fastest new car

[Vetterin]

Originally posted by: thomsbrain

I'm sure there must be some V8 engines out there that are supposed to run on regular, though, right?

Mustang GT anyone?

 

[lurk3r]

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
I've spent $55 filling my Altima with regular... all things considered, the price difference is very small. Around here I usually buy gas at $2.95 and I have a 20 gallon tank. If I put 20 gallons in that's $59. If I put 20 gallons of Premium in at $3.05 that's $61. Not much of a difference. If you get 25 mpg with Regular, you're spending about 11.8 cents per mile. If you get 26 mpg with Premium, you're spending about 11.7 cents per mile. So if you can get an extra mile per gallon by using Premium fuel, you'll actually be SAVING money by buying the more expensive fuel.

Exactly, I've found this on nearly every car I've driven. The only time I ever put 87 octane in a car is when its a rental, the sucky gas milage is then the next guy's problem. Nearly any new vehicle will retard the timing when a motor starts pinging on the shit 87 octane gas. This is especially true in Michigan, by far the worst gas I've driven on.

After many thousands of miles, I've found that I can get about this far on gas from each state:

Ohio/Indiana ~ 730 km
Michigan ~ 650 km
Ontario ~ 750 km

All are on 89 octane, in my 06 2.5L Altima

--edit --
Oh and the Honda will be way pickier than your Maxima on the octane, a good check would be the compression ratios if they are posted, if you MUST run on 87, pick the engine with the lowest compression.

 

[zerocool84]

And theres different kinds of "Premium"....................California Premium 91 and everywhere else. I know there are many cars that get full power with 93 and not 91 which is funny seeing as how big Cali is for cars.

 

[KentState]

In my GTO, I put in 12 gallons a week, get around 20mpg average, and only spend $156 more on premium which is usually $.25 more/gallon. I know money can be tight, but $3 a week shouldn't be breaking the bank.

 

[rh71]

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
I've spent $55 filling my Altima with regular... all things considered, the price difference is very small. Around here I usually buy gas at $2.95 and I have a 20 gallon tank. If I put 20 gallons in that's $59. If I put 20 gallons of Premium in at $3.05 that's $61. Not much of a difference. If you get 25 mpg with Regular, you're spending about 11.8 cents per mile. If you get 26 mpg with Premium, you're spending about 11.7 cents per mile.

:thumbsup: for people who do the math. It's never been a big difference.

 

[Sust]

It's a 2002 GLE that i've had since it read .7 miles on the meter.
In fact, I think I remember you(or someone else here) asking about it a long time ago and I posted my thoughts on my maxima back then.
The car has held up well in terms of durability(/knocks on wood), but the car's performance is no where near the way I remember it when I first hit I95 with it. Ah, sweet memories...
I've been driving a fair amount of long distance with my car over the years and the little computer mileage-o-meter says 27.5 mpg but I know that the truth is that it's around 23-24 mpg when I do the math.

I see what everyone is saying about my nickeling and diming of gas, but something just doesnt feel right about the whole $50 fill up thing. I remember when I could fill up a car with a 20 dollar bill and get change back. Not the case anymore obviously, but I'll try to live in the now. I just figured that if I could look into cars all over again, maybe i'll look into something that runs equally well and designed for regular unleaded too.

Nothing's written in stone yet, so the search continues. Thanks to everyone for posting.

 

[Jeff7181]

It wasn't that long ago that a $20 fillup was possible either. When I started driving to high school I used to buy gas for 89 cents per gallon... that was 10 years ago. During that time the price has more than tripled.

 

[GoatMonkey]

Here's an article from Car and Driver from a few years back...

http://www.caranddriver.com/fe...-or-premium-page2.html

Our low-tech Ram managed to eke out a few extra dyno ponies on premium fuel, but at the track its performance was virtually identical. The Mustang's knock sensors and EEC-V computer found 2 hp more on the dyno and shaved a more impressive 0.3 second off its quarter-mile time at the track. The Accord took a tiny step backward in power (minus 2.6 percent) and performance (minus 1.5 percent) on premium fuel, a phenomenon for which none of the experts we consulted could offer an explanation except to posit that the results may fall within normal test-to-test variability. This, of course, may also be the case for the gains of similar magnitude realized by the Ram and Mustang.

The results were more dramatic with the test cars that require premium fuel. The turbocharged Saab's sophisticated Trionic engine-control system dialed the power back 9.8 percent on regular gas, and performance dropped 10.1 percent at the track. Burning regular in our BMW M3 diminished track performance by 6.6 percent, but neither the BMW nor the Saab suffered any drivability problems while burning regular unleaded fuel. Unfortunately, the M3's sophisticated electronics made it impossible to test the car on the dyno (see caption at top).

I would like to know what happened to the fuel economy with the different grades of gas in these cars, but it wasn't covered in the article. I'd bet that the MPG drops for the cars that require premium when you put regular in them. That would account for some of the variance you see on user reported MPG on sites like fueleconomy.gov.

