more power > because it has to use premium fuel as recommended. Let's go back to what you read of your owner's manual: Lexus says use 87 octane fuel. For "more performance" (a vague statement with no details to back up what that means) use 91 octane. What fuel do you call "premium"? You're putting 93 octane in your tank--even though Lexus doesn't say to under ANY conditions, even their vague "better performance" condition. So you're one of those who think that "premium fuel equals more power". It doesn't. But the fuel companies are happy to have you think that. You also claimed engine damage when using the lower octane fuel, yet your owner's manual doesn't go anywhere near that. Face it--you don't know what your doing or why. You just want to believe that higher octane equals more power (it doesn't), and you like the idea of spending more money for the sake of spending more money. It makes you feel rich. > like the idea of spending more money for the sake of spending more money. > It > makes you feel rich. Actually it is probably more like telling people NOT to put aluminum foil in the Microwave because it is easier to just say (don't) do it, rather than try to explain under what conditions it is okay ... than to expect them to understand/think. ... it is all part of catering to the lowest common denominator. >> Since I have to spell things out for you: Lexus has more power >> because it has to use premium fuel as recommended. [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >the idea of spending more money for the sake of spending more money. It >makes you feel rich. to add fuel to the fire (pun intended), here's a pretty good article on what octane level does to an engine and it's performance. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octane_rating basically, yes.higher octane *will* increase horsepower, but only at the maximum output. In normal driving conditions, the difference between lower and high octane is minimal. Additionally, putting a higher octane rating than the maximum recommended by the manufacturer has little or no effect. > Additionally, putting a > higher octane rating than the maximum recommended by the manufacturer > has little or no effect. It actually has the effect of damaging the engine. > > Additionally, putting a > > higher octane rating than the maximum recommended by the manufacturer > > has little or no effect. > > It actually has the effect of damaging the engine. And where, pray tell, is your evidence for this somewhat unqualified opinion? You could hear a pin drop when the almighty Jay Somerset <<jay-1941-@hotmail.com>> addressed his adoring fans with these immortal words: >> > Additionally, putting a >> > higher octane rating than the maximum recommended by the manufacturer [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >And where, pray tell, is your evidence for this somewhat unqualified >opinion? I can't speak for Elmo but I've read that putting high octane fuel in an engine that doesn't require high octane will cause excessive carbon buildup which, over time, will build up enough carbon on the piston heads to eventually *require* higher octane fuel. >You could hear a pin drop when the almighty Jay Somerset ><<jay-1941-@hotmail.com>> addressed his adoring fans with these [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >buildup which, over time, will build up enough carbon on the piston >heads to eventually *require* higher octane fuel. Carbon buildup is caused by incomplete burns. This may be caused by a poor spark or a mixture that's too rich. The higher octane doesn't cause carbon buildup. That's probably a myth when someone thinks that the premium fuel has more "gasoline" mixture than standard unleaded. > >I can't speak for Elmo but I've read that putting high octane fuel in > >an engine that doesn't require high octane will cause excessive carbon > >buildup which, over time, will build up enough carbon on the piston > >heads to eventually *require* higher octane fuel. > > Carbon buildup is caused by incomplete burns. Hmmmm....why would the gas not burn completely...??? What might cause that tendency? > The higher octane doesn't > cause carbon buildup. The higher octane fuel is...let's see....think now....more difficult to ignite. That's what octane rating is. Hmmmm....... You know, you really, really want to believe that spending more money makes you better, happier, wealthy. So you do so, unnecessarily. You could hear a pin drop when the almighty "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> addressed his adoring fans with these immortal words: >> >I can't speak for Elmo but I've read that putting high octane fuel in >> >an engine that doesn't require high octane will cause excessive carbon [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >You know, you really, really want to believe that spending more money >makes you better, happier, wealthy. So you do so, unnecessarily. One way to determine once and for all if these engines require higher octane is merely to find out what the compression ratio is. If the engines are, like most modern engines, low compression, high octane fuel has no effect except in the wallet and wasted fuel for inefficient combustion. >> >I can't speak for Elmo but I've read that putting high octane fuel in >> >an engine that doesn't require high octane will cause excessive carbon [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >Hmmmm....why would the gas not burn completely...??? What might cause >that tendency? I did indicate the cause of this. Why did you leave it out? It would seem you need assistance in your reading comprehension. >> The higher octane doesn't >> cause carbon buildup. