Switched to premium; instantly went from 33-35 mpg to 35-37 mpg.
#121
07-09-2011, 01:58 PM
I've tried using premium before but I maybe bias because I only tried for about 4-5 tanks. Using the same driving style and condition. I lost mpg and was of course paying more. I have a long commute everyday about an hour and 20 minutes one way. About 90% highway and of course 10% city driving. Running at speed limit 55mph and sometimes 50mph and very seldom at 60-62mph.
#122
07-09-2011, 02:23 PM
Here is a good link to read. https://www.fitfreak.net/forums/fit-...ocedure-4.html
#123
07-09-2011, 02:39 PM
I'm going on your log and Selden's log of actual MPG, published tests by Car and Driver using dyno and track results, and SilverBullet's recommended manual "Changes in Gasoline." (Bullet's link goes as far as describing the premium myth.) There are a wealth of published articles, not a single one recommending premium, where it's not recommended or required by the manufacturer.
Without anything other than opinions that premium performs better, my bias against using premium would skew my test results. And I'd feel silly filling up my honda economy car with premium.
I've begged and pleaded with you guys to provide any published report of improved performance through using premium grade fuel for any car whose manufacturer does not recommend or require premium. Still waiting.
I have been pilloried by DSM and Texas Coyote for posting published articles and quoting your own statistics.
You and SilverBullet have been gentleman. I'm not sure what to think of Krimson Cardnal. He seems a bit conflicted. I'll miss your contributions to the debate.
If it makes any difference, I agree that the Fit is capable of sustaining more advanced timing when using higher octane, and that this should have an effect on power at WOT. Whether there is a significant difference has yet to be shown. Results by Car and Driver are not promising using other cars including a Honda V6.
I also agree there could be a type of driving where premium would be an advantage: lugging the engine. Whether this provides a measurable difference in MPG has yet to be demonstrated. Using premium fuel when frequently lugging the engine may help prevent damage.
#124
07-09-2011, 03:02 PM
One exception to this would
be in vehicles equipped with knock sensors. In these vehicles,
if octane is insufficient, the computer will retard the timing to
limit engine knock. If the vehicle is operating in the “knock
limiting” mode (retarded timing), using a higher octane fuel will
allow timing to be advanced, resulting in some level of
performance increase. However, even in these vehicles,
tests have shown that there is no perceptible performance
improvement from using a fuel of higher octane than that
recommended by the vehicle manufacturer.
be in vehicles equipped with knock sensors. In these vehicles,
if octane is insufficient, the computer will retard the timing to
limit engine knock. If the vehicle is operating in the “knock
limiting” mode (retarded timing), using a higher octane fuel will
allow timing to be advanced, resulting in some level of
performance increase. However, even in these vehicles,
tests have shown that there is no perceptible performance
improvement from using a fuel of higher octane than that
recommended by the vehicle manufacturer.
4. The very article you posted states that it is based upon recommendations by the manufacturer. Honda did not recommend 87 octane, they merely said not to run anything lower. It is not that far of a reach to think that Honda chose to not recommend high octane fuel due to the fact that the Fit is marketed as a gas $$ saving car.
Fuel Recommendation
Your vehicle is designed to operate
on unleaded gasoline with a pump
octane number of 87 or higher. Use of
a lower octane gasoline can cause a
persistent, heavy metallic rapping
noise that can lead to engine damage.
Your vehicle is designed to operate
on unleaded gasoline with a pump
octane number of 87 or higher. Use of
a lower octane gasoline can cause a
persistent, heavy metallic rapping
noise that can lead to engine damage.
I'd be interested to know how long you think the ECU will run in "retard timing" mode. It really is counter-intuitive to think Honda would degrade performance, either power or MPG for more than a few hundred revolutions. Even if it did, there is nothing in any data to suggest that MPG is degraded for any period.
#125
07-09-2011, 10:34 PM
Two questions:
1. What other NA cars have similar (or higher) compression ratios?
2. Okay, so 87 may retard timing up to 10 degrees (or, put another way, higher octanes may push timing the other way up to 10 degrees). Does anybody have statistics showing what difference that makes? Such as HP changes?
