Octane Rating
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /o/ - Auto
You are currently reading a thread in /o/ - Auto
Is High Octane gas a complete scam or is there actually some benefit to it? If so what's different about it? Where do they get these numbers from?
>>13870889
would you like me to google that for you?
>>13870889
>>13870889
Google it, retard
>>13870889
higher performance engines often ask for or require it. higher compression=higher octane to avoid engine knocking. if your car which took 87 octane starts to knock try higher octane like 91.
http://www.exxon.com/octane-rating
>>13870889
The higher the octane number, the more compression the fuel can withstand before detonating. Sports (sport-ish) cars, etc. with higher compression ratios thus often require high-octane fuel.
Also, there are two methods for measuring octane rating. These are the Research Octane Number (RON) and the Motor Octane Number (MON). Here in 'murrica, we use something different, the Anti-knock Index (AKI), which is just the average of the RON and MON. If you want to know more, use Google you nigger.
TL;DR: Check your owner's manual. If it says you need high-octane, you should use it. If it says you don't, you're pissing money away.
Your engine is mainly designed and tuned for your specified octane. Higher octane won't make a difference or even perform worse. What you can do is have your car tuned for a higher octane and you'll get a little more performance.
>>13870926
>>13870936
I've heard that your E.C.U. compensates for the lower octane rating and you're totally fine. I was wondering about any effect on performance this would have if any. I think I was moreso asking for anyone's personal experience with doing that.
>>13870889
There is a documentary on this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPPkPAbzwbU
>>13870951
go with what your manual suggests
>>13870947
>>13870936
Modern engines almost always have tunes allowing them to use up to the highest octane available in your country from the factory, gaining fuel economy and power due to variable timing.
>>13870951
In a lot of newer cars, yes, the E.C.U. will compensate. In that case, yes, the performance will lower. By how much depends on the type of car. The main thing you might notice is a decrease in efficiency (perhaps up to 20% in some cases). This means that by being a cheap bastard with the gas you're using, you're getting Jewed over in the end because of the decrease in economy anyway.
TL;DR: RTFM.
>>13870978
Also, this.
My car does not like going up the rocky mountains on the cheap stuff. I get a bit of knocking going up steep hills at 7000 feet or so. So if I travel cross country, I put a full tank of premium in it going up hill, and otherwise use 87.
That's the only time I've ever noticed it outside of uber tuned ricemobiles and top end sports cars.
>>13870962
>>13870962
Why the fuck would the premium gas give a lower horsepower rating on that fucking test? What kind of idiot is misinforming those people from CBC?
The car is producing however much horsepower is needed to maintain cruise control speed on that machine, the only thing that would change is how much fuel it's using to produce that amount of horsepower.
>>13871043
This is part of the reason I asked here. There can't be literally no difference if it's entirely different fuel. If everything else was true then it would be more fuel efficient right?
>>13871052
I'd believe that it is marginally more fuel efficient, but definitely not 10% more efficient. If it's not about 10% better, it's not worth the added cost.
Maybe if gas goes up to 10 dollars a gallon, and the price difference is still 20 cents. That's such a small percentage difference between the two that the increased fuel economy might be worth it. At current gas prices? Not worth it at all.
>>13870962
>0.2 liters less fuel used is "the same fuel economy"
>0.1 ppm more hydrocarbons is "worse for the environment"
Also, why did the readout fluctuate between "6.1" and "6.0" on the premium test but it was just "6" on the regular test?
>>13871021
Higher elevations you can use lower octane. In Colorado they use 85 instead of 87. You are probably experiencing hot spots in your combustion chamber from climbing mountains and the cheap fuel is pre detonating.
>>13871021
Also forgot to add, if you do have hot spots, it's from carbon buildup. Clean that with seafoam through a vacuum line.
>>13871486
>>13871498
Heat from working exceptionally hard going up hills for 2-3 hours continuously. The engine is perfectly clean. On the flat at high altitudes it's fine.
>>13870980
This. My friend's 2003 TL gets like 150 km more per tank when he uses premium as opposed to 87.
