gas

[marik77]

hi guys,
can i use regular gas instead of premium on my genesis cope 2.0 turbo automat

 

[dbx]

You can use regular "unleaded" gas, yes. The manufacturer suggests using "premium unleaded", but personally, I believe it's BS. There are some high performance engines that will run noticeably better on premium, but most, so-called, HP engines make the equation negligible. If you really have to have that extra...um...3hp....then by all means, spend .60 cents more per gallon

 

[homeofstone]

You can use regular "unleaded" gas, yes. The manufacturer suggests using "premium unleaded", but personally, I believe it's BS. There are some high performance engines that will run noticeably better on premium, but most, so-called, HP engines make the equation negligible. If you really have to have that extra...um...3hp....then by all means, spend .60 cents more per gallon

Some mfg. recommend premium and some say its required.
It depends on engine design.

Recommended = yes regular can be used.

Required = Premium is required due to possible engine damage from spark knock.

Also, premium gasoline in my area is only about .30 per gallon more and I run premium in all my vehicles.

 

[dbx]

Some mfg. recommend premium and some say its required.
It depends on engine design.

Recommended = yes regular can be used.

Required = Premium is required due to possible engine damage from spark knock.

Also, premium gasoline in my area is only about .30 per gallon more and I run premium in all my vehicles.

I'm with you on the above. Being close to the same age, you might appreciate that I was trying to inform a younger person that "premium" gas is not needed in most vehicles. In our day, you knew when any knocking started that, you could still adjust timing to correct knocking...and use the gas of your choice. But yes, performance (in terms of HP) would be effected.

 

[Top Gear]

If you start running regular in these cars, you might think you're saving money on a tank, but you'll start burning more and more, and the engine will reward you with early failures. Don't be that guy. Run premium in your sports car, or buy a freakin' minivan

 

[DRS]

Ok guys.... I would think that the 2.0 turbo CPU allows more boost, resulting in more power with premium. It would also allow to advance timing and lean things out with good grade of premium resulting in overall better mpg. Turbo engines can be ideal to take advantage of higher octane fuel for better performance and MPG. Does anyone know for sure Hyundai or any of the tuners optimize the 2.0 for 93 octane when used? Most the time, it will take a ROM CPU reset or few hundred miles to complete mapping adjustments to premium. I would be shocked if the 2.0 in stock form (or tuned) will not take advantage of better fuel. Heck, way back when, the 86 SVO, and GNX I had would do that. Cranking up boost and other elements to take advantage of better fuel.

 

[dbx]

If you start running regular in these cars, you might think you're saving money on a tank, but you'll start burning more and more, and the engine will reward you with early failures. Don't be that guy. Run premium in your sports car, or buy a freakin' minivan

Can you cite qualified studies to support these statements?

 

[dbx]

Re: What do you dislike about the Genesis Coupe?

As for car care of a turbo, it's just like car care of any engine. Keep the oil changed as recommended. Run the best gas you can. Don't hold the engine at redline, etc, etc.

As for running "the best gas you can", again, I ask you to post qualified studies that support this. Why do I say/ask this? Because there are qualified studies that prove that for many high performance engines/cars, buying premium gas is a joke. However, I know this doesn't apply to 100% of these type of cars.

Having said that, I'll post a link that supports this claim, but will allow you plenty of room to support your claim that a 2.0T has to have premium gas. (Again, "performance" isn't in my question, as the techncality is proven). It's the fact that you warn of danger with "non-premium" gas that is.

http://www.edmunds.com/fuel-economy/to-save-money-on-gas-stop-buying-premium.html

 

[Top Gear]

You're kidding, right? I think you just want to argue, but isn't it a bit obvious even to you that the best additives of any brand are in their premium grade? Shell regular for example, has lower octane and no "V-Power" additives. So, your position is seriously that it's the same or better than their 93 octane with the most advanced V-Power additives?? You are the one arguing that load of BS, so please post YOUR qualified studies, and I'll show you how fallacious they are.

 

[Top Gear]

Re: What do you dislike about the Genesis Coupe?

You can run anything you like, dude. If you're not a kid, then it should be obvious that your car performs better, runs smoother, and gets better mileage once you start on premium fuel and let it adjust (the computer will retune the engine based on the better fuel). It's not up to me to prove the obvious fact that premium is better than regular. If you've "tested" premium by pumping a few gallons and then satisfying yourself that it was pointless, returning to cheap (what I call "lawnmower") gas, then there's nothing I could post to convince you. You just need to learn the truth for yourself. It's gas we're talking about, not some religious conversion. Take a risk. Pay the few pennies per gallon. Pump the good stuff and enjoy your car

______________________________

Help support this site so it can continue supporting you!

