2003 Camry V6 - Fuel Octane

[93celicaconv]

I just purchased a used 2003 Camry XLE 3.0 V6, excellent condition, all the options, a little on the high mileage side, but looks to have been well maintained.

Question on fuel octance recommendations. The owners manual says for the V6 that 87 regular grade fuel is OK, but performance would be improved if 91 octane premium fuel as used.

It doesn't seem to say only premium fuel should be used, unlike some cars with high-performance engines. The owners manual doesn't say anything about a performance improvement using premium fuel for the 4-cylinder engine available in Camry in 2003.

So what does this forum suggest? If the extra cost of 91 octane premium fuel have a fuel economy benefit? A power benefit? Or do most owners use regular 87 octane fuel?

[Punks_Not_Dead5]

Don't waste your money, stick to 87.

You won't feel any gains with 91.

It's not a performance car at all. So just stick to the cheapest octane. Unless you're supercharged ofcourse.

[93celicaconv]

Thanks for the input. No, not supercharged, not even close. Just wondering why the owners manual, for only the V6 engine, recommended premium fuel to improve performance, but didn't do the same for the 4-cyl engine.

I have a related question, if anyone has an opinion:

What would you recommend between 87 octance regular unleaded vs. 87 octance fuel with 10% ethanol added? Any difference one way or the other? I've read where the ethanol blend has slightly lower BTU's, but the oxygenated fuel tends to burn better, which in the end keeps fuel economy the same. Any inputs?

[gdanaher]

a) Ethanol kills fuel mileage by several percent and can do damage to the fuel system of most cars. Ethanol should be avoided if fuel mileage and performance are critical.

b) Congress long ago mandated 10% ethanol blends and now they are looking at 15%.

[93celicaconv]

Originally Posted by gdanaher

a) Ethanol kills fuel mileage by several percent and can do damage to the fuel system of most cars. Ethanol should be avoided if fuel mileage and performance are critical.

b) Congress long ago mandated 10% ethanol blends and now they are looking at 15%.

I take it, from your response, you would recommend using a non-ethanol fuel then, especially if prices between non-ethanol and 10% ethanol blend are equal? No benefit from a 10% ethanol blend, only the potential for problems down the road?

[wiswind]

Much of Wisconsin has "up to" 10% ethanol in ALL grades of gasoline.
This is required by law.
If you live in SouthEast Wisconsin, you are forced to use this fuel.
It will not hurt your vehicle, but there is slightly less energy in it......it should not impact your fuel economy by more than a couple MPGs.
As stated, "several percent" which is not much.
The vehicles made in any recent years are designed to deal with ethanol up to 10% with no issues.
I would not worry about it harming your vehicle in any way.
TRUE, if 2 stations were side by side, I would choose the non-ethanol "enhanced" fuel.
But it is certainly not something to drive very far out of your way for.

Of course, DO NOT use E85 unless your vehicle is rated by TOYOTA as a flex fuel vehicle.
If E15 comes along, I will be waiting to hear from TOYOTA as to what impact it would have on my vehicle.

As for what grade to use, if you don't notice any pinging or issues with 87 Octane, then that would be just fine to use, you are not hurting anything.
TOYOTA had to lower the rated horsepower of some 6 cylinder engines when they stated that 87 octane could be used.
The rules for stating horsepower have changed a lot over the years.
One rule now in place is that the stated horsepower is to be with the minimum octane called for in the owner's manual.
Would I notice the increased couple of horsepower with 93 octane.....very unlikely.
If you hear a slight pinging, then try a higher octane.
I doublt that any increase in fuel economy would offset the increased cost of the higher octane.

I have been using 93 octane in my '03 Sienna with the 1MZFE motor.
It did take care of a pinging that I got now and then.
However, I really have not seen a significant (if any) increase in fuel economy.
If any, it would be in the couple MPG range, which to me is "noise", so many variables in driving that I cannot put a couple MPGs down to anything in particular.

If you have no pinging......you are not doing any benefit to your vehicle with the higher octane than called for.....just spending extra money.