1. What other NA cars have similar (or higher) compression ratios?
2. Okay, so 87 may retard timing up to 10 degrees (or, put another way, higher octanes may push timing the other way up to 10 degrees). Does anybody have statistics showing what difference that makes? Such as HP changes?
#126
07-10-2011, 02:54 AM
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 4,428
Why do you guys still respond to these dipshits?
Put them on ignore.
This conversation will go nowhere because we are dealing with someone who doesn't even understand basics like how torque/hp and spark angle are related yet asks questions that are way over his head and then wonders why it can't be predigested in black and white for the lowest common denominator. And another has no idea how an ECU works and quotes selectively with a healthy dose of cognitive dissonance and a contempt for learning..
This is akin to trying to have an intelligent discussion with the homeless folks downtown screaming about how the world is going to end.
I tune a car almost every single day, be it my own or someone else. The OBD2 ECU's follow almost universal behavior in comparable platforms. I probably spend 2 hours a day minimum looking at data logs from a variety of platforms.
One of the ones I went through today was for a 3speed Bonneville Lakester (Gasoline Class) that ran 276.xxx MPH on the salt at speed week last year. On pump gas.
Think you might learn about a fuel working at the extremes of its usage routinely?
My FIC6 on a 1.5L Fit DD vs. full AEM & MSD on a 509 Merlin big block chevy that runs full bore for 6-7 miles back to back in an hour at 250+ mph averages a couple times a day for a week on the salt flats?
Are you going to listen to the guys who have been on the job getting their hands dirty actually using the chemicals and hardware discussed or the internet know it all who's never even tried premium fuel because they feel they would look silly.
Isn't that ironic as shit? Afraid of looking silly? Then man up and drop a topic you very clearly know nothing about aside from internet shit talking and oversimplified BS.
I have tuned on everything from JP8, AVBlue, Kerosene, Diesel, Ethanol Toluene, Xylene, Methanol Propane, Hydrogen, Q16, 100LL, Nitromethane, etc. Yet I still don't pretend that things are black and white based on my experience. I expect quirks and anomalies to arise. There is no dogma, just reality and adapting to it.
I just generally don't care to have technical discussions here anymore as it is apparently a waste of time when someone like Texas Coyote who has been in the world of motorsports and maintenance for decades put on par in a discussion with some random jackoff who in one breath thinks there is no difference between premium and regular as his laughable kwik trip link suggests, or in another that greater efficiency is a myth with higher quality fuel.
This same sycophant will ignore any inconvenient evidence and has no intentions on educating himself in the matter. He will not by a scan gauge and see for himself and at this point even if he did how would we know he is even giving us truthful results.
We are ignoring the basics to hash out a very complicated discussion in a totally half assed manner because so many of you folks are routinely giving attention to someone who is doing what basically amounts to trolling and then trying to reason with him.
This denial has become a religion, he has become so invested that he will pound out posts on his computer for days on end repeating the same circular logic and relying on two small sets of datapoints that he finds convenient and posting garbage links while cherry picking parts of others out of context and then makes broad spectrum declarations that actually conflict with the information given to him by owners of scan tools and in several cases.. actual engine management equipment.
This forum can be, for lack of a better word.. completely fucking retarded on technical matters because unlike other forums that don't deal with BS like stance, there are actual established and acknowledged authorities on various topics that you can seek out where not everything degenerates into a worthless pissing match.
And because there is like one moderator for ~49,000 member forum there is no rhyme or reason when it comes to searching, new useless threads on the same topics pop up constantly, next to no one seems to search on a given topic in the hopes that the solutions will just be given to them.
How can you guys tackle such a complex multidiscpline endeavor without a sound understanding or familiarity of what is being discussed, let alone try to find some semblance of a definitive answer?
Where the homeless guy is not put on level ground with someone of actual experience/formal education while the unwashed masses chime in with their often misguided theories. There was a point in time where you weren't given participation prizes and facts/reality were not subject to populism.
Truth is not found through consensus.
Some days it's like Idiocracy was actually a documentary.
It is no small wonder that so many of the innovators, developers, manufactures and helpful/knowledgeable posters have not only moved on from this forum.. but this platform entirely.