 

[dbx]

Re: What do you dislike about the Genesis Coupe?

You can run anything you like, dude. If you're not a kid, then it should be obvious that your car performs better, runs smoother, and gets better mileage once you start on premium fuel and let it adjust (the computer will retune the engine based on the better fuel). It's not up to me to prove the obvious fact that premium is better than regular. If you've "tested" premium by pumping a few gallons and then satisfying yourself that it was pointless, returning to cheap (what I call "lawnmower") gas, then there's nothing I could post to convince you. You just need to learn the truth for yourself. It's gas we're talking about, not some religious conversion. Take a risk. Pay the few pennies per gallon. Pump the good stuff and enjoy your car

I'm not looking to start a whizzing contest, so I'll put it this way; I'm also a lifetime audiophile, and I know that, for instance, "esoteric" speaker wire and/or audio cable that manufacturers sell for 5-100 times the price of "the poor man's normal buy" (we'll call this lawnmower gas )-, can indeed, be scientifically measured to have specs (conductivity, resistance, noise level etc..) that exceed that of the lowest priced connectors. However, the laboratory studies are only great for marketing, as they leave out one very important fact; a human being cannot tell the difference in a true double blind test.....ALL day long!

And so, this is why I asked if you could provide studies to back your claim. My request was well intentioned, not threatening. There is no, "obvious fact that premium is better than regular", without a specific, related case to cite as it pertains to the actual subject and measurable performance that is more than can possibly be human perception. In this case, that would be Hyundai Genesis Coupe models. I've already ceded that performance can be noticeably effected in certain high performance engines/cars, but certainly, not all in all. This is a fact. "Car guys" are no less prone to "perceived" value in buying more expensive...."anything"...for their cars, as with an audiophile swearing that they can surely tell the difference in a $600 single RCA type connector (not joking) over a connector bought from Walmart for $2.99.

Respectfully,

dbx

 

[dbx]

Re: What do you dislike about the Genesis Coupe?

Here's a link or two to consider:

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fact-or-fiction-premium-g/

This one leans your way a bit:

http://www.businessinsider.com/using-premium-gas-often-a-waste-of-money-2013-8

http://www.kbb.com/car-advice/articles/premium-gas-when-and-why/?r=504170602948848800

 

[Top Gear]

Re: What do you dislike about the Genesis Coupe?

These articles are not scientific proof of anything, as they're just jounalist's or magazine opinions, but they do actually support my position every bit as much as yours. Here are key quotes from them which prove my points...

1st link: "First and foremost, premium gas really is a better fuel in terms of the power it provides in the right engine." (your engine is the right engine)

2nd link: "Does you fancy car need fancy gas? If your owner’s manual says to use premium gas, you should listen. That’s most likely if you drive a luxury or sports car. High-performance engines tend to run hotter and use a high compression ratio, so fuel that is less likely to pre-ignite keeps things running smoothly." (your car is fancy)

3rd link: "Most premium gasolines have a higher-quality additive package put in at the refinery. The actual additives in a particular brand of gasoline are generally not disclosed by refiners. But usually they include detergents and other solvents that keep the carburetor and rest of the fuel system clean." (you asked about turbo issues in another thread)

The cars we're talking about, yours and mine, are sports cars. You did not buy a minivan, and you even asked in another thread about how you could best care for your car. Your car will run better on better fuel, especially if you run your tank as empty as possible and start fresh. The computer in your car will literally retune the engine during this change to take advantage of the superior properties of the better gas.

It's not just a question of octane (which is an additive) and whether your car is knocking. That is a fallacy. If you want to take the best care of your sports car, as you've indicated, I don't see why you'd pump cheap junk into it, or even the regular 87 version of a top brand like Shell or Chevron, and then try to tell me you're an audiophile. Every car and motorcycle I've ever had, and some were not sports cars, ran better, smoother, with better power and mileage on premium.

What's more, I think you agree with me in principle. You kinda want to have it both ways, which is understandable because some dude challenged you on a discussion forum. I'm not a kid, either, and I've yet to see the engine that didn't run better on better fuel. It's just that obvious, common sense, really. You can fight it and run regular in your car, but you will never get all you can out of that engine. To each his own, I guess.

 

[dbx]

Re: What do you dislike about the Genesis Coupe?

These articles are not scientific proof of anything, as they're just jounalist's or magazine opinions, but they do actually support my position every bit as much as yours.

