 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Lexus Cars / December 2008Octane
Lexus recommends 91 octane or above for my 2004 ES330. My experience is that I get better mileage (and less hesitation/jerking) using premium gas (93 octane) than using regular gas (87 octane). Virtually every gas station around me offers 3 grades of gas -- 87, 89 and 93 octane. Does anyone here fill up their tank with two-thirds 93 octane and one-third 87 octane to get a "blend" of 91 octane? It seems like a bit of a hassle to save about a dollar a tank, but I was wondering if anyone has tried it and what their experience has been. > Lexus recommends 91 octane or above for my 2004 ES330. My experience is > that I get better mileage (and less hesitation/jerking) using premium gas [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > It seems like a bit of a hassle to save about a dollar a tank, but I was > wondering if anyone has tried it and what their experience has been. I just use the mid-grade fuel and do not have any problems with performance, hesitation, etc. in my LS.  SignatureRay O (correct punctuation to reply) >> Lexus recommends 91 octane or above for my 2004 ES330. My experience >> is that I get better mileage (and less hesitation/jerking) using [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > I just use the mid-grade fuel and do not have any problems with > performance, hesitation, etc. in my LS. I use 87 on my LS - no problems. I tested the fuel economy a while ago with 93 octane and 87. Filled the tank with 03 (after it was almost empty) and recorded the mpg per tank than did the same with 87. Both times driving the same route: a 1000 miles from Delaware to Michigan. The result was 2% or less difference. I am using 87 now. SignatureRead and be merry http://blog.rankarmor.com If the Toyota engine doesn't perform smoothly with 87 then it's a design problem with the engine, not the fuel. Modern cars do adapt without problems, including Porsche. Yes, I agree that you may lose a bit of power and mileage, but it's very slight in typical driving. Go ahead and read the USA Today article and decide for yourself, http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2003-07-30-premiumgas_x.htm "I personally use regular even though my owner's manual says you'll get better performance with premium," says Lewis Gibbs, consulting engineer and 45-year veteran at Chevron oil company. He's chairman of Technical Committee 7 on Fuels, part of the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) Fuels & Lubricants Council. Gibbs knows gas. "My wife runs midgrade (89 octane) in her car, and it's a turbocharged engine" meant for 91-octane premium, he says. > Lexus recommends 91 octane or above for my 2004 ES330. My experience is > that I get better mileage (and less hesitation/jerking) using premium gas [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > It seems like a bit of a hassle to save about a dollar a tank, but I was > wondering if anyone has tried it and what their experience has been. In article <281ff15e-8889-4f35-8639-4576a112cda1@i20g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, > If the Toyota engine doesn't perform smoothly with 87 then it's a > design problem with the engine, not the fuel. Modern cars do adapt > without problems, including Porsche. Yes, I agree that you may lose a > bit of power and mileage, but it's very slight in typical driving. It's all about the COST PER MILE, people. Don't worry about the mileage in and of itself. It's the cost per mile to fuel the car. Not all fuel is the same. You'd see a difference between, say, Shell gas and grocery store gas, all at 87 octane. And the ONLY way to measure it decently is to run several tanks of each gas and measure it carefully. > In article > <281ff15e-8889-4f35-8639-4576a112cda1@i20g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > And the ONLY way to measure it decently is to run several tanks of each > gas and measure it carefully. Good idea in theory. However, it's impossible to drive exactly the same on two different tanks of gas. Anyone who thinks they can do that and use the data to gage small differences in mileage is kidding themselves. Also, it's not only about cost. It's about performance, too. > > And the ONLY way to measure it decently is to run several tanks of each > > gas and measure it carefully. > > Good idea in theory. However, it's impossible to drive exactly the same on > two different tanks of gas. But if you do each gas over several tanks, it all comes out in the wash. Overall, over a couple thousand miles per type of gas, your driving is generally all the same. > Also, it's not only about cost. It's about performance, too. And you'll discover that, too. >> >> If the Toyota engine doesn't perform smoothly with 87 then it's a >> >> design problem with the engine, not the fuel. Modern cars do adapt [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > Overall, over a couple thousand