| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 90223 | 2008-05-27 03:46:00 | 91 vs 95 Octane | nofam (9009) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 672991 | 2008-05-27 03:46:00 | Had one of those classic pub conversations-turned-arguments last night about newer vehicles that can run either octane rating actually being more economical on 95 . Theories abounded, but the consensus was that the engine didn't have to work as hard (on 95), so this more than offset the higher price-per-litre . . . . What have you guys found? |
nofam (9009) | ||
| 672992 | 2008-05-27 03:49:00 | '93 Bluebird SR20. I get a consistent 50km - 100km more off a tank of 95 rather than 91. Better pick up, and smoother running also. On the newer cars, I'm not so sure it makes as big of a difference. Parents '92 Estima is the same again - and way better on 98 than 95. Haven't really got a new car to test it on. :dogeye: But if you wanted to supply your Mazda for testing purposes... :p |
wratterus (105) | ||
| 672993 | 2008-05-27 03:59:00 | Yeah, well I was actually arguing the same as you Wrat - the Mazdagini does seem better on 95 (actually only run it on 95 when driving on long trips). Newer cars like mine have computerized timing/anti-knock adjustment etc so it can run just as well on either. Might have to bust out the clipboard and white lab coat, and get all scientific n stuff!! :D |
nofam (9009) | ||
| 672994 | 2008-05-27 04:08:00 | I have a supercharged V6 and the manufacturer states I must run 95 to help stop pre-detonation....I get 10L to 100km on open road when using CC | SolMiester (139) | ||
| 672995 | 2008-05-27 06:47:00 | The only cars here in the US that actually REQUIRE high-test fuel are the Volvos . . . and maybe a RR and Ferrari or so . I have a feeling that NZ octane ratings are NOT the same as US . . because it's the law here that everything but some special (and I don't know why a Volvo is special!) cars must run on 87 R+M/2 rating . Actually both 87 and 89 Octane rates will start a BBQ equally well if you can get them to burn . |
SurferJoe46 (51) | ||
| 672996 | 2008-05-27 10:11:00 | Well, anything with a turbo will probably benefit from the higher octane due to the high effective compression ratio with max boost; Most used imports seem to need it - I believe there is no fuel as low as 91 octane in Japan except for spirit stoves. If you conscientiously record your running costs for a few tankfuls of each grade you can soon tell which is the most cost effective. For my current car 96 is the best value, the previous one preferred 98. YMMV ;) | R2x1 (4628) | ||
| 1 | |||||