Vanagon EuroVan
Previous messageNext messagePrevious in topicNext in topicPrevious by same authorNext by same authorPrevious page (July 2004, week 2)Back to main VANAGON pageJoin or leave VANAGON (or change settings)ReplyPost a new messageSearchProportional fontNon-proportional font
Date:         Mon, 12 Jul 2004 18:50:28 -0400
Reply-To:     David Beierl <dbeierl@ATTGLOBAL.NET>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         David Beierl <dbeierl@ATTGLOBAL.NET>
Subject:      Re: Fuel Octane, Additives
Comments: To: Mark Tuovinen <mst@AK.NET>
In-Reply-To:  <b47fedb465b0.b465b0b47fed@gci.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

At 17:22 7/12/2004, Mark Tuovinen wrote: >My Audi calls for 91 octane fuel and I have observed over several years >and varying weather/driving conditions that it does indeed get improved >mileage and run better with 91 octane vs 87. Enough so to easily justify >the higher fuel cost, the mileage difference alone more then covers the >cost variance. > >with the higher octane fuel, and ran better too. In fact the 91 octane >fuel burned so much better that it increased the idle speed and we had to >readjust it. The differences were probably more noticable on the car we >used then most people would see as it called for a minimum of 99 octane.

Or to put both of these things a different way, modern engine-management systems with knock sensors were able to retard the timing enough that you could get degraded performance instead of blowing holes in your engine? I don't want to be dismissive but in all honesty it's hard not to. It's not any sort of secret that engines designed for high octane (i.e. high resistance to detonation, using the properties of the substance octane as representing 100 on the scale (and then fudged around later somewhat)) have to have that quality to work properly and until recently, to survive. Likewise it's not in any question that a) engines gain nothing from an octane number higher than they need under given circumstances, which one hopes will be covered under the mfr's specification; and b) that chemically speaking, gasoline with high octane properties has measurably less energy per unit than gasoline with lower octane qualities.

But "premium" -- more to it (maybe) than octane. And there was certainly a time when EFI systems that had plenty of octane number from regular gas, didn't get enough detergent from it to keep injectors clean. Now they do, in US anyway, because it's Federally mandated. But only enough to keep them clean, not necessarily to clean them. So if there's a question in this area, it seems to me that it's best to specifically dismiss octane and look a bit closer.

thanks, david

-- David Beierl - Providence RI USA -- http://pws.prserv.net/synergy/Vanagon/ '84 Westy "Dutiful Passage," '85 GL "Poor Relation"


Back to: Top of message | Previous page | Main VANAGON page

Please note - During the past 17 years of operation, several gigabytes of Vanagon mail messages have been archived. Searching the entire collection will take up to five minutes to complete. Please be patient!


Return to the archives @ gerry.vanagon.com


The vanagon mailing list archives are copyright (c) 1994-2011, and may not be reproduced without the express written permission of the list administrators. Posting messages to this mailing list grants a license to the mailing list administrators to reproduce the message in a compilation, either printed or electronic. All compilations will be not-for-profit, with any excess proceeds going to the Vanagon mailing list.

Any profits from list compilations go exclusively towards the management and operation of the Vanagon mailing list and vanagon mailing list web site.