Yes, they are not scientific, but written from some considered reliable sources.

1st link: "First and foremost, premium gas really is a better fuel in terms of the power it provides in the right engine." (your engine is the right engine)

You may well be correct, but you cannot provide specific source/study to back it up. Sure, I love to think I own a high performance sport car, but past the looks and power I'm happy with, I just cannot swear to the fact that the engine performance/life will really change in a measurable way. We don't own lamborghini. Only a study would/could point in this direction. Fair? In other words, neither of us knows for fact at this point. Fair?[/QUOTE]

2nd link: "Does you fancy car need fancy gas? If your owner’s manual says to use premium gas, you should listen. That’s most likely if you drive a luxury or sports car. High-performance engines tend to run hotter and use a high compression ratio, so fuel that is less likely to pre-ignite keeps things running smoothly." (your car is fancy)

"Fancy" is in the eye of the beholder . But yes, I get your point here. I truly, do not know anything about this engine. I also fear not being able to do simple fixes to it (brakes, tune-ups, etc...), due to being out of being a "car guy" for quite a while.

3rd link: "Most premium gasolines have a higher-quality additive package put in at the refinery. The actual additives in a particular brand of gasoline are generally not disclosed by refiners. But usually they include detergents and other solvents that keep the carburetor and rest of the fuel system clean." (you asked about turbo issues in another thread)

There are (as of 2014) only 142 viable oil/gas refineries in the U.S. In other words, these same refineries produce ALL of the gasoline that all of us use. Additionally, they can't turn many tricks.

The cars we're talking about, yours and mine, are sports cars. You did not buy a minivan, and you even asked in another thread about how you could best care for your car. Your car will run better on better fuel, especially if you run your tank as empty as possible and start fresh. The computer in your car will literally retune the engine during this change to take advantage of the superior properties of the better gas.

I've seen you mention this twice. I will take your word for it, as you are so, "matter of fact" in your assertion. This is a new innovation for me.

It's not just a question of octane (which is an additive) and whether your car is knocking. That is a fallacy. If you want to take the best care of your sports car, as you've indicated, I don't see why you'd pump cheap junk into it, or even the regular 87 version of a top brand like Shell or Chevron, and then try to tell me you're an audiophile. Every car and motorcycle I've ever had, and some were not sports cars, ran better, smoother, with better power and mileage on premium.

You lost me here..........I made a couple of very valid points. And as for the "knocking fallacy", you'd be wrong...all day long.

What's more, I think you agree with me in principle.

Yes, on some issues, but not in whole, on all....by any means

 

[Top Gear]

From another thread:

These articles are not scientific proof of anything, as they're just jounalist's or magazine opinions, but they do actually support my position every bit as much as yours. Here are key quotes from them which prove my points...

1st link: "First and foremost, premium gas really is a better fuel in terms of the power it provides in the right engine." (your engine is the right engine)

2nd link: "Does you fancy car need fancy gas? If your owner’s manual says to use premium gas, you should listen. That’s most likely if you drive a luxury or sports car. High-performance engines tend to run hotter and use a high compression ratio, so fuel that is less likely to pre-ignite keeps things running smoothly." (your car is fancy)

3rd link: "Most premium gasolines have a higher-quality additive package put in at the refinery. The actual additives in a particular brand of gasoline are generally not disclosed by refiners. But usually they include detergents and other solvents that keep the carburetor and rest of the fuel system clean." (you asked about turbo issues in another thread)

The cars we're talking about, yours and mine, are sports cars. You did not buy a minivan, and you even asked in another thread about how you could best care for your car. Your car will run better on better fuel, especially if you run your tank as empty as possible and start fresh. The computer in your car will literally retune the engine during this change to take advantage of the superior properties of the better gas.

It's not just a question of octane (which is an additive) and whether your car is knocking. That is a fallacy. If you want to take the best care of your sports car, as you've indicated, I don't see why you'd pump cheap junk into it, or even the regular 87 version of a top brand like Shell or Chevron, and then try to tell me you're an audiophile. Every car and motorcycle I've ever had, and some were not sports cars, ran better, smoother, with better power and mileage on premium.

What's more, I think you agree with me in principle. You kinda want to have it both ways, which is understandable because some dude challenged you on a discussion forum. I'm not a kid, either, and I've yet to see the engine that didn't run better on better fuel. It's just that obvious, common sense, really. You can fight it and run regular in your car, but you will never get all you can out of that engine. To each his own, I guess.