 

[fbrdphreak]

Who cares about regular vs premium? Pay the extra $0.30 per gallon and quit yer bitchin. The fuel economy of the vehicle matters much more than the grade of gas it requires.

The new Civic Si requires premium, OH NOES!!!! Too bad it still gets really good gas mileage, and for the penalty of $0.30 per gallon (along with the horror of driving a Civic ) you get a solid 200HP.

 

[DisgruntledVirus]

Originally posted by: fbrdphreak
Who cares about regular vs premium? Pay the extra $0.30 per gallon and quit yer bitchin. The fuel economy of the vehicle matters much more than the grade of gas it requires.

The new Civic Si requires premium, OH NOES!!!! Too bad it still gets really good gas mileage, and for the penalty of $0.30 per gallon (along with the horror of driving a Civic ) you get a solid 200HP.

What's wrong with a Civic (other then the ricer's that pretend they are in The Fast and the Furious)? They are great cars, reliable, maintain resale value well, etc. The only issue with them are you then get put in the "ricer" group, even though you have not done anything other then add a CAI.

 

[fbrdphreak]

Originally posted by: DisgruntledVirus

Originally posted by: fbrdphreak
Who cares about regular vs premium? Pay the extra $0.30 per gallon and quit yer bitchin. The fuel economy of the vehicle matters much more than the grade of gas it requires.

The new Civic Si requires premium, OH NOES!!!! Too bad it still gets really good gas mileage, and for the penalty of $0.30 per gallon (along with the horror of driving a Civic ) you get a solid 200HP.

What's wrong with a Civic (other then the ricer's that pretend they are in The Fast and the Furious)? They are great cars, reliable, maintain resale value well, etc. The only issue with them are you then get put in the "ricer" group, even though you have not done anything other then add a CAI.

I'm just messing man. Not my style, but it's a decent car. Today's Civic is really the Accord of 5-7 years ago, the Accord has stepped up a class, and the Fit is the Civic of 5-7 years ago.

 

[Jeff7181]

Originally posted by: GoatMonkey
Here's an article from Car and Driver from a few years back...

http://www.caranddriver.com/fe...-or-premium-page2.html

Our low-tech Ram managed to eke out a few extra dyno ponies on premium fuel, but at the track its performance was virtually identical. The Mustang's knock sensors and EEC-V computer found 2 hp more on the dyno and shaved a more impressive 0.3 second off its quarter-mile time at the track. The Accord took a tiny step backward in power (minus 2.6 percent) and performance (minus 1.5 percent) on premium fuel, a phenomenon for which none of the experts we consulted could offer an explanation except to posit that the results may fall within normal test-to-test variability. This, of course, may also be the case for the gains of similar magnitude realized by the Ram and Mustang.

The results were more dramatic with the test cars that require premium fuel. The turbocharged Saab's sophisticated Trionic engine-control system dialed the power back 9.8 percent on regular gas, and performance dropped 10.1 percent at the track. Burning regular in our BMW M3 diminished track performance by 6.6 percent, but neither the BMW nor the Saab suffered any drivability problems while burning regular unleaded fuel. Unfortunately, the M3's sophisticated electronics made it impossible to test the car on the dyno (see caption at top).

I would like to know what happened to the fuel economy with the different grades of gas in these cars, but it wasn't covered in the article. I'd bet that the MPG drops for the cars that require premium when you put regular in them. That would account for some of the variance you see on user reported MPG on sites like fueleconomy.gov.

I'm sure the mileage does drop. One of the ways to stop detonation and pre-ignition is to richen the air/fuel mixture.

Cruising is one condition that higher octane fuel can help almost any car because when the computer sees cruising conditions, it will lean out the air/fuel mixture (IIRC, it can be as high as 16:1 when cruising) to conserve fuel. If the engine begins to knock it will either retard timing or richen the air/fuel back up. If your fuel resists detonation better, the engine can run leaner when cruising and save fuel.

 

[DisgruntledVirus]

Originally posted by: fbrdphreak

Originally posted by: DisgruntledVirus

Originally posted by: fbrdphreak
Who cares about regular vs premium? Pay the extra $0.30 per gallon and quit yer bitchin. The fuel economy of the vehicle matters much more than the grade of gas it requires.

The new Civic Si requires premium, OH NOES!!!! Too bad it still gets really good gas mileage, and for the penalty of $0.30 per gallon (along with the horror of driving a Civic ) you get a solid 200HP.

What's wrong with a Civic (other then the ricer's that pretend they are in The Fast and the Furious)? They are great cars, reliable, maintain resale value well, etc. The only issue with them are you then get put in the "ricer" group, even though you have not done anything other then add a CAI.

I'm just messing man. Not my style, but it's a decent car. Today's Civic is really the Accord of 5-7 years ago, the Accord has stepped up a class, and the Fit is the Civic of 5-7 years ago.

Yeah the Civic has really stepped up as a car, and for under $20k cars I would rate the Civic as one of the top 3 cars. As for the Fit, my gf was with me at the Honda dealer over the weekend and now she wants one. She is in love with the Fit.

I almost cried

 

[evident]

Originally posted by: DisgruntledVirus

Originally posted by: fbrdphreak

Originally posted by: DisgruntledVirus

Originally posted by: fbrdphreak
Who cares about regular vs premium? Pay the extra $0.30 per gallon and quit yer bitchin. The fuel economy of the vehicle matters much more than the grade of gas it requires.

The new Civic Si requires premium, OH NOES!!!! Too bad it still gets really good gas mileage, and for the penalty of $0.30 per gallon (along with the horror of driving a Civic ) you get a solid 200HP.

What's wrong with a Civic (other then the ricer's that pretend they are in The Fast and the Furious)? They are great cars, reliable, maintain resale value well, etc. The only issue with them are you then get put in the "ricer" group, even though you have not done anything other then add a CAI.

I'm just messing man. Not my style, but it's a decent car. Today's Civic is really the Accord of 5-7 years ago, the Accord has stepped up a class, and the Fit is the Civic of 5-7 years ago.

Yeah the Civic has really stepped up as a car, and for under $20k cars I would rate the Civic as one of the top 3 cars. As for the Fit, my gf was with me at the Honda dealer over the weekend and now she wants one. She is in love with the Fit.

I almost cried

i have a loaner civic this week and it's definitely the best loaner car i've ever driven. my accord is in the shop because a stupid deer jumped in front of me at 1:30PM!!!!

 

[mcturkey]

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
Yep, 87 octane is fine. I bet you could even put 86 octane in it and it would be fine. But don't think for a second that the engine will make the same amount of power and get the same mileage as if you used Premium.

Suppose it has a 20% reduction in power with 87 octane (it most certainly is less of a reduction). That still means that the 2008 Corvette (rated at 430hp) will now make 344hp. Name me another car that does that on 87 Octane.

 

[overst33r]

Originally posted by: mcturkey

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
Yep, 87 octane is fine. I bet you could even put 86 octane in it and it would be fine. But don't think for a second that the engine will make the same amount of power and get the same mileage as if you used Premium.

Suppose it has a 20% reduction in power with 87 octane (it most certainly is less of a reduction). That still means that the 2008 Corvette (rated at 430hp) will now make 344hp. Name me another car that does that on 87 Octane.

I did. 2 of them in fact.

 

[alimoalem]

Originally posted by: mariok2006

Originally posted by: mcturkey

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
Yep, 87 octane is fine. I bet you could even put 86 octane in it and it would be fine. But don't think for a second that the engine will make the same amount of power and get the same mileage as if you used Premium.

Suppose it has a 20% reduction in power with 87 octane (it most certainly is less of a reduction). That still means that the 2008 Corvette (rated at 430hp) will now make 344hp. Name me another car that does that on 87 Octane.

I did. 2 of them in fact.

you only listed the G8...what's the second one?

btw, according to fueleconomy.gov (it's the only thing i could think of), both the corvette and G8 6L cars are listed as using premium. the G8 3.6L is listed as using regular, though.

 

[overst33r]

Originally posted by: alimoalem

Originally posted by: mariok2006

Originally posted by: mcturkey

Originally posted by: Jeff7181
Yep, 87 octane is fine. I bet you could even put 86 octane in it and it would be fine. But don't think for a second that the engine will make the same amount of power and get the same mileage as if you used Premium.

Suppose it has a 20% reduction in power with 87 octane (it most certainly is less of a reduction). That still means that the 2008 Corvette (rated at 430hp) will now make 344hp. Name me another car that does that on 87 Octane.

I did. 2 of them in fact.

you only listed the G8...what's the second one?

btw, according to fueleconomy.gov (it's the only thing i could think of), both the corvette and G8 6L cars are listed as using premium. the G8 3.6L is listed as using regular, though.

It seems that the V8 is listed as premium, but this site lists the V8 as regular grade gasoline.

The other car I listed was the Hyundai Genesis.

Thing that doesn't make sense to me: Who is going to buy a Corvette and run it on regular to save money when you just spent $40k on a sports car?

 

[swtethan]

Originally posted by: DisgruntledVirus

Originally posted by: fbrdphreak
Who cares about regular vs premium? Pay the extra $0.30 per gallon and quit yer bitchin. The fuel economy of the vehicle matters much more than the grade of gas it requires.

The new Civic Si requires premium, OH NOES!!!! Too bad it still gets really good gas mileage, and for the penalty of $0.30 per gallon (along with the horror of driving a Civic ) you get a solid 200HP.

What's wrong with a Civic (other then the ricer's that pretend they are in The Fast and the Furious)? They are great cars, reliable, maintain resale value well, etc. The only issue with them are you then get put in the "ricer" group, even though you have not done anything other then add a CAI.

Nothing wrong with the civic,I love my 2008 SI. MMMMM.