[93celicaconv]

Wiswind, thanks for the detailed explanation. There is one gas station that clearly marks the pumps of all octane grades by me with "No ethanol added", so at least one station has found a way to sell non-ethanol blended fuels. And it sells for the same price as all the other fuel at stations in the area. It's just a little longer drive for me. Was just wondering if this non-ethanol fuel was better or not, and if there was any advantage of 91 octance over 87 octane fuel, as the owner's manual seems to suggest.

[Yazovets]

Originally Posted by 93celicaconv

I take it, from your response, you would recommend using a non-ethanol fuel then, especially if prices between non-ethanol and 10% ethanol blend are equal? No benefit from a 10% ethanol blend, only the potential for problems down the road?

I don't know how it is in your area but in the province of Ontario, by definition, 87 fuel contains 10% ethanol, 89 contains 5% and 91 doesn't contain any. I suppose the manual is suggesting that you logically use 91 because of the lack of ethanol.

[93celicaconv]

In our area of Wisconsin, we can get 87 octane with no ethanol, 87 octane with 5% ethanol, 87 octane with 10% ethanol, 89 octane with no ethanol, 89 octane with 5% ethanol, 91 octane with no ethanol, 91 octane with 10% ethanol (I think I got all the combinations for our area right).

Because ethanol effectively raises octane levels, many places in Iowa and surrounding states to Wisconsin have 87 octane with no ethanol, 89 octane with 5% ethanol (at a lower cost than the 87 octane with no ethanol), and 91 octane with 10% ethanol. I think the same base 87 octane fuel is used, then ethanol added to bring the octane levels up.

Anyway, what I am getting out of this thread is 87 octane for the V6 engine is just fine, and it would be best to stay away from ethanol blends, but if not, it is OK to use ethanol blended fuels with little fuel economy penalty at the risk of possibly deterioration of the fuel system. Am I interpretting the responses correctly?

[wiswind]

The ethanol, up to 10% will not harm the fuel system in any way.
Only a very old vehicle would possibly have an issue with that.
Ethanol, up to 10%, has been around a very long time, far longer than EPA mandates, and owner's manuals for many years have stated that up to 10% is just fine.

Non-ethanol fuel will contain slightly more energy (BTUs), so I would prefer it over ethanol.
However, Ethanol from a trusted station would be prefered over a hole in the wall no-name station that you don't trust.

As you can see from the posts, rules vary in different places.
So my point in stressing that 10% ethanol is not an issue is that it is not worth worrying about as you travel, since you have little control then.
Labeling and content requirements vary by location.
Of course, if it is anything above 10%, then the rules anyplace in the US or Canada are going to require that the pumps be clearly labeled.

[dandxg]

Originally Posted by 93celicaconv

I just purchased a used 2003 Camry XLE 3.0 V6, excellent condition, all the options, a little on the high mileage side, but looks to have been well maintained.

Question on fuel octance recommendations. The owners manual says for the V6 that 87 regular grade fuel is OK, but performance would be improved if 91 octane premium fuel as used.

It doesn't seem to say only premium fuel should be used, unlike some cars with high-performance engines. The owners manual doesn't say anything about a performance improvement using premium fuel for the 4-cylinder engine available in Camry in 2003.

So what does this forum suggest? If the extra cost of 91 octane premium fuel have a fuel economy benefit? A power benefit? Or do most owners use regular 87 octane fuel?

I have the same engine, don't listen to ppl that say it doesn't matter. You will lose 15-20% acceleration by dropping octane. I wish it weren't the case but I am convinced after trying it numerous times. Sure it will run on regular noticeably slower from an accel standpoint.

[gdanaher]

I can drive roughly 4 miles to the next county and get alcohol free gas. If I drive at highway speeds and drive for good mileage my car will get about 28 mpg with 10% ethanol. If I fuel a dry tank with 0% ethanol, the car will get 31 mpg on the same route. Argue about this all you care to. 10% might not destroy the fuel system but it kills about 10% of my gas mileage, and if the price of gas is about the same, well, it makes a difference.