...and responding:

Yes, they are not scientific, but written from some considered reliable sources.

You may well be correct, but you cannot provide specific source/study to back it up. Sure, I love to think I own a high performance sport car, but past the looks and power I'm happy with, I just cannot swear to the fact that the engine performance/life will really change in a measurable way. We don't own lamborghini. Only a study would/could point in this direction. Fair? In other words, neither of us knows for fact at this point. Fair?

"Fancy" is in the eye of the beholder . But yes, I get your point here. I truly, do not know anything about this engine. I also fear not being able to do simple fixes to it (brakes, tune-ups, etc...), due to being out of being a "car guy" for quite a while.

There are (as of 2014) only 142 viable oil/gas refineries in the U.S. In other words, these same refineries produce ALL of the gasoline that all of us use. Additionally, they can't turn many tricks.

I've seen you mention this twice. I will take your word for it, as you are so, "matter of fact" in your assertion. This is a new innovation for me.

You lost me here..........I made a couple of very valid points. And as for the "knocking fallacy", you'd be wrong...all day long.

Yes, on some issues, but not in whole, on all....by any means

There have been various layers of this discussion I've been addressing, which we can group into the science behind fuels, the often wrong reliance on journalists' opinions, and the practical aspect of cost.

The science has definitively established that fuel detergents and other additives are beneficial to all engines. Ethanol has also been shown to effectively replace higher octane as an anti-knock agent, however it must be countered by additional advanced chemistry found only in "Top-Tier" brands and their premium fuels. Here are just a few actual scientific studies:

A background on gasoline additives:
http://papers.sae.org/902104/

Performance and emissions effects of ethanol additives:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0196890402001668

Long-term study of premium fuels being beneficial:
http://engagedscholarship.csuohio.e...1/2&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

Octane responses of engines:
http://papers.sae.org/2013-01-0883/

Piston deposits using lower-grade fuels:
http://papers.sae.org/2013-24-0101/

Combustion chamber deposits using lower-grade fuels:
http://jer.sagepub.com/content/early/2012/02/16/1468087411427661.abstract

Emissions reduction using premium fuels:
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11783-012-0438-3

Detailed study of ignition improvers such as ethanol and octane:
http://papers.sae.org/2014-01-1282/

Fuel use reduction through detergent additives:
http://www.scientific.net/AMR.608-609.1236

Premium additives needed to counteract ethanol:
http://hrcak.srce.hr/101331

I could go on...

Now, car journalists have too easily concluded, or just endlessly repeated, that premium is a myth. The better journalists go a step further and say that because we are essentially all now running E10 (10% ethanol-enriched fuels) whether regular or premium, then we don't need to spend the money on premium, because the higher octane makes no difference. The finer points have been entirely lost in our dumbed-down media and culture, which just concludes something is a "myth" or doesn't matter "because it costs more.". These specious arguments the journalists propagate contain a small kernel of truth, as far as knock is concerned, but mask any number of erroneous assumptions regarding all the other additives and benefits a premium fuel offers over a regular, particularly those from the Top Tier brands - benefits shown in scientific studies.

It is particularly odd for you to claim to be, say, an "audiophile" - willing to spend vasly more money on audio products despite them having no effect on actually hearing the audio signal over cheaper alternatives - just to use your own skepticism against you. To then say gasoline is all the same, that none of the felt and measured benefits are real, is irrational given the audio analogy. Also, to claim the Genesis Coupe is not a performance car is simply ludicrous. If you really believe that, why post on a discussion forum, or for that matter, why did you purchase a 2-door RWD sporty car over all the cheaper econoboxes available that get you from A to B? Did you just pick a random car to buy and then later discover it has sport features??

Moreover, it is faulty reasoning to cite journalistic sources as scientific "proof", then deny inherent claims made by those sources when it doesn't suit your skepticism, as you did above in response to my quotes from your links. As I've said, I think you just want to argue, which is fine because this is a discussion forum, but while your skepticism is very easy, perhaps even fun and cute for you, dbx, you forget it also applies to your audio products, on which you claim to be an expert. Perhaps you can show proof that a $10,000+ audiophile setup allows you to hear an audio signal, such as music, any more readily than a $20 boombox? That is the equivalent argument you are making.

Lastly, there's the practical aspect, which is also irrational. Sure, premium gas can cost a good bit more at the pump, and so many arguments against using premium add up to nothing more than "don't waste your money," or "your car's not high-end, so regular is fine." The typical cost spread of regular to premium is some 30 cents per gallon, which can be about a 10% higher cost at today's prices, give or take. Imagine all the things you spend a 10% premium on and how you would defend that economic choice.

