Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
HomeAnnouncements
Discussion Groups
By Brand
BMWChevroletDodgeFordGMHondaLexusMercedes-BenzNissanPeugeotToyotaVolkswagenOther Brands
By Topic
4x4 CarsRVsDrivingMaintenance & RepairCar AudioCollectible Cars
Country Specific
Australian ForumsUK Forums
ArticlesAuto InsuranceBuyingCars & TechnologyMaintenanceMiscellaneousSafety
DMV Resources
Related Topics
MotorcyclesBoatsMore Topics ...

Car Forum / Saab Cars / March 2005

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Saab 9-3: What octane to tank?

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Happy - 28 Feb 2005 23:04 GMT
I have tried 87, 89, 92 with no noticable difference, although I suspect to
feel a more little vibration when idling on 87.

The manual recommends 92, but says it can run lower grade as well.

The only reason why I will tank 92 would be if 87 would be bad for the
engine or shorten its lifetime. If I were to reason about this, I would
actually think that 87 causes lower heat and less violent explosions,
actually prolonging the lifetime. But I suspect it doesn't work that way :-)

Any recommendation, experience?

What do you use?
Walt Kienzle - 02 Mar 2005 03:21 GMT
There is a line of thought that says the lower octane fuel is more volatile
and would cause more violent explosions.  Higher octane fuel is more
resistant to ignition, causing less violent explosions, but more
importantly, fewer uncontrolled explosions that would result in
pinking/pinging.  All that useless trivia aside, just about any Saab I can
think of that has been made in the past 10 years has a knock sensor that
adjusts for octane variations.  The only difference you should notice with
lower octane is reduced performance (because of retarded ignition timing to
accommodate the lower octane) and reduced fuel economy (for the same
reason).  The octane recommendation in the manual provides the spirited
performance Saab owners expect and, because the recommendation comes from
the factory, is the fuel used to calculate fuel economy during EPA tests in
the US.

The only other consideration is that high octane fuels tend to have a better
additive package to help ensure that the fuel system and fuel injectors (in
particular) remain clean.  Not all brands of fuel hold to the same standard,
but all must meet a basic minimum in all grades of gasoline/petrol that they
sell (in the US.  I can't speak to other regions).  There are many factors
that weigh in on prolonging or reducing lifetime.  Given that a knock sensor
controls the spark, in my opinion the grade of fuel used comes in rather low
in importance on the list.

Walt Kienzle
1991 9000T

>I have tried 87, 89, 92 with no noticable difference, although I suspect to
> feel a more little vibration when idling on 87.
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
>
> What do you use?
R. Frist - 03 Mar 2005 20:36 GMT
Just a thought:  Is it not true that in order for the knock sensor to
work it must sense a knock?  If so, it follows that running lower
octane in a turbo must cause a little more wear and tear than high
octane fuel.  I suppose it depends on how often the knock sensor lets
the ignition and boost advance until another knock is detected.

Another consideration may be carbon deposits.  A friend of mine has a
Cadillac with signs "Use only premium fuel" all over it.   He claims
that using premium is a waste and has only used 87 for the last 10,000
miles.  He now complains that the car keeps running on roughly after
turning off the ignition.   Granted, the Cadillac is not a turbo and
has a higher compression ratio then turbo engines at atmospheric
pressure.  Maybe this is not a problem with turbo engines.   Does
anyone have any data?
Dave Hinz - 03 Mar 2005 21:14 GMT
> Just a thought:  Is it not true that in order for the knock sensor to
> work it must sense a knock?  If so, it follows that running lower
> octane in a turbo must cause a little more wear and tear than high
> octane fuel.  I suppose it depends on how often the knock sensor lets
> the ignition and boost advance until another knock is detected.

Makes sense, but no.  No matter where the knock point is, it'll find
it and set ignition and boost just short of there.

> Another consideration may be carbon deposits.  A friend of mine has a
> Cadillac with signs "Use only premium fuel" all over it.   He claims
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> pressure.  Maybe this is not a problem with turbo engines.   Does
> anyone have any data?

If he runs mostly city miles, no good long runs to burn the crap out
of the engine, it'll build up.  I don't know of that being related to
octane, more of how the car is driven.  People generally will drive
a Cadillac differently than a Saab owner will drive a Saab.

Dave Hinz
The Malt Hound - 03 Mar 2005 21:52 GMT
>> Just a thought:  Is it not true that in order for the knock sensor
>> to
[quoted text clipped - 26 lines]
> octane, more of how the car is driven.  People generally will drive
> a Cadillac differently than a Saab owner will drive a Saab.