miles per type of gas, your driving is > generally all the same. That's about as scientific as astrology. It would be foolish to rely on such data. >> Also, it's not only about cost. It's about performance, too. > > And you'll discover that, too. Apparently you haven't discovered it yet. That's why, in response to "you may lose a bit of power and mileage," you said "It's all about the COST PER MILE, people" (see above, you know, the part you deleted). > > But if you do each gas over several tanks, it all comes out in the wash. > > Overall, over a couple thousand miles per type of gas, your driving is > > generally all the same. > > That's about as scientific as astrology. It would be foolish to rely on > such data. To the thousandths place, sure. But try it--you'll be surprised at the information you can glean. >> > But if you do each gas over several tanks, it all comes out in the >> > wash. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > But try it--you'll be surprised at the information you can glean. Nonsense. Astrologists make the same claim. > >> Also, it's not only about cost. It's about performance, too. > > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > may lose a bit of power and mileage," you said "It's all about the COST PER > MILE, people" (see above, you know, the part you deleted). It's not about the MILEAGE, it's about the COST PER MILE. People think "oooo, I'm getting 2mpg better" then they never factor in the cost of getting that extra 2mpg. Performance is a completely different, and subjective, matter. >> >> Also, it's not only about cost. It's about performance, too. >> > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > "oooo, I'm getting 2mpg better" then they never factor in the cost of > getting that extra 2mpg. I taught you well, I see. > Performance is a completely different, and subjective, matter. > > It's not about the MILEAGE, it's about the COST PER MILE. People think > > "oooo, I'm getting 2mpg better" then they never factor in the cost of > > getting that extra 2mpg. > > I taught you well, I see. You didn't teach me sh.t. >> > It's not about the MILEAGE, it's about the COST PER MILE. People think >> > "oooo, I'm getting 2mpg better" then they never factor in the cost of [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > You didn't teach me sh.t. No, you're a self-taught sh.t. > >> > It's not about the MILEAGE, it's about the COST PER MILE. People think > >> > "oooo, I'm getting 2mpg better" then they never factor in the cost of [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > No, you're a self-taught sh.t. hehehehe Keep going, asswipe, for the world to see. >> >> > It's not about the MILEAGE, it's about the COST PER MILE. People >> >> > think [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > hehehehe Keep going, asswipe, for the world to see. Haven't looked the mirror lately, have you? > >> >> > It's not about the MILEAGE, it's about the COST PER MILE. People > >> >> > think [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Haven't looked the mirror lately, have you? It's ALL about the cost per mile. >> >> >> > It's not about the MILEAGE, it's about the COST PER MILE. People >> >> >> > think [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > It's ALL about the cost per mile. It's also about performance. And yours is very predictable. > > It's ALL about the cost per mile. > > It's also about performance. And yours is very predictable. Your wife complained to me just last night about your performance. >> > It's ALL about the cost per mile. >> >> It's also about performance. And yours is very predictable. > > Your wife complained to me just last night about your performance. Like I said, very predictable. > > Your wife complained to me just last night about your performance. > > Like I said, very predictable. That you can't get it up? Absolutely. >> > Your wife complained to me just last night about your performance. >> >> Like I said, very predictable. > > That you can't get it up? Absolutely. hehehehe Keep going, asswipe, for the world to see. > >> > Your wife complained to me just last night about your performance. > >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > hehehehe Keep going, asswipe, for the world to see. It's ALL about the cost per.....asswipe. David -- stop having a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent. It's just not fair! (but it IS amusing). GIga >> >> > Your wife complained to me just last night about your performance. >> >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > It's ALL about the cost per.....asswipe. The funny thing is I could keep this moron going on in perpertuity if I wanted. > David -- stop having a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent. It's just > not fair! (but it IS amusing). [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >> >> It's ALL about the cost per.....asswipe. |
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.