Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2007 00:33:49 -0700 From: "gerry" <notforgenerausenospamam.com> Subject: Octane ratings.....what's the truth?
I know this is old stuff, but I would like some input (hopefully informed) on current thinking, now that gas prices have skyrocketed and there is a real financial significance that just didn't exist "in the olden days". Here in British Columbia, Canada we are paying $1.17/litre in $Cdn or 1.17 x 3.785 (l. / U.S. gal) x .86/1=$3.80 U.S. / U.S. gallon.....and that's for regular. Let's look at about $4.10+ U.S. / U.S. gallon. The book for my car 2001 V70xc recommends a minimum octane (RON) of 91, and I see regulars at 87 and mid-range at 89. I listen to Radio Station KGO (San Francisco) at night and often hear their science Guru Bill Wattenberg (PhD etc. etc. knows all, et al) who says, "If it will run on regular, use regular. A modern sophisticated car engine may not run initially that well, but sensors will "re-tune" to the lower octane and will be fine.....no damage.....no power loss.....no effect on warranty. The theory, as I understand it is that "higher octane" doesn't mean more "power" in the gas, it means elements added to adjust combustion rate. In his opinion higher octanes are "generally speaking" a scam on automobile users perpetrated by the oil companies and encouraged by the auto manufacturers. What's the consensus? Gerry
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