Kraftwerks is an excellent example. As a population the trends and potential market are a complete turn off, there are several projects I started with the folks who would get it done only to stop and shelve it because in the long run it wouldn't be worth it to deal with the clientele.
Shift kits, end clutches, friction steels, converters, valve bodies etc. for AT GE8's were in the works until I pulled the plug because there is no way in hell I or anyone else can explain to the average FF.net member how to install something like that without them fucking it up horrendously on their end and then blaming us.
Instead of finishing up my plans on the GD3 this weekend.. I bought a Mint 1GA DSM (cammed, built trans, LSD, 16G, 3" custom exhaust, etc) this afternoon from a guy I met at the Porsche Exchange in a client's car.. The Fit will wait.
I actually get excited discussing technical matters in the DSM community as well as on other private tuning/racing communities with people who will challenge what I know and where what I know puts me towards the middle of the pack and makes me average at best. Where nearly everyone who takes the time to post is someone with something intelligent to say and
Here on FF, there are a maybe a few dozen people who really seem to have a good head on their shoulders, contribute to the community several of which have been in this thread
How can I say all this in a callous shotgun spread post? Because as a very wise man told me when I was young..
It helps no one to encourage stupid, let alone debate it. Yes there are stupid questions. Yes there is a point where you are wasting your time. Try to recognize it.
As George Carlin said:
No amount of oil squirters, quench surfaces, chamber polishing, ceramic coating can change the fact that 87 octane is the bare minimum Honda will let you put in the engine. The only real way to work with it is with colder IAT's, colder plugs, or better fuel.
That is effectively a warning. Honda may go so far as to void your warranty. 87 is the lowest you can get away with before DAMAGE can occur.
How much more fucking clear do they have to make it?
If you think you can mitigate the effects of a 10.4:1CR on regular 87 with out pulling timing and enriching the mixture, you are beyond help.
If you think there is no merit for fuel economy to being able to run MBT on a leaner burn in the low rpm/highload range of the map, you are in no position to be discussing the matter because you don't even have the foundations of an elementary education in the matter.
If you think that a simple adaptation in driving along with superior fuel can't help mileage, you have no business sharing "advice" on the interwebz.
Put them on ignore.
This conversation will go nowhere because we are dealing with someone who doesn't even understand basics like how torque/hp and spark angle are related yet asks questions that are way over his head and then wonders why it can't be predigested in black and white for the lowest common denominator. And another has no idea how an ECU works and quotes selectively with a healthy dose of cognitive dissonance and a contempt for learning..
This is akin to trying to have an intelligent discussion with the homeless folks downtown screaming about how the world is going to end.
I tune a car almost every single day, be it my own or someone else. The OBD2 ECU's follow almost universal behavior in comparable platforms. I probably spend 2 hours a day minimum looking at data logs from a variety of platforms.
One of the ones I went through today was for a 3speed Bonneville Lakester (Gasoline Class) that ran 276.xxx MPH on the salt at speed week last year. On pump gas.
Think you might learn about a fuel working at the extremes of its usage routinely?
My FIC6 on a 1.5L Fit DD vs. full AEM & MSD on a 509 Merlin big block chevy that runs full bore for 6-7 miles back to back in an hour at 250+ mph averages a couple times a day for a week on the salt flats?
Are you going to listen to the guys who have been on the job getting their hands dirty actually using the chemicals and hardware discussed or the internet know it all who's never even tried premium fuel because they feel they would look silly.
Isn't that ironic as shit? Afraid of looking silly? Then man up and drop a topic you very clearly know nothing about aside from internet shit talking and oversimplified BS.
I have tuned on everything from JP8, AVBlue, Kerosene, Diesel, Ethanol Toluene, Xylene, Methanol Propane, Hydrogen, Q16, 100LL, Nitromethane, etc. Yet I still don't pretend that things are black and white based on my experience. I expect quirks and anomalies to arise. There is no dogma, just reality and adapting to it.
I just generally don't care to have technical discussions here anymore as it is apparently a waste of time when someone like Texas Coyote who has been in the world of motorsports and maintenance for decades put on par in a discussion with some random jackoff who in one breath thinks there is no difference between premium and regular as his laughable kwik trip link suggests, or in another that greater efficiency is a myth with higher quality fuel.