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >Hmmmm....... People that know about chemistry would think that you're retarted. The higher octane simply means that it has less tendency to pre-ignite (or ping in layman's terms). That doesn't necessarily mean more difficult to ignite. >You know, you really, really want to believe that spending more money >makes you better, happier, wealthy. So you do so, unnecessarily. Wrong again. Would you like to go for double jeopardy where the points can really double? > >The higher octane fuel is...let's see....think now....more difficult to > >ignite. That's what octane rating is. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > (or ping in layman's terms). That doesn't necessarily mean more > difficult to ignite. Did you really say that? >> Since I have to spell things out for you: Lexus has more power >> because it has to use premium fuel as recommended. [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] >the idea of spending more money for the sake of spending more money. It >makes you feel rich. You still offer no proof. You're one of those that merely speculates. You have no expertise on the subject. Even other responders have explained this to you yet to resist. You're beset with your own ignorance. Just don't pass it along perniciously to others like a virus.. > >Face it--you don't know what your doing or why. You just want to > >believe that higher octane equals more power (it doesn't), and you like > >the idea of spending more money for the sake of spending more money. It > >makes you feel rich. > > You still offer no proof. The owner's manual, which you quoted, is clear that the requirement is 87 octane. Your stand, which you've made clear, is that you prefer to put higher octane fuel--that is, more expensive fuel--in your tank. The math is easy. And you have yet to back up or document what Toyota's vague "better performance" statement actually means. >> >Face it--you don't know what your doing or why. You just want to >> >believe that higher octane equals more power (it doesn't), and you like [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >And you have yet to back up or document what Toyota's vague "better >performance" statement actually means. Now who's avoiding answering the question? What proof do you have that Toyota is doing this more marketing reasons? Answer that. > >And you have yet to back up or document what Toyota's vague "better > >performance" statement actually means. > > Now who's avoiding answering the question? What proof do you have > that Toyota is doing this more marketing reasons? Answer that. You still haven't answered the question on what "better performance" means. That means you don't know. You're just wasting money to waste money, to show the world that you can "afford" it. Yer an idiot. > You still haven't answered the question on what > "better performance" means. Nonsense. This question has been answered over and over again. Better performance means more mpg, which may, in fact, partially or even fully offset the additional cost of higher octane fuel. Potentially, it also means faster acceleration and longer engine life. A lot of claims have been made here on both sides of the argument. And many requests for "proof" have been made on both sides, but no proof has been submitted either way. > You're just wasting money... Let's keep things in perspective here. We're talking about $100 per year, which may, in fact, be partially or even fully offset by the additional cost of higher octane fuel. > ...to waste money, to show the world that you can "afford" it. Elmo, is it possible for you to disagree without being disagreeable? > Yer an idiot. This comment says more about the poster than anything else. There are valid ideas on both sides of this argument. I, for one, would be interested in more knowledge and less kindergarten playground attacks. > > You still haven't answered the question on what > > "better performance" means. > > Nonsense. This question has been answered over and over again. It has? Can you post a reference to the answer? Better performance could mean quicker trap times. Or it could mean nothing more than the engine idles more smoothly when the AC compressor kicks in. So please post a reference to where Lexus defines the term "better performance". > Better performance means more mpg