gas question
03-28-11, 06:14 PM
#32
RX330inFL - Interested in your comment about the additives. Worked in the oil & gas industry for 13 yrs till 2001, and is true (at least at that time) that refinery gas same at all tiers. However, I would believe that the majors have improved their additives over the minors and independents in efforts to distinguish their product(s). Not sure that this can make a significant enough difference to justify price differences we see in MA, however!
As for the USTs, service station tanks today are either new or retrofitted fiberglass or fiberglass/steel with trend toward smaller tank size and fewer tanks - e.g. blending from 2 tanks to make Plus - with frequent deliveries so less opportunity for sludge/sediment issues.
As for the USTs, service station tanks today are either new or retrofitted fiberglass or fiberglass/steel with trend toward smaller tank size and fewer tanks - e.g. blending from 2 tanks to make Plus - with frequent deliveries so less opportunity for sludge/sediment issues.
03-28-11, 08:43 PM
#33
RX330inFL - Interested in your comment about the additives. Worked in the oil & gas industry for 13 yrs till 2001, and is true (at least at that time) that refinery gas same at all tiers. However, I would believe that the majors have improved their additives over the minors and independents in efforts to distinguish their product(s). Not sure that this can make a significant enough difference to justify price differences we see in MA, however!
What makes each brand of gasoline different are the additives they put in just before it is delivered to the stations. Some have more or better additives than others and if you do not use a top tier fuel they say you will have a problem with engine deposits over time.
Premium grade gas also is said to contain more additives than lower grades in some brands.
Still, in all my experiences and working with engines of various types in the current age and with the current fuels being dispensed, there is not a huge difference between ARCO, Getty, Texaco/Shell, AMOCO/BP, Mobil/Exxon or any other of the major players in this regard.
I use BP exclusively, which is not on the list, in my vehicles and I will wager they are as clean internally as similar vehicles using fuel brands on the list.
Still, in all my experiences and working with engines of various types in the current age and with the current fuels being dispensed, there is not a huge difference between ARCO, Getty, Texaco/Shell, AMOCO/BP, Mobil/Exxon or any other of the major players in this regard.
Premium grade gas also is said to contain more additives than lower grades in some brands.
Still, in all my experiences and working with engines of various types in the current age and with the current fuels being dispensed, there is not a huge difference between ARCO, Getty, Texaco/Shell, AMