Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2007 09:52:57 -0400 From: "John" <johnnospamg.org> Subject: Re: Octane ratings.....what's the truth?
"Richard" <rootnospamlhost> wrote in message news:46139f18$0$46636$dbd4f001nospam.euronet.nl... > > "gerry" <notforgenerausenospamam.com> wrote in message > news:1316l6virkhfj97nospam.supernews.com... >>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 > > Ah.... > the Truth. > There is no truth, there is just perceiption. > There also is no consensus on this I am afraid. > And since when is truth determined by consensus? When it comes to 'science' of global warming! ;-) > ;) > > Anyway... > MY EXPERIENCE is that the higher octane fuels will cause the engine to run > more efficiently, somewhere around the same percentage as the price is > higher. > So... if the higher octane stuff is around 10% more expensive, then I get > a milage that is around 10% better. > This has been "More Or Less Accurate" (= True? ;) ) since the first time > I did the calculations for my Saab 99. Since this car did not have any > "intelligence" built in (you had to get in the car first yourself) it > didnt adjust to the fuel by itself. > So.... I got fed up with tuning to a different fuel and did the > calculations. > In the end I stuck with the higher octane fuel. > > If I was/had an oil company, I would make sure my fuel was priced so that > i would sell the most, OR make my profits as high as possible. > If my high octane fuel did not have enough benefits, then I would have to > lower the price OR improve the performance of it. > So..... I suspect this has been going on in the oil-markets for a while, > and the prices will have leveled out related to the performance. > > That is my GUESS. That is not the truth. ;) > > BTW: > The best way to save on fuel cost is... > ... not drive. > It is easy to drive 10% less. Try it. > It is the truth. > Ehm.... oops! ;) > > Good luck. > Richard. > >
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