Indeed, I have personally seen far more than 10% swings in better mileage alone from using premium fuels, up to 30% in fact, not to mention the other benefits. Thus, if my car gets even slightly better mileage on premium, it more than makes up for the increased cost at the pump, and this is particularly true over time, not just by doing a quick one-time comparison. This increase in mileage or performance may not come from the inherent energy value of the fuel, but from re-tuned engine due to contemporary ECU technology and the "synergy" of having the advanced detergents, ethanol and anti-ethanol chemistry, higher octane, as well as other additives typically only available in the premium grade (just as a better audio signal comes from the synergy of everything in the audio chain, as well as the more attuned ear that quality trains in the listener).

Thus, to counter the oft-repeated "it only costs more, therefore it's a myth" mantra, consider that a cleaner engine running slightly cooler will in fact get better mileage and yield better performance, which itself is easily noticeable but also proven, but that engine will also pollute less and last longer with fewer repairs, also proven - well worth a mere 10% more a gallon as opposed to burning more junk fuel, decreased performance, higher repair and other environmental costs. To argue otherwise is to be forced to analogously argue that a high-end audio system is no better than the cheapest no-name boombox.

 

[Sal Collaziano]

I think you just want to argue

I got the feeling he didn't want to argue after he hadn't responded for three days. But I could be wrong...

 

[Top Gear]

We were arguing these points in another thread just last night, HG. Your moderator broke it up, and said to move to one of these gas threads. This one was the most recent, and between dbx and myself, mainly.

 

[Sal Collaziano]

We were arguing these points in another thread just last night, HG. Your moderator broke it up, and said to move to one of these gas threads. This one was the most recent, and between dbx and myself, mainly.

I see... Okay, I merged the conversation from that discussion thread into this one...

 

[dbx]

First, let me tell you that I am not arguing just to argue. I was told years ago that I should have been an attorney, lol . Secondly, I thank you for your lengthy and thoughtful post. Additionally, please remember that voice inflection and so many other things about "posting" can make it look like two people are screaming at each other, when it's not even close to being the case. I love a healthy discussion, even if it appears heated. That is, as long as each person can "hear" each other during days long discourse on a web forum.

Having said that, let me try to reply to what you posted below.

There have been various layers of this discussion I've been addressing, which we can group into the science behind fuels, the often wrong reliance on journalists' opinions, and the practical aspect of cost.

The science has definitively established that fuel detergents and other additives are beneficial to all engines. Ethanol has also been shown to effectively replace higher octane as an anti-knock agent, however it must be countered by additional advanced chemistry found only in "Top-Tier" brands and their premium fuels. Here are just a few actual scientific studies:

A background on gasoline additives:
http://papers.sae.org/902104/

Performance and emissions effects of ethanol additives:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0196890402001668

Long-term study of premium fuels being beneficial:
http://engagedscholarship.csuohio.e...1/2&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

Octane responses of engines:
http://papers.sae.org/2013-01-0883/

Piston deposits using lower-grade fuels:
http://papers.sae.org/2013-24-0101/

Combustion chamber deposits using lower-grade fuels:
http://jer.sagepub.com/content/early/2012/02/16/1468087411427661.abstract

Emissions reduction using premium fuels:
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11783-012-0438-3

Detailed study of ignition improvers such as ethanol and octane:
http://papers.sae.org/2014-01-1282/

Fuel use reduction through detergent additives:
http://www.scientific.net/AMR.608-609.1236

Premium additives needed to counteract ethanol:
http://hrcak.srce.hr/101331

I could go on...

I haven't had time to read any of the links, but I certainly will when time permits. As for the opening before the links, no argument there.

Now, car journalists have too easily concluded, or just endlessly repeated, that premium is a myth. The better journalists go a step further and say that because we are essentially all now running E10 (10% ethanol-enriched fuels) whether regular or premium, then we don't need to spend the money on premium, because the higher octane makes no difference. The finer points have been entirely lost in our dumbed-down media and culture, which just concludes something is a "myth" or doesn't matter "because it costs more.". These specious arguments the journalists propagate contain a small kernel of truth, as far as knock is concerned, but mask any number of erroneous assumptions regarding all the other additives and benefits a premium fuel offers over a regular, particularly those from the Top Tier brands - benefits shown in scientific studies.

Definitely, points ^ to be considered while reading through numerous studies/reports/articles.