This same sycophant will ignore any inconvenient evidence and has no intentions on educating himself in the matter. He will not by a scan gauge and see for himself and at this point even if he did how would we know he is even giving us truthful results.
We are ignoring the basics to hash out a very complicated discussion in a totally half assed manner because so many of you folks are routinely giving attention to someone who is doing what basically amounts to trolling and then trying to reason with him.
This denial has become a religion, he has become so invested that he will pound out posts on his computer for days on end repeating the same circular logic and relying on two small sets of datapoints that he finds convenient and posting garbage links while cherry picking parts of others out of context and then makes broad spectrum declarations that actually conflict with the information given to him by owners of scan tools and in several cases.. actual engine management equipment.
This forum can be, for lack of a better word.. completely fucking retarded on technical matters because unlike other forums that don't deal with BS like stance, there are actual established and acknowledged authorities on various topics that you can seek out where not everything degenerates into a worthless pissing match.
And because there is like one moderator for ~49,000 member forum there is no rhyme or reason when it comes to searching, new useless threads on the same topics pop up constantly, next to no one seems to search on a given topic in the hopes that the solutions will just be given to them.
How can you guys tackle such a complex multidiscpline endeavor without a sound understanding or familiarity of what is being discussed, let alone try to find some semblance of a definitive answer?
Where the homeless guy is not put on level ground with someone of actual experience/formal education while the unwashed masses chime in with their often misguided theories. There was a point in time where you weren't given participation prizes and facts/reality were not subject to populism.
Truth is not found through consensus.
Some days it's like Idiocracy was actually a documentary.
It is no small wonder that so many of the innovators, developers, manufactures and helpful/knowledgeable posters have not only moved on from this forum.. but this platform entirely.
Kraftwerks is an excellent example. As a population the trends and potential market are a complete turn off, there are several projects I started with the folks who would get it done only to stop and shelve it because in the long run it wouldn't be worth it to deal with the clientele.
Shift kits, end clutches, friction steels, converters, valve bodies etc. for AT GE8's were in the works until I pulled the plug because there is no way in hell I or anyone else can explain to the average FF.net member how to install something like that without them fucking it up horrendously on their end and then blaming us.
Instead of finishing up my plans on the GD3 this weekend.. I bought a Mint 1GA DSM (cammed, built trans, LSD, 16G, 3" custom exhaust, etc) this afternoon from a guy I met at the Porsche Exchange in a client's car.. The Fit will wait.
I actually get excited discussing technical matters in the DSM community as well as on other private tuning/racing communities with people who will challenge what I know and where what I know puts me towards the middle of the pack and makes me average at best. Where nearly everyone who takes the time to post is someone with something intelligent to say and
Here on FF, there are a maybe a few dozen people who really seem to have a good head on their shoulders, contribute to the community several of which have been in this thread
How can I say all this in a callous shotgun spread post? Because as a very wise man told me when I was young..
Suffer no fools.
As George Carlin said:
"Think of how stupid the average person is, and then realize that half of them are dumber than that"
No amount of oil squirters, quench surfaces, chamber polishing, ceramic coating can change the fact that 87 octane is the bare minimum Honda will let you put in the engine. The only real way to work with it is with colder IAT's, colder plugs, or better fuel.
That is effectively a warning. Honda may go so far as to void your warranty. 87 is the lowest you can get away with before DAMAGE can occur.
How much more fucking clear do they have to make it?
If you think you can mitigate the effects of a 10.4:1CR on regular 87 with out pulling timing and enriching the mixture, you are beyond help.
If you think there is no merit for fuel economy to being able to run MBT on a leaner burn in the low rpm/highload range of the map, you are in no position to be discussing the matter because you don't even have the foundations of an elementary education in the matter.
If you think that a simple adaptation in driving along with superior fuel can't help mileage, you have no business sharing "advice" on the interwebz.
Last edited by DiamondStarMonsters; 07-10-2011 at 03:58 AM.
