Toyota Nation Forum banner

101 - 113 of 113 Posts

·
Premium Member
2008 Highlander Base
Joined
·
34,924 Posts
It isn't the spread, ethanol free gas doesn't follow an octane rating spread. it costs more because it's pure gasoline.
:headbang: Yah, sorry, I was thinking California and forgot other states actually have non-ethanol gas.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
257 Posts
Y'all have great wine! I'm glad we can get 93 octane in Florida, can't imagine a GT86 with a Ecutek tune running very well on 91 octane
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
710 Posts
Our price in Western PA goes from $3.37 for 87 octane to $3.69 for 93 octane. the Pure 100% gas is $4.59 for 90 octane and $8.59 for 112 octane racing fuel. These 100% gas offerings are slim around here. I am fortunate that this is the nearest station to my house which just started selling 100% gas. My wife saw $3.20 a gallon for 87 octane last week in Ohio.
 

·
Cressida nut
91 Pickup (Hilux)2wd
Joined
·
4,586 Posts
I did a short 250 mile experiment using 90 octane 100% gas. While my mileage increased from 25 to 30 miles on this trip my wallet got a lot lighter paying $4.59 a gallon over $3.39 for regular gas. I intend to use the 100% for my 95 Corolla if it runs better on it.
so you changed 2 variables: octane AND ethanol%

1 tank doesn't prove it. mileage is subject to too many fluctuations. Run a few tanks through, run a few tanks of the regular stuff, run a few tanks of good stuff, run a few tanks of regular stuff, etc. If it's consistent, THEN you have a case. That's why I have a 3 tank running average set up in my logs rather than just individual tanks. (especially in the FB: 30 seconds of fun drops 5 mpg and I have a lot more than 30 seconds of fun)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
710 Posts
so you changed 2 variables: octane AND ethanol%

1 tank doesn't prove it. mileage is subject to too many fluctuations. Run a few tanks through, run a few tanks of the regular stuff, run a few tanks of good stuff, run a few tanks of regular stuff, etc. If it's consistent, THEN you have a case. That's why I have a 3 tank running average set up in my logs rather than just individual tanks. (especially in the FB: 30 seconds of fun drops 5 mpg and I have a lot more than 30 seconds of fun)
Yes one tank doesn't prove anything. There are too many variables, weight, speed, temperature, etc. My 100% gas test was on a cool, no A/C day.
I have tried consecutive tanks of different octane gas. I haven't noticed significant differences to warrant higher octane. With the price of 100% gas I don't plan on repeating the mileage tests because it is not cost effective. As for mileage I have a hard time maintaining 25mpg in hilly PA. When I go to the beach I can consistently get 27-28mpg in city traffic. All on 87 octane gas
 

·
Registered
2011 Venza V6 AWD
Joined
·
42 Posts
I just swapped my 2011 V6 Venza to 91 octane and i do a little better millage.

( KM/Liter and not miles/gal )

With 87 octane i did 11.8 and 11.4 on the two last tank. I did 10.8 on the "in between" tank and on this ~100% 91 octane tank i'm currently at 10.6 with ~50% of the tank burned.


I'm not working for good millage, i drive as i alwais do. Temperature was very similar and constant here in Quebec for those weeks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
I would like to know how the factors discussed here can be applied to a statement in the manual of a 2004, 6 cyl 4Runner, that premium is "recommended"...??

The engine has the capability to take advantage of the properties of premium gas discussed here, resulting in better running and mpg...?? (Versus the engine will run poorly on regular gas, which I do not believe to be the case.)
 

·
Registered
2011 Venza V6 AWD
Joined
·
42 Posts
The engine will run fine on regular but can take advantage of premium fuel. In my case it's the 2GR-FE engine that have the ability to adjust both the intake and exhaust on the cam shaft.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
113 Posts
I didn't read through all 110 posts; but let me pass on what I've heard or read. All unleaded gasoline is required to have detergent in it. A couple brands (I think Chevron and Shell) add much more detergent to their premium grade gas. With modern engines and modern fuels, carbon deposits are common. If you were to mimick a race car team and tear your engine apart regularly, it would be ugly. The question is whether paying $5-$6 extra per tank for premium vs Arco or Costco regular is worth it. I'm not racing or pulling a trailer, so that's some serious money to hope to keep your car performing like it's 1 year old.