It is particularly odd for you to claim to be, say, an "audiophile" - willing to spend vasly more money on audio products despite them having no effect on actually hearing the audio signal over cheaper alternatives - just to use your own skepticism against you.

First rebuttal: Claiming to be an audiophile doesn't necessarily mean that I " am willing to spend vastly more money on audio products despite them having no effect on actually hearing the audio signal over cheaper alternatives." It just means I'm more discerning and informed. But yes, I will readily and happily admit that I own many pieces that "look" really freaking cool and can rock.......and at the same time...admit that even though they look and sound great, that I opted for them out of personal vanity...because I own "lesser" equipment that I'd be equally happy with...if I were a blind person .

To then say gasoline is all the same, that none of the felt and measured benefits are real, is irrational given the audio analogy.

First, I never stated that all gasoline is the same, sir. If you'll go back and reread, you'll find that I did say that the benefits of higher octane/priced gasoline absolutely does make a difference for many "high performance" (the term is subjective, yes?) cars, but not for all (because of the subjectivity of the term itself).

Also, to claim the Genesis Coupe is not a performance car is simply ludicrous.

Can you please cite where I posted this ^?

If you really believe that, why post on a discussion forum, or for that matter, why did you purchase a 2-door RWD sporty car over all the cheaper econoboxes available that get you from A to B? Did you just pick a random car to buy and then later discover it has sport features??

I purchased a, "2-door RWD sporty car", because it appealed to me in many ways. Mainly, looks, sport suspension drive and power. However, if I lined it beside my oldest son's 2013 Honda Accord.....I'd beat him 0-60 by approximately 1.5 seconds....and beat him in a qtr mile by just under 2 seconds. I gave this example because I'm assuming you'd consider a 4 door Honda sedan as an "econobox"? I'm just saying, while I love the look, drive and handling of my Genesis Coupe, I'm also well aware that I'm not driving a Bugatti. Both are "sports cars", right?

Moreover, it is faulty reasoning to cite journalistic sources as scientific "proof", then deny inherent claims made by those sources when it doesn't suit your skepticism, as you did above in response to my quotes from your links. As I've said, I think you just want to argue, which is fine because this is a discussion forum, but while your skepticism is very easy, perhaps even fun and cute for you, dbx, you forget it also applies to your audio products, on which you claim to be an expert. Perhaps you can show proof that a $10,000+ audiophile setup allows you to hear an audio signal, such as music, any more readily than a $20 boombox? That is the equivalent argument you are making.

I agree with you on citing "journalistic" sources. In fact I initially requested that you post some scientific ones to definitively debunk the journalistic ones that I subsequently posted. They were not offered as fact, but merely subjective writing that I hoped you respond to (in a sincere and informative way). As for the rest of your statement above, I think I just covered that.

Imagine all the things you spend a 10% premium on and how you would defend that economic choice.

Respectfully, this ^ is not sound logic. It's just like saying, "I can't prove what I'm saying, but why take a chance that I could be wrong? I mean, hey, you buy expensive clothes, or.... buy expensive wine right? Why not err on the side of safety, even when I've produced no definitive evidence...because you can afford to..."

Again, this ^ is not meant to anger you, but it is an argument that is not well suited to prove a position.

Indeed, I have personally seen far more than 10% swings in better mileage alone from using premium fuels, up to 30% in fact, not to mention the other benefits. Thus, if my car gets even slightly better mileage on premium, it more than makes up for the increased cost at the pump, and this is particularly true over time, not just by doing a quick one-time comparison. This increase in mileage or performance may not come from the inherent energy value of the fuel, but from re-tuned engine due to contemporary ECU technology and the "synergy" of having the advanced detergents, ethanol and anti-ethanol chemistry, higher octane, as well as other additives typically only available in the premium grade (just as a better audio signal comes from the synergy of everything in the audio chain, as well as the more attuned ear that quality trains in the listener)..

Yes, I will actually run several tanks on 92/93 (best I can get here) and see what happens. After all, I can afford it .

It's all good, Top Gear. I like discussing issues with intelligent people, and you have made this discussion interesting for me. I will surely read the links you provided to gain more insight to the issue at hand.

 

[dbx]

I got the feeling he didn't want to argue after he hadn't responded for three days. But I could be wrong...

Oh, no! I love a great "argument"! I just work (12-14hrs per day). I should have been retired by now, but...........lol

We were arguing these points in another thread just last night, HG. Your moderator broke it up, and said to move to one of these gas threads. This one was the most recent, and between dbx and myself, mainly.

Yep. It's all good..........