#127
07-10-2011, 03:56 AM
If Honda says not to use fuel with an octane rating lower than 87.... That is like saying that you should feed your children food with the minimal amount of calories and nutrients to sustain life... Of course if a child is well fed he or she is going to be healthier, smarter, more productive, and less likely to suffer from mental or physical illnesses.. Why is it that people that have marginal knowledge about automobiles have very loose associations of the meaning of the text of dated articles they produce as undeniable evidence that substantiates cars built 10 or more years agoWhat I have been having thrown at me that is supposed to change my interpretations of what I know has more to do with cars that were built before 1996 on back to 1979.... A person that states time and again that they have a bias against something that is recommended for use in your and favors the fuel that has the lowest recommendation by the manufacturer. If a persons mind is closed to at least burning a tank or 2 to have an experience to relate to he is here to be disruptive and annoying.... In the mental health profession a few years back this type of behavior was referred to as "crazy making behavior".....How many of you that have been keeping up with this lunacy have actually learned anything applicable to the cars being sold today by Honda?
Last edited by Texas Coyote; 07-10-2011 at 04:00 AM.
#129
07-10-2011, 10:35 AM
RIP George, what a funny man, that had some really good words that made you think. Thank you for that quote DSM, made me laugh as I just pictured old George standing on stage and letting loose.
#130
07-10-2011, 01:40 PM
I just generally don't care to have technical discussions here anymore as it is apparently a waste of time when someone like Texas Coyote who has been in the world of motorsports and maintenance for decades put on par in a discussion with some random jackoff who in one breath thinks there is no difference between premium and regular as his laughable kwik trip link suggests, or in another that greater efficiency is a myth with higher quality fuel.
This same sycophant will ignore any inconvenient evidence and has no intentions on educating himself in the matter. He will not by a scan gauge and see for himself and at this point even if he did how would we know he is even giving us truthful results.
This same sycophant will ignore any inconvenient evidence and has no intentions on educating himself in the matter. He will not by a scan gauge and see for himself and at this point even if he did how would we know he is even giving us truthful results.
This denial has become a religion, he has become so invested that he will pound out posts on his computer for days on end repeating the same circular logic and relying on two small sets of datapoints that he finds convenient and posting garbage links while cherry picking parts of others out of context and then makes broad spectrum declarations that actually conflict with the information given to him by owners of scan tools and in several cases.. actual engine management equipment.
Define small. goober's spreadsheet of 42 premium data points and 34 regular data points over 1 year is large. The difference he experienced over the year for premium 30.25mpg, regular 29.72 was a difference of 0.53mpg or 1.8%. This is not statistically significant.
There were two issues that may have skewed the results, the first being his premium usage was over winter/spring, and regular over summer/fall; and the second that he changed wheels/tires at about the time he switched to premium fuel. Isolating and comparing smaller periods of time during the year where these issues may have had less of an impact, the difference was 1.3MPG, an increase of 4% for premium. A significant difference giving weight to your argument. I hope goobers continues to keep and share records.
Find a better set of data points, either MPG or dyno/track results and we'll have something to discuss. Find an article supporting your conclusions and we'll have something to discuss. The fact there are none is significant. Until then, please feel free to insult me some more.
I'd like to thank Texas Coyote for his advice:
1. Changing oil is like changing underwear
2. Octane is like Chinese food.
3. Fueling your Fit is like feeding a child.
I'd also like to thank SilverBullet for his find: A manual entitled Changes in Gasoline (2009), written by engineers for auto technicians.
Originally Posted by Changes in Gasoline page 4
A number of myths about octane have grown over the
years. There is a widespread perception that the greater the
octane the better the performance. However, once enough
octane is supplied to prevent engine knock, there is little, if
any, performance improvement. One exception to this would
be in vehicles equipped with knock sensors. In these vehicles,
if octane is insufficient, the computer will retard the timing to
limit engine knock. If the vehicle is operating in the “knock
limiting” mode (retarded timing), using a higher octane fuel will
allow timing to be advanced, resulting in some level of
performance increase. However, even in these vehicles,
tests have shown that there is no perceptible performance
improvement from using a fuel of higher octane than that
recommended by the vehicle manufacturer.
