2nd Generation (GE 08-13) 2nd Generation specific talk and questions here.

what grade of gas do you give to your fit?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
  #121  
Old 09-29-2010, 01:43 PM
Steve244's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Georgia
Posts: 3,661
Originally Posted by DiamondStarMonsters

Case in point 87 is fine but it is the MINIMUM recommended. There is no reason yet presented with hard data (Car & Driver aren't exactly SAE material) that you couldn't make a tad more from better fuel.
yet there is no hard data to support better performance from premium fuel in engines designed for regular. If there is I have yet to see any premium users post any references (besides personal stories).

I'll allow "a tad more [power/mpg] from better fuel" but "premium" doesn't mean "better" in terms of industry ratings. It means higher octane. Higher octane isn't better either, except in engines that recommend or require it. The Fit is neither (until you go hang a blower on it). And "tad" isn't a very useful measurement.

Some oil companies are adding more detergents to their "premium" fuel according to their advertisements. But there are no numbers to compare, just slogans like "Now With Invigorate!" Nor is there any evidence outside of oil company ads to suggest they do a better job maintaining engine performance than regular.

You sure you're not related to Silver Bullet?
 
  #122  
Old 09-29-2010, 01:55 PM
DiamondStarMonsters's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 4,428
Originally Posted by Steve244
yet there is no hard data to support better performance from premium fuel in engines designed for regular. If there is I have yet to see any premium users post any references (besides personal stories).

I'll allow "a tad more [power/mpg] from better fuel" but "premium" doesn't mean "better" in terms of industry ratings. It means higher octane. Higher octane isn't better either, except in engines that recommend or require it. The Fit is neither (until you go hang a blower on it). And "tad" isn't a very useful measurement.

Some oil companies are adding more detergents to their "premium" fuel according to their advertisements. But there are no numbers to compare, just slogans like "Now With Invigorate!" Nor is there any evidence outside of oil company ads to suggest they do a better job maintaining engine performance than regular.

You sure you're not related to Silver Bullet?
Either you cannot read or you just really like to argue, reality be damned.

You've also made it abundantly clear that you don't understand the concepts you are discussing, the implications of different fuels, nor how ECMs work internally.

So, I'll have to remember to not take what you say seriously in the future.

BTW, the engine was not designed for 87. It can use 87, but that is the minimum.

Go read up on interpolated MinOct and MaxOct Timing and Fuel tables. It is just the tip of the iceberg, but it puts your argument to sleep like an old addled dog.

What experience do you have with engines and fuels that can lead you to make these asinine statements?

There are several people in this thread alone who have shared actual scan tool data.

You however preface statements with "I think.." and make generalizations. when you can adress and answer the basic questions I asked you about determining the best "optimistic" results and how you derived that arbitrary margin of error, then we can continue having an intelligent and grounded conversation.

Till then your form of discourse provides no insight or factual evidence to the discussion at hand.

 

Last edited by DiamondStarMonsters; 09-29-2010 at 05:43 PM.
  #123  
Old 09-29-2010, 03:56 PM
JJIN's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Tustin, CA
Posts: 627
I pump premium (91 octane in CA) in my GE once a month to treat it to some delicious higher octane gas. i pump my gas at my local chevron which to my knowledge does not add ethanol as of yet.

with a full tank of 91 my fit runs smoother throughout the entire rev range. feels like there is more torque in lower revs when driving off the line.

i have also noticed an increase in mpg with no other changes in driving habits.

i have done this for about 4 months now, i am now convinced that my fit benefits from premium and will switch completely to running only premium. for an extra $2 my fit can run smoother with better low end torque, its worth the money imo.

to all that doubt premium doesnt have any benefits in our little 1.5L, try it and maybe youll like. if not, go back to using 87 its all good its your opinion and your money. i dont need claims and jibba jabba to convince me something is better or worse ill judge for myself and if i reap benefit ill switch.
 