Please post a reference to where Lexus defines "better performance" as meaning "more mpg". > There are valid ideas on both sides of this argument. I, for one, would > be interested in more knowledge As would I. So please post a reference to where Lexus defines the term "better performance". > So please post a reference to where Lexus defines > the term "better performance". When did anyone claim that Lexus made any such statement? That's not the issue and you know it. Who cares if Lexus made any such statement or not? The question is whether higher octane fuel increases mpg enough to justify the relatively small increase in cost. And whether or not higher octane fuel yields more power and longevity. I made it very clear from my last post that I don't profess to know the answer to these questions. How did you miss that? > Please post a reference to where Lexus defines "better performance" as > meaning "more mpg". There you go again. > > There are valid ideas on both sides of this argument. I, for one, > > would be interested in more knowledge > > As would I. So please post a reference to where Lexus defines the term > "better performance". And again. > > So please post a reference to where Lexus defines > > the term "better performance". > > When did anyone claim that Lexus made any such statement? That's my point. Lexus has done nothing but say "use 87 octane, or, for better performance, use higher octane". That's in their owner's manual. They do NOT define what they mean by "better performance". Yet you and others come in here and use that vague term as the end of the discussion. You have no idea what it means, because Lexus hasn't told anyone, but you're hanging onto it very tightly. If they don't define it in a clear, concise, engineering-oriented way, then it's just marketing fluff designed to make you feel better. > The question is whether higher octane fuel increases mpg enough to > justify the relatively small increase in cost. That's actually a separate question, unrelated to Viperkiller's owner's manual statement of "better performance" and what rationale he's using to defend his use of higher octane fuel--in other words, what does "better performance" mean. > > Please post a reference to where Lexus defines "better performance" as > > meaning "more mpg". > > There you go again. See above. Viperkiller has come in here and quoted his owner's manual, and it makes reference only to some vague and mystical "better performance" that one will get by using higher octane fuel (or, as Viperkiller insists on calling it, "premium"). >> >It's not a matter of being "cheap" on fuel. It's a matter of using the >> >fuel that the engine and its management system were designed for--not [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >With Lexus, they market a "lifestyle experience". Absolutely they would >tell their customers that the car requires "premium" gas. but they don't tell owners of all models to use premium >We all know there's nothing "premium" about the gas, but the gas >companies have spent years saying there is and people are buying into >it. Witness all the people who come to places like this wanting the >"best" for their Hyundai, for example, and tell the world how they >therefore use "premium" gas. there certainly is a difference, the question is that with the engines in use today that are equipped with anti knock sensors and computers that adjust the spark and combustion levels is premium always needed, as far as I am concerned the answer is no. >Lexus marketing wouldn't dare let their customers think there's anything >"regular" about the Lexus auto. crapola, maybe some people with ego issues buy into that crap but most people who are secure with they way they are don't fall into an image trap. Balance of nonsense snipped WARNING: NEVER USE 1800FLOWERS.COM They can't deliver as promised > >Lexus marketing wouldn't dare let their customers think there's anything > >"regular" about the Lexus auto. > > crapola, maybe some people with ego issues buy into that crap but most > people who are secure with they way they are don't fall into an image > trap. Right. Exactly. Well said. The Lexus build quality is (or at least was) unchallenged. But the stuff surrounding it is pure smoke and mirrors. Of *course* they want you to think you bought a "premium" car, so they surround it with "premium" smoke and mirrors. Gas? "Use premium" (even though the "premium" fuel is nothing more than higher octane and there's nothing "premium" about it). Service? Come to our "premium" service department where, for a mere $150, you can have your oil changed while you sit on our leather couch and watch our 80" plasma TV and drink our coffee. The base engineering is very good, the marketing stuff is just smoke and mirrors. And it's legitimate to ask: where is the line between base engineering and marketing? Did the engineers change the hardware and engine management computer on the ES, for example, to make it sufficient different from the Camry that it requires a