Theoretically, going to Pep Boys or Auto Zone and buying a bottle of Techron should do the same. My TCH has that stupid Atkinson cycle engine, so keeping everything clean is a joke. My 2006 Accord LX has iVTEC, so it'll run like a scared cat.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11 Posts
I did not go through 11 page of reading but take it from someone who did testing on 7 different fuel types and 6 different brands of gas in 5 different car for 6 months.


There is not major difference between fuel type except for Octain and eathonol
Alll different type of octain burns on slightly different temperatures inside engine. Premium on regular engine will burn ( feel like burning smoother due to temperature it burns on. ) all grades of fuel has same cleaning detergent across for each brands. Example. Shell 87 and 93 has same cleaning detergent.
Eathonol free gas burns better with higher mileage.
 

·
Registered
Rav4 Hybrid
Joined
·
84 Posts
Better gas mileage verses gas cost. In NJ premium is $.50 more per gallon. You better be getting some better gas mileage to make up for that cost of that gas.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,204 Posts
Been driving for mileage for over a decade. Not crazy stuff that affects traffic flow, but very close. I generally shop fuel for price and COSTCO is the best price here at least. Last tank was 50 MPG on my Echo, that's 5 cents a mile, $5k for 100k miles. Drive something that gets 10 MPG and you spend $25k for the same 100k miles. I saved $20k, that's real money and a lot more than i pay for cars.

Bottom line is I see no significant difference in fuel mileage, that could ever be attributed to the fuel alone. I can get 10% better or 10% worse just by changing my driving technique and the routes that I choose, even the vehicles I choose to follow at Interstate speeds can increase my MPG by 20%, or I can drive down deserted roads with no traffic or traffic lights and get over 100 MPG fairly easily.

Fuel is like gunpowder to a reloader. Fast burning powder is used in small capacity cartridges and weapons with short barrels. Slow burning powder is used in larger caliber weapons with longer barrels. Vehicle engines have similar characteristics. Short strokes, high compression, and high RPM require a fuel that "pushes" longer versus slamming the piston crown with pressures that can not be converted to useable power. Longer strokes and good combustion chamber design allow the faster burning regular fuel to provide the proper "push" for good efficiency.

Comparing an ancient high performance engine to modern technology is a waste of time. A dyno allows peak power to be tested, BUT it has nothing to do with the real world driving. My wife has not floored a car in a decade, that is real world to many who drive conservatively.

My driving for economy has been refined to an art in itself. I can drive your car and get 20% better mileage, with no change in time to distance, if you drive "wrong". The only change would be to increase your tire pressure about 15% on average. Everything that wears last much longer the way I drive, even the engine oil is cooler when I get home and change the oil it won't even burn my hands, since it is cooler due to less wasted heat energy. Consequently the vehicle will last longer, WHILE I AM SPENDING SIGNIFICANTLY LESS ON FUEL, so total cost of ownership is significantly lower.

Last tank was not a fill from empty but a partial fill, 230 miles on 4.7 gallons of fuel, just a tad under 50 MPG, very consistently that number over that last few tanks, with a range of about 10% due to weather conditions, winter versus summer.

That is 10% ethanol fuel. Non ethanol here is 50 to 80 cents a gallon higher price. What few realize is the fuel that is blended with the ethanol is very low octane and your car would not run on it at all. Basically it has to be refined to be non ethanol. since ethanol is basically the fuel they run in indy cars with octane around 116, it raises the octane of the base stock fuel to acceptable levels. I found ethanol free gas to be good for a couple more MPGs but not even close to cost effective considering the price. The energy content of E10 is 4% lower than non ethanol, but that does not consider the much cheaper base stock gas used to blend with the ethanol. I'm not an ethanol advocate, just pragmatic about the values of ethanol fuel. I'd much rather buy my fuel with components made in the USA than other options and a big part of the lower cost of E10 is the lower cost of the base stock of fuel blended into the E10.

I am now at $75 a month for fuel to travel 1500 miles a month. That's $900 a year, in a $1600 car.
 
101 - 113 of 113 Posts
Top