  #124  
Old 09-29-2010, 05:49 PM
555sexydrive's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ATL, Jorja
Posts: 2,317
Steve244, the engine was designed for 87, you are sure about that? Just one last thing to add and I'm done with this thread, where was the Fit designed at? By Honda in Japan where 87 octane gas doesn't exist. Regular here is more like mid-grade 89 and premium in CA or other states that only see 91. So just think about that for a little bit and then maybe realize why the manual states 87 as a minimum stateside.
 
  #125  
Old 09-29-2010, 07:00 PM
DiamondStarMonsters's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 4,428
Something that seems to be forgotten by some in this discussions would be the fact that the 109HP/106TQ SAE ratings these engines earn is usually on an engine stand under fixed conditions with lots of control variables.

In many cases, as OE Calibrators like Greg Banish have explained, they often only change the load on the engine to reach various cells and leave it to idle or even shut down between tests to keep operating and ambient temperatures consistent for a more accurate tune.

So in the real world on a given day, say 95*F summer day and 80% humidity, you might be making far less than rated. Conversely, when it's -5* and dry you can be making a significant deal more at the same atmospheric pressure. You would be able to claw some of that power back on a more knock resistant fuel in the summer.
 

Last edited by DiamondStarMonsters; 09-29-2010 at 07:13 PM.
  #126  
Old 09-29-2010, 08:43 PM
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Capital Distric New York
Posts: 3,417
I await
 
  #127  
Old 09-29-2010, 10:00 PM
DOHCtor's Avatar
Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Québec city
Posts: 622
I'll see sunday when i'll be returning from the dragstrip...

17.77 @ 77.6Mph on 87Octane!!

??.?? @ ??.?Mph on 91Octane!!

Marko!!
 
  #128  
Old 09-29-2010, 11:30 PM
Farther's Avatar
Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: State of Jefferson
Posts: 178
Originally Posted by JJIN
i pump my gas at my local chevron which to my knowledge does not add ethanol as of yet.
E10 replaced the MTBE gasoline in California a short while back. So if you are purchasing your gasoline in California, it is most likely E10.
 
  #129  
Old 09-30-2010, 09:42 AM
Steve244's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Georgia
Posts: 3,661
Originally Posted by Krimson_Cardnal
I await
It is rather fascinating.
 
  #130  
Old 09-30-2010, 09:55 AM
Steve244's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Georgia
Posts: 3,661
Originally Posted by DiamondStarMonsters
Either you cannot read or you just really like to argue, reality be damned.

You've also made it abundantly clear that you don't understand the concepts you are discussing, the implications of different fuels, nor how ECMs work internally.

So, I'll have to remember to not take what you say seriously in the future.

BTW, the engine was not designed for 87. It can use 87, but that is the minimum.

Go read up on interpolated MinOct and MaxOct Timing and Fuel tables. It is just the tip of the iceberg, but it puts your argument to sleep like an old addled dog.

What experience do you have with engines and fuels that can lead you to make these asinine statements?

There are several people in this thread alone who have shared actual scan tool data.

You however preface statements with "I think.." and make generalizations. when you can adress and answer the basic questions I asked you about determining the best "optimistic" results and how you derived that arbitrary margin of error, then we can continue having an intelligent and grounded conversation.

Till then your form of discourse provides no insight or factual evidence to the discussion at hand.


I'm amused how many insist an economy mark (Honda) makes their least expensive econo box (the Fit) in a way that makes premium fuel necessary to enjoy good performance (or even better) than regular gas.

Get real. But, as you're related to Silver Bullet, I think this is unlikely.

If any of you premium fuel worshipers would post a single shred of evidence outside of your own delusions I'll stop insisting.

For now there's this:

Prejudice and preference aside, engineers, scientists and the federal government say there's little need for premium.

The main advantage of premium-grade gas is that it allows automakers to advertise a few more horsepower by designing and tuning engines to take advantage of premium's anti-knock properties. But auto engineers generally agree that if you use regular in a premium engine, the power loss is so slight, most drivers can't tell.

"I go back and forth, and I'm hard-pressed to notice" whether there's regular or premium in the tank, says Jeff Jetter, principal chemist at Honda Research and Development Americas. He drives an Acura designed for premium.

Import brands, especially, use premium fuel to distinguish their upmarket models. Most Toyotas, for instance, are designed to run on regular or midgrade, while the automaker's Lexus luxury brand prefers premium. Same with Honda and its Acura luxury line.

