So then smart guy, what makes the Civic qualify and not the Fit?

 

Precisely. We have determined he is willfully ignorant. It's not like everything we have already provided has stuck, why bother?

It's like arguing with the crazy guys downtown telling me the world is gonna end and wall street is run by lizard-alien hybrids.

We know it's not true, why legitimize the crazy?

==========================

Steve, you didn't even bother to answer the very simple basic questions I asked you on pages 6 & 7, nor the others from various members in previous pages. Your own links disprove what you have to say, and even that hasn't stopped you.

You have proven you don't know what you are talking about, and seem to be bent on making the last post as if it makes you correct all the sudden.

Try and absorb what we are illustrating for you. Or don't, I don't care. But we will continue to counter your non-sense with reason so the random passersby can make an informed decision.

In this case it is reality and experience v. some random dude making shit up.

 

This is getting good.

Steve has provided a very interesting and informative article. Silvers links in post #8 are excellent info and have begun my understanding of my Fit's engine.

Searching for conclusive data will defeat us all.

The empirical data says my FIT will understand the grade of fuel I put in it w/ 87 being the minimum recommended octane for the USDM.
With certain set-ups it will increase performance to some degree.
With daily drivers it might, however, the change will hardly be noticeable.

The hows center on the ECU and engine timing.
Tweak the ECU and you change the systems. I'm sure in other markets the ECU is set-up for those grades of fuel.
One size does not fit all.

I was getting tiered of all the oil talk anyway.

 

as far as fuel, i use the cheapest gas in town but from a known vendor... like mobil or thornton or speedway, etc.

 

And there is nothing wrong with that

 

Its all about MBT, if regular gas produced MBT than Steve244 would have an argument but it doesn't. When a engine is MBT it is at the most efficient setting producing the most Torque. Premium gas gets you to MBT most of the time so any higher octane wont produce more torque. There are exceptions to this but we cant get past regular.

 

BTW Thank you to my new and old friends for defending the truth. Steve should know better not to use me as an example but every one has a bad day. Steve just has more than others.

 

heh. thanks bullet.

 

A wiki link about octane and another from hondata about knock control? What was your point?

Who said they would make different ECU's? They probably do have different flashes depending on locally provided equipment (i.e. CVT vs 5sp autos) and the market. Each country (at least here and in Europe) has its own guidelines for pollution. It's reasonable to expect them to tailor the flash to each country's requirements to pass local regulations. But this is irrelevant to the issue of gaining better performance by using premium fuel.

The issue is whether more power/better mpg is derived using premium in a car designed for regular. The answer from every source I've linked is "no." You have yet to show otherwise.

 

Qualify for what?

The author's point was that economy cars could benefit from higher compression engines. He failed to anticipate that with advancements in technology this would be possible using regular fuel. Case in point: The L15A.


Sorry, here ya go:

No. With my bias against premium this would have little point given the small difference (if any). AT.

The Pontiac is stock, aside from the GMPP tune and related upgraded MAPT sensors. Here's a link if you're interested. (Other than brag rights this has nothing to do with the topic...) GM Tune

I was being exceedingly generous with the only hard numbers I've been able to find. The ones from the Car and Driver article with actual dyno and track results with three different vehicles after testing them on regular and premium gasoline.

The 5.9 liter Dodge saw "a few extra dyno ponies on premium fuel, but at the track its performance was virtually identical." I think this would be far less than 3%. The 4.6 liter Mustang saw 2HP more. The Accord lost 2.6%. Their experts thought "that the results may fall within normal test-to-test variability." Here's the link to the article again. Car and Driver

Do you have any independent numbers?



That's fine, but I'm still waiting for a reference you can rest your argument on. Just one?

In the meantime, here's this:

link: quicktrip!

How's that?

 

Let start at the beginning regular is not the same as premium. Regular doesn't burn faster, Premium has less c9-c15 then regular. Premium burns cleaner because it has less c9-c15. C9-C15 is considered diesel or kerosene. Heres the analysis.

http://www.energylab.com/pdf-docs/fi...ingerprint.pdf

 

He can't even understand his own sources, how is he going to understand that?

 

knock it off; you're starting to sound like a broken record.

 

Why don't you go back to wherever bullet found you (they ban people there for disagreeing with you right?). After licking your wounds, come on back and we'll chat awhile. But check your insults and profanity at the door. Fit owners are nice (don't know why they put up with me...). Might help if you actually own a Fit (I don't believe you've ever sat in one.)

And just in case my post above was too long for you, here's the juicy part:

link

 

Let's try and NOT keep it personal. If we were all judged by our personalities this would be a lonely forum.

No need to pick sides - rambling thoughts and opinions are enough to deal with.

fitfreaks is friends

 

Ha.

Trying to explain the implications of premium vs. regular to you has been like trying to explain Integrals and Riemann Sums to a 4 year old.

You still don't seem to understand that the engine was not designed specifically for 87, something you keep repeating. It can use it, but again that is the minimum recommended. Let that sink in.