higher octane fuel? Or is that part of the marketing smoke and mirrors? All legitimate questions. Those that just buy into it blindly are chumps. >> >Lexus marketing wouldn't dare let their customers think there's anything >> >"regular" about the Lexus auto. [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] >All legitimate questions. Those that just buy into it blindly are >chumps. it just like they used to say, you don't sell the steak, you sell the sizzle WARNING: NEVER USE 1800FLOWERS.COM They can't deliver as promised >there certainly is a difference, the question is that with the engines >in use today that are equipped with anti knock sensors and computers >that adjust the spark and combustion levels is premium always needed, >as far as I am concerned the answer is no. Most ASE-certified mechanics will (correctly) tell you that if your vehicle runs fine on a lower octane fuel that to use a higher octane fuel is wasteful extravagance. However, it is a documented fact that premium fuel will, under sustained highway driving conditions, result in better MPG for most vehicles, not just the Lexus LS. Whether the improvement in fuel economy justifies what is currently a 20¢ per gallon difference is unclear. At $3 a gallon you would need to achieve at least 15% improvement in fuel economy for it to be worth the extra money. Translation: at 20 mpg (assuming 87 octane regular) you would need to achieve 23 mpg or greater to cost-justify the higher octane fuel. Stated another way, if you're achieving 20 mpg today with premium, a drop to 17.4 mpg with regular would be economically a 'push'. Finally, don't confuse the difference between regular and premium grades of fuel with the difference between brand names and the off-brand stuff you find at Krogers & WalMart. IMO you will generally be well-advised to stay with name-brands. > Whether the improvement in fuel economy justifies what is currently a > 20¢ per gallon difference is unclear.At $3 a gallon you would need to > achieve at least 15% improvement in fuel economy for it to be worth > the extra money. Incorrect. The required improvement in fuel economy is 6.7% ($0.20/$3.00) > Translation: at 20 mpg (assuming 87 octane regular) you would need > to achieve 23 mpg or greater to cost-justify the higher octane fuel. Same error. An mpg of 21.3 (106.7% of 20 mpg) would cost-justify premium fuel. > However, it is a documented fact that premium fuel will, under sustained > highway driving conditions, result in better MPG for most vehicles, you wanna show us that "document", or will you just spout and leave? >> However, it is a documented fact that premium fuel will, under sustained >> highway driving conditions, result in better MPG for most vehicles, >you wanna show us that "document", or will you just spout and leave? My recollection is the higher octane fuel provides an incrementally longer burn. If true it would seem logical that you could expect a very slight improvement in mpg from using the higher octane blend. > >> However, it is a documented fact that premium fuel will, under sustained > >> highway driving conditions, result in better MPG for most vehicles, [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > burn. If true it would seem logical that you could expect a very slight > improvement in mpg from using the higher octane blend. It's also harder to burn--which is the nature of its anti-knock properties. Which leads to lower mileage in cars that are not designed SPECIFICALLY to use that octane level of fuel. > Finally, don't confuse the difference between regular and premium grades > of fuel There is no "premium grade of fuel". That's a MARKETING CONSTRUCT created by the oil companies. There is octane level--period. >>> Premium is recommended. Why would someone buy a Lexus and be cheap on >>> the fuel? Well if you push the performance limits of the automobile, premium IS a must ... under less demanding conditions, it is more likely a waste. The US Marketing machine not only condones waste ... it encourages it! I challenge ANY automobile used exclusively for local runs to perform any differently on different formulations... On the highway you ARE most likely to see benefits (to some degree). The gasoline combustion engine is just NOT all that efficient. Modern engines use their computer and knock detectors to provide optimum performance with the fuel used. Various factors determine performance, Load on engine, octane of fuel, and programing. It's a shame that the name "premium" was used when people started using high octane fuel. Using a higher octane fuel than what the engineers call for is a waste of money. If a lower octane is used, the spark is retarded only under conditions that cause pinging or knocking. As soon as condtions change the timing goes back to normal. The engine doesn't permanantly reprogram itself for low octane. > Do any Lexus cars take E85 gas? > > What is the lowest octain that will work in Lexus cars? > > Thanks. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.