Premium, in fact, sometimes is worse fuel than regular. It resists knock because it's harder to ignite than lower-octane fuels. As a result, some engines won't start as quickly or run as smoothly on premium, notes Gibbs, the SAE fuel expert.

High-test does have a potential fuel economy benefit. It is slightly denser than lower-octane gas, meaning there's a little more energy in a gallon. But the small difference is hard to measure in real-world use, and that same density can contribute to undesirable buildup of waste products inside the engine.

No data show that engines designed strictly for regular run better or longer on premium. [yes I see the word strictly, prove the Fit isn't in this category.]

The Federal Trade Commission, in a consumer notice, emphasizes: "(I)n most cases, using a higher-octane gasoline than your owner's manual recommends offers absolutely no benefit. It won't make your car perform better, go faster, get better mileage or run cleaner."

There is "no way of taking advantage of premium in a regular-grade car," says Furey [chemist and fuels specialist at General Motors].

"There is no gain. You're wasting money," insists Jim Blenkarn, in charge of powertrains at Nissan in the USA.

"No customer should ever be deluded into thinking there's any value in buying a higher grade of octane than we specify," says Toyota's Paul Williamsen, technical expert and trainer.
full article.
 
  #131  
Old 09-30-2010, 10:59 AM
Texas Coyote's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Anderson County Texas
Posts: 7,388
Bottom line is that 87 octane is the minimum octane grade of fuel that can safely be used in your car... There may be some people that don't drive frequently that buy into your lame reasoning and suffer serious damage to their cars as what is marginal fuel degrades in their tanks over the period of time it spends in their tanks... If you are so interested in saving money you would have more to save if you were to spend more of your time doing something productive..... Your shit is very flaky.
 

Last edited by Texas Coyote; 09-30-2010 at 01:09 PM.
  #132  
Old 09-30-2010, 11:04 AM
DiamondStarMonsters's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 4,428
What is this hard on you have for Silver Bullet? Even were I related in some sense, at least the guy knows what the fuck he is talking about.

Again with that whole reading comprehension problem of yours, you can run about and find these articles, yet you can't be bothered to read the owner's manual.

Regular is the MINIMUM recommended. It is not the requisite, it is in many cases lower grade than what is available.. You don't seem to understand how high 10.4:1CR is or the implications of that. I also noticed you backed off your attempts to disingenuously bring up 91 RON in other countries, while neglecting that 99/98 RON is all that is available in some markets where the fit is sold, and as low as 80 RON in others.

The article you linked described engines designed specifically for regular grade.

The Fit is not one of those cars. Like life, you are not supposed to adhere to minimums for greatest success. Though for some reason, I get the feeling this is part of your troubled philosophy on debate, aiming for the bottom..

My old Alpha 1.5L Hyundai Accent was however designed to work with regular only. It also had a lower compression, and a very narrowly defined set of spark and fuel tables. The Fit does not. The fit costs $15-17k out the door, my Accent brand new in '96 was $9300. So you clearly need some perspective on what makes an economy car. Like the TaTa Nano, or the Chery QQ, the Accent is a world market economy car, the Fit is not the definitve economy option in many places.

Even then on a hot humid day you can feel the knock retard in both cars.

Maybe you just don't know what knock retard is, feels like, or sounds like under actual pre-det.

And again you are making guesses as to what the L15A was designed for, and then quoting GM engineers...

So, I'll ask again, besides being ripped off by some shop on your Solstice, what direct experience do you have with engines to make these statements with such confidence?

Scan tool data is hard evidence by the way...
 
  #133  
Old 09-30-2010, 11:26 AM
Texas Coyote's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Anderson County Texas
Posts: 7,388
I think he is mistaking the Fit as being in some remote way related to a Chevette.
 
