Well at least not my car.


I put some 87 octane in after reading threads about others using it and being ok. I'm getting restricted performance when accelerating at about 70% throttle and it won't let me rev beyond 3k rpms. It starts stuttering at 3k rpms and I heard it knock once. Restricted performance also occasionally comes on while just coasting or idling.


I was just testing 87 to see if it worked ok b/c of high gas prices. 89 octane is fine however. Next time I'm doing either 89 or 93 octane

 

Some engines will run fine on 87 but will have more power if fed premium.

The V6 that Nissan uses is a great example of this -- They recommend premium but the engine will run on 87. Porsche indicates that since they make cars for markets with different fuel supplies they design them to operate in all markets -- but they don't define operate.

My bet is the XJR with the lower compression would work better if not pushed.

My Mercedes V6 wagon will run fine on 89 - But the V8's need premium.

 

To me its not worth the 3 or 4 dollars per fill up to run cheap fuel .....

 

here here, totally agree with that, 93+ all the way with a Jaguar. Personally run 97.

 

I agree. I was just testing my car. Its the first and last time I'm going to run regular grade gas. I've read people say that regular runs fine on their car though on this forum. Maybe as these cars age, some can tolerate lower grades of fuel depending on their car's amount of blow by, meaning less compression?

 

i was tempted to try 87, after reading that other thread...but after this one i'll be sticking with my 93 :-)

 

Since I've owned my 99 XJR, I've run 3 tanks of 87 through it, 2 accidentally, and 1 intentionally. Two of them coughed and sputtered, and 1 ran smoothly. I guess it depends on the station, but I've found the mileage also suffers enough that the cost savings ends up being minimal in the long run. I've since stuck with 91 octane (that's the best available around here).

 

Generally we only have 95 or 98 here.

My handbook recommends 95 though 98 "may be used as an alternative"

Many schools of thought say that using higher than needed (recommended) does not add power of mileage unless the engine senses "knock" and adjusts automatically (like the BMW 330 their handbooks claims 10bhp more on 98)

Just though I would muddy the waters further *S*

 

North America has a different octane rating system than the rest of the world.

91 octane in N.Am is labelled as 95 everywhere else.

 

well thats even more confusing LOL

 

Only for those that are not aware. This also gives rise to some pretty amusing myths by people who think that European gas is 'more powerful'

 

Political statement....
yeh, how could that be? North America is the biggest consumer of petroleum oil in the world, so much so they go to war over it, and drag us into it too.
Euro markets are now primarily Diesel power, and to prove this look at what's winning Le Mans each year, and the most popular engines being sold are diesels.

 

Not a clue what you're trying to get at, you've possibly misread what I was saying above.

 

We use different numbers for the octane rating - it's an average -- but the fuel is the same.

We do not have diesels in great numbers in the USA for a couple of reasons. For many years low sulfur diesel was not widely available - also the emissions requirements in California are so strict that most european diesel engines will not pass and those that do often require expensive add ons. The direct ignition engines are gong to make a difference. But if you can not sell a car in California it's not worth importing.

Another reason is that since europe has an excess of gasoline with all the diesels -- we currently buy the excess gasoline. This creates a wider price difference in in the USA -- making diesel less attractive.

We do use a lot of fuel -- don't forget .......... 300 million of us .........