Another myth is that using a higher octane fuel will result
in improved fuel economy (increased miles per gallon). Octane
is nothing more than a measure of anti-knock quality.
Fuel economy is determined by a number of variables including
the energy content of the fuel. Some premium grades of
fuel may contain components which increase energy content.
In those cases, fuel economy may improve slightly as a result
of higher energy content, but not as a result of the higher
octane. Two fuels of identical octane could have different
energy content due to compositional differences
years. There is a widespread perception that the greater the
octane the better the performance. However, once enough
octane is supplied to prevent engine knock, there is little, if
any, performance improvement. One exception to this would
be in vehicles equipped with knock sensors. In these vehicles,
if octane is insufficient, the computer will retard the timing to
limit engine knock. If the vehicle is operating in the “knock
limiting” mode (retarded timing), using a higher octane fuel will
allow timing to be advanced, resulting in some level of
performance increase. However, even in these vehicles,
tests have shown that there is no perceptible performance
improvement from using a fuel of higher octane than that
recommended by the vehicle manufacturer.
Another myth is that using a higher octane fuel will result
in improved fuel economy (increased miles per gallon). Octane
is nothing more than a measure of anti-knock quality.
Fuel economy is determined by a number of variables including
the energy content of the fuel. Some premium grades of
fuel may contain components which increase energy content.
In those cases, fuel economy may improve slightly as a result
of higher energy content, but not as a result of the higher
octane. Two fuels of identical octane could have different
energy content due to compositional differences
#131
07-10-2011, 01:57 PM
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 4,428
Torque is improved in the low and mid range. Premium, at least around here, contains top cylinder lubes and detergents.
The other nice bit is the gas stations I frequent for tuning purposes also receive AMG/M-series owners as well as other high compression NA and high boost street and weekend warrior's vehicles so the fuel has to be good consistently.
You are getting at LEAST 93 oct from locations like that, lest someone in their SL65 Bi-Turbo V12 melts some valves, lifts a head or windows a block.
#133
07-11-2011, 09:38 AM
Two questions:
1. What other NA cars have similar (or higher) compression ratios?
2. Okay, so 87 may retard timing up to 10 degrees (or, put another way, higher octanes may push timing the other way up to 10 degrees). Does anybody have statistics showing what difference that makes? Such as HP changes?
1. What other NA cars have similar (or higher) compression ratios?
2. Okay, so 87 may retard timing up to 10 degrees (or, put another way, higher octanes may push timing the other way up to 10 degrees). Does anybody have statistics showing what difference that makes? Such as HP changes?
Toyota Yaris, 10.5:1. Recommended fuel unknown. No doubt it requires premium.
Last edited by Steve244; 07-11-2011 at 09:55 AM.
#135
07-11-2011, 12:29 PM
These are eco cars and must be marketed to be cheap to run. No car manufacturer is going to market an eco car that has to run on premium octane. Honda leaves the fits octane rating open for interpretation. If you want to drive slow and sip gas then by all means run 87, but if you want to actually drive your car and get the most enjoyment out of it you should run premium.
#138
07-11-2011, 04:25 PM
What, and deprive you of the opportunity to feel smug by posting that I should google it?
Googling stuff like that yields a million pages that don't have what I'm looking for. Most of them simply rehash that if the manual says regular, use regular... not helpful here.
Googling stuff like that yields a million pages that don't have what I'm looking for. Most of them simply rehash that if the manual says regular, use regular... not helpful here.
#139
07-11-2011, 04:55 PM
Just filled up the tank with 91 octane premium fuel - Toyota Yaris Forums - Ultimate Yaris Enthusiast Site
Oh hey, look: similar discussions about the Yaris.
#140
07-11-2011, 05:07 PM
Premium Gas - Toyota Yaris Forums - Ultimate Yaris Enthusiast Site
Just filled up the tank with 91 octane premium fuel - Toyota Yaris Forums - Ultimate Yaris Enthusiast Site
Oh hey, look: similar discussions about the Yaris.
Just filled up the tank with 91 octane premium fuel - Toyota Yaris Forums - Ultimate Yaris Enthusiast Site
Oh hey, look: similar discussions about the Yaris.
That doesn't surprise me.