To elabarate, my understanding is that the knock sensors in most EFI
set-ups are able to sense the very early stages of detonation and
thereby prevent the damaging effects of pre-ignition.

The SAAB system of sensing using the DI unit is not clear to me, but
may offer an even better ability than the acoustic methods normally
used.

-Fred W
Dave Hinz - 03 Mar 2005 21:59 GMT
>> Makes sense, but no.  No matter where the knock point is, it'll find
>> it and set ignition and boost just short of there.

> To elabarate, my understanding is that the knock sensors in most EFI
> set-ups are able to sense the very early stages of detonation and
> thereby prevent the damaging effects of pre-ignition.

Yes.

> The SAAB system of sensing using the DI unit is not clear to me, but
> may offer an even better ability than the acoustic methods normally
> used.

http://www.vehicular.isy.liu.se/~larer/Projects/main.html
...explains it in more detial than you may care to read.  Impressive
engineering, to say the least.

Dave Hinz
John B - 04 Mar 2005 01:50 GMT
> Another consideration may be carbon deposits.  A friend of mine has a
> Cadillac with signs "Use only premium fuel" all over it.   He claims
> that using premium is a waste and has only used 87 for the last 10,000
> miles.  He now complains that the car keeps running on roughly after
> turning off the ignition.

A few years ago, I started experiencing some rough idle and stalling from my
1992 (classic) 900. I was running 89 octane in it at the time (which is
mid-grade around here, and is suggested I think in the owners manual), and
someone suggested I try premium (93). I did, and the problem cured itself by
the end of the tank. I've continued running 93 octane, and it's been fine
since. That was at least 15k miles ago. Of course correlation != causation,
necessarily.

This is the 2.1L NA engine.

John
Laura K - 02 Mar 2005 04:03 GMT
> I have tried 87, 89, 92 with no noticable difference, although I suspect
> to feel a more little vibration when idling on 87.
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> actually prolonging the lifetime. But I suspect it doesn't work that way
> :-)

Is it a turbo? In my 1997 900SE, I get the most fun with premium (92) also
the best mileage at highway speeds. If I'm just going to be driving around
town, I'll use midgrade (89). Not as much ooomph when the turbo kicks in but
acceptable. Mileage drops though.
The first time I ran 87, I thought the turbo had died. It came to life again
when I put 92 in it.
Pooh Bear - 02 Mar 2005 06:32 GMT
> > I have tried 87, 89, 92 with no noticable difference, although I suspect
> > to feel a more little vibration when idling on 87.
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
> The first time I ran 87, I thought the turbo had died. It came to life again
> when I put 92 in it.

That's not unsurprising.

Any decent modern car like a Saab adjusts its ECU to the fuel.

Unlike a carburettor car it doesn't even need retuning.

Depending on your driving pattern you may wish to choose for optimum mileage or
optimumm performance.

I can only suggest you try it and draw your own conclusions.

Graham
Pooh Bear - 02 Mar 2005 06:14 GMT
> I have tried 87, 89, 92 with no noticable difference, although I suspect to
> feel a more little vibration when idling on 87.
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
>
> What do you use?

Well..... I discovered that UK and US octane are different.

Long story.

Anyway - any Saab will *like*  higher octane. The engine management computer is
designed to recognise it. Try it and see.

If I want optimum performance I fill the tank with Shell Optimax.

Graham
Dima - 02 Mar 2005 19:55 GMT
Here is some data that could be useful. WE bought a 2000 9-3 Viggen and
brought it from Ohio to Oregon. The previous owner apparently used regular
gas. We started filling up with premium. Data:
1st fill up - approx 27mpg
2nd fill up - approx 29mpg
3d fill up - approx 31mpg
4th fill up - approx 33mpg and stayed there (if we stayed under 80mph, of
course).

The ECU adjusts to the better gas, but it takes a couple of fill ups.

-Dima

>I have tried 87, 89, 92 with no noticable difference, although I suspect to
> feel a more little vibration when idling on 87.
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
>
> What do you use?
WitchDr - 04 Mar 2005 02:29 GMT
If you have a normally aspirated engine or a low pressure turbo, use the
lowest octane gas available. Most NA cars adjust and are designed to use the
lowest octane gasoline. Turbos are different since you have a much higher
compression, you need detonation resistance. I have a Viggen with a high
pressure turbo. I use 92 octane all of the time because without it, the
computer will most likely retard boost. On every other car I've had that was
non turbo, there was never any benefit to using high octane. Every once in a
while I get knocking in a Pontiac and at that point I will put Super in and
the problem is gone.

>I have tried 87, 89, 92 with no noticable difference, although I suspect to
> feel a more little vibration when idling on 87.
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
>
> What do you use?
 
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



©2008 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.