  #134  
Old 09-30-2010, 12:02 PM
Texas Coyote's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Anderson County Texas
Posts: 7,388
[QUOTE=DiamondStarMonsters;916608]What is this hard on you have for Silver Bullet? Even were I related in some sense, at least the guy knows what the fuck he is talking about.
Silver Bullet has been driving professionally for over 2 decades... His two sons are both Honda enthusiast and the youngest is in the process of building a hell of a ride and is much admired on the website where he posts his progress. The kid is 14 years old.... Silver Bullet has posted more technical links about fuel than I ever thought existed, definitely knows his stuff and is a gentleman that's primary interest is sharing what he has found with other automotive enthusiast...... People are very open minded about new things, as long as they are just like the old ones.
 
  #135  
Old 09-30-2010, 12:15 PM
DiamondStarMonsters's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 4,428
Originally Posted by Texas Coyote
Originally Posted by DiamondStarMonsters
What is this hard on you have for Silver Bullet? Even were I related in some sense, at least the guy knows what the fuck he is talking about.

Silver Bullet has been driving professionally for over 2 decades... His two sons are both Honda enthusiast and the youngest is in the process of building a hell of a ride and is much admired on the website where he posts his progress. The kid is 14 years old.... Silver Bullet has posted more technical links about fuel than I ever thought existed, definitely knows his stuff and is a gentleman that's primary interest is sharing what he has found with other automotive enthusiast...... People are very open minded about new things, as long as they are just like the old ones.
Exactly, I've had a bit of a back and forth via PM with SB, hes a nice guy, actively researching and both his sons have some ambitious projects, especially considering their age.

I didn't start my first turbo project till I was 17. I had however been welding and machining custom parts for my cars by then.

It sounds like SB and his family are just a few miles up the highway from me as well. Perhaps one of these days we will have to grab some beers, shoot the shit and wrench away on some of the projects all of us are currently working on.

Were I to find myself in your neck of the woods I would offer the same, those rotrex units are very slick! It sounds like you have a few decades of experience and knowledge to share as well, and if guys like Steve244 don't want to learn, that is their problem.

Like you, I refuse to stand idly by and watch while such poorly formed opinions are disseminated as fact, because that becomes a problem for others researching these forums.

On serious tuning and racing forums like NABR or ECMTuning, Steve's ass would've been ban-hammered a while ago. For those unfamiliar, they are private forums considered to be akin to the holy grail of tuning/modding/racing data.

Ad hominems and opinion do not help anyone.
 
  #136  
Old 09-30-2010, 01:02 PM
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Capital Distric New York
Posts: 3,417
[quote=Texas Coyote;916624]
Originally Posted by DiamondStarMonsters
What is this hard on you have for Silver Bullet? Even were I related in some sense, at least the guy knows what the fuck he is talking about.
Silver Bullet has been driving professionally for over 2 decades... His two sons are both Honda enthusiast and the youngest is in the process of building a hell of a ride and is much admired on the website where he posts his progress. The kid is 14 years old.... Silver Bullet has posted more technical links about fuel than I ever thought existed, definitely knows his stuff and is a gentleman that's primary interest is sharing what he has found with other automotive enthusiast...... People are very open minded about new things, as long as they are just like the old ones.
Well said my friend, well said.
 
  #137  
Old 09-30-2010, 02:37 PM
Steve244's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Georgia
Posts: 3,661
Originally Posted by DiamondStarMonsters
Ad hominems and opinion do not help anyone.
This works both ways. You have yet to post anything except your opinion. One single published reference is all I ask.

While we're waiting:

"The regular fuel will burn properly and the premium fuel will burn properly and therefore there is no reason you should pay the extra money." William Green, a chemist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

But for standard cars on the road today, purchasing premium gasoline is simply paying a premium for a fuel that delivers no added benefits. "If you think you need it," Green says, "you're being very eccentric."
Scientific American.
 
  #138  
Old 09-30-2010, 02:48 PM
DiamondStarMonsters's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 4,428
Originally Posted by Steve244
This works both ways. You have yet to post anything except your opinion. One single published reference is all I ask.

While we're waiting:



Scientific American.
I have read every article you have posted in good faith, and the frustration comes in when you cherry pick quotes out of context. In the very same paragraph where you sourced those quotes he goes on to say:

""Such high compression ratios—and the premium fuels that go with them—could be turned to efficiency, rather than speed, Green notes, especially if put into the engines of lighter cars like his Honda Civic. Other automotive fuels, such as ethanol, can also offer high octane ratings, allowing oil companies to use more volatile gasoline in such blends."

So, with all the money you save buying regular, I recommend you go take some classes in remedial english, chemistry, physics and logic.

For the record, what I and others here are telling you is established fact. Because you disagree or FEEL that this is not the case does not make it so.
 

Last edited by DiamondStarMonsters; 09-30-2010 at 03:00 PM.
  #139  
Old 09-30-2010, 03:04 PM
Steve244's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Georgia
Posts: 3,661
Originally Posted by DiamondStarMonsters
I have read every article you have posted in good faith, and the frustration comes in when you cherry pick quotes out of context. In the very same paragraph where you sourced those quotes he goes on to say:

""Such high compression ratios—and the premium fuels that go with them—could be turned to efficiency, rather than speed, Green notes, especially if put into the engines of lighter cars like his Honda Civic. Other automotive fuels, such as ethanol, can also offer high octane ratings, allowing oil companies to use more volatile gasoline in such blends."

So, with all the money you save buying regular, I recommend you go take some classes in remedial english, chemistry, physics and logic.
This would be true, if the Fit's high compression engine required premium fuel. It doesn't.

Here's another:
Myth No. 3: Going Premium
The Lie: "More expensive fuel offer better fuel economy, because it's higher quality!"

The Truth: The media has confused this issue terribly. Post-1996 model-year cars virtually all have knock sensors. If the octane rating is too low, the computer will roll back the ignition timing a few degrees to compensate. This will reduce peak engine power, and also increase fuel consumption. So, in some sense, this myth gets it right--if your car is supposed to run premium. One of our long-term test cars in the PM fleet delivers an impressive 25-percent better fuel economy running on premium than it does on regular, although our test was hardly done under rigorous conditions. I'll leave the math for an exercise, but I calculate the price differential between 87- and 91-octane fuel at more like 6 percent--at least in my neighborhood. Your mileage may vary, but it's worth trying to see what happens in your car. If you top 6-percent better fuel mileage on premium, it may save you money to run it.

Of course, older cars, built in the days before knock sensors, may be damaged by running too poor a grade of fuel. Spark knock can actually burn holes in pistons, so burn substandard fuel in non-knock-sensor-equipped cars at your peril.

But wait, there's more! Is your car supposed to run on Regular? There are more BTUs (energy) in regular than in higher grades. You may very well get better miles-per-gallon from regular.
Popular Mechanics

Or this one:
Q What octane-rating gas should I use in my car? It calls for premium, but I get slightly better fuel economy on regular, if you can believe it.

A The nominal octane requirement for any engine is in the owner's manual, or probably even placarded inside the gas-filler door. Most modem, post-1996 vehicles with knock sensors can burn lower grades of gas without the danger of detonation knocking holes in the pistons. The engine-management computer will richen up the mixture and retard the timing enough to make the knock abate. This comes, no surprise, at the expense of power and economy.
Your vehicle, for whatever reason, is happy burning lower-grade gasoline without knocking. What is knocking? When the temperature of the gases in the combustion chamber is high enough, the fuel-air mixture ignites spontaneously and prematurely (before the spark plug fires). It makes a knocking noise, which can damage an engine in a short period of time. Higher-octane gas is more resistant to igniting under these conditions.
Why, then, do you see higher mileage on regular? In the fractional distillation of gasoline from crude oil, the higher-octane-rated fraction has less potential chemical energy, providing less power. Racers have always known that using the lowest-octane-rated gasoline that doesn't melt the pistons provides the most power.
(2010). Octane Shortchange. Popular Mechanics, 4. Retrieved from Science & Technology Collection database.

One published link supporting your opinion would help the discussion immensely.
 
  #140  
Old 09-30-2010, 03:09 PM
Scratch&Dent's Avatar
Member
5 Year Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Northeast GA
Posts: 540
It looks like you didn't read the 2 links I posted. Why should anyone bother giving you any more?
 


Quick Reply: what grade of gas do you give to your fit?



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:08 PM.