Because you can't grasp that, you have also failed to absorb how this is related to knock, internal ECU octane ratings, Min/MaxOct Fuel and Timing maps, etc.

You seem to understand the ECU lets the engine run, but the hows and whys are escaping you.

But please attack me, and look more ignorant in the process. I am beyond caring about what you have to say, when you will overlook parts of your own citations because they don't fit your narrative.

The mental gymnastics required to deduce that the Civic mentioned in Scientific American was less advanced than the Fit, when model year was not discussed, are impressive.

You can accept that a high compression B-series will benefit from superior fuel, but the Fit is too advanced... how does that make the slightest bit of sense? You do not understand how ECMs work, and refuse to learn on top of that.

This means the conversation with you cannot move forward. So you can consider this my last response to you, unless you decide you want to learn instead of reinforcing your own pre-conceived notions.

I am more than happy to answer any questions related to tuning, modding, fabricating, blueprinting, fluids and theory, but you are actively fighting education, for this no one can help, and I shall not bother.

If you don't believe I own a Fit, well again, couldn't care less. Go through my profile, find my thread and there you will see the couple crappy cell phone pictures I have uploaded so far.

You don't acknowledge scan tool data from L15As, or testimony from other drivers who actually use premium, and drive in a manner that would see the benefits behind it, but rag on it anyways. You seem to have some sort of conspiracy theory against premium and oil companies and you are certainly entitled to your opinions, thats fine, but stupid nonetheless.

Further, why would a more advanced engine and computer benefit less, or be more restricted in its ability with respect to a less advanced unit, to take advantage of better fuel?

That is absurd on its face.

Bear in mind, I build and race my own vehicles, I am very well versed in fuels. I have actually melted pistons, windowed blocks and popped HGs in my experimenting.

The Fit is only the second car I've ever had that was not turbo charged. The other was the Accent, which was designed and tuned to use only regular fuel, where premium would literally do me no good, unless I was spraying my 35 shot, because the Accent's ECU would only let you pull so much timing, and knock could quickly become catastrophic.. I outlined all of this for you on pages 6 & 7.

You present disingenuous statements, and cherry pick quotes. Outside observers will be able to make their own judgements on the content of our arguments and character.

 

It's not better. (sorry for cherry-picking again).

Sure the Fit can adjust its timing (all modern cars can). But there is no more energy to extract from premium than regular.


Here's the complete quicktrip quote (they are part of the conspiracy, right?). My italics. No cherry-picking.

sheesh, sorry about the rerun, but this is good stuff. link

 

Had you bothered to read the Hondata link I posted earlier, you would have seen that adjusting timing has a lot to do with how much torque you can get out of an engine. It's pretty succinctly stated in the first few paragraphs, with more info as the article progresses.

 

Exactly. This all goes back to his refusal to understand what goes on inside an ECU.

Several times has MBT been brought up, but Steve doesn't want to understand it. It simply doesn't agree with his narrative, therefore in his mind it is irrelevant and written off.

When idle tuning a given engine, you don't aim for MBT. This way if electrical load suddenly spikes or the AC compressor comes on, the ECU can increase spark advance, and keep the engine from stalling without needing throttle input But since Steve has never tuned or built an engine it is easy to see why he fails to comprehend these very basic tuning concepts.

Effectively what you are doing is creating a torque reserve by not running at MBT.

The car can run fine, without knock, on 87 under many, if not most conditions. That is established. It just means you will stay in the more conservative areas of the Fuel/Timing tables, and you will avoid knock because the computer adapts to conditions constantly.

The car can however ramp up timing, and lean out target AFRs on better fuel, This by default produces a more efficient, complete burn which increases fuel economy and torque output. It really is that simple.

Regardless of what "quicktrip" has boiled down for spoon feeding to the least common denominator, premium is considered superior fuel for quantifiable reasons.

That is why certain engines come from the factory with the recommendation of premium as minimum, not because the OEs are in collusion with the oil companies to make a better buck.

If premium wasn't any better, than why do you need it in forced induction or high compression, where they are trying to create more power? If there was no real difference between premium and regular, I would run 87 in all my turbo cars.

There is a reason it is called premium, and it is not because it simply costs more. It costs more to refine because there is a different balance of constituents that determines what is premium and what is regular.

It is not just some ambiguous mix of hydrocarbons given a price on a whim because it seemed like a good idea at the time.

 

Back in June I remember Silverbullet and I began wondering about the fuel issues being talked about here.
I'll say that this thread has identified more rational [EDIT: in a very irrational way]information than has appeared on this forum in the past six months.

As has been noted there are some good links provided and the indication is, opinions aside, that the L15 USDM ECU is sensitive to fuel being burned.
Question remains as to what is the give-away factor? How does it know that? What criteria is used to adjust the timing.
All I'm aware of is the knock-sensor. Good to only get you out of the low octane blues, not into the advantages of high octane power.

My feeling is that Honda protects the info because it is what makes an i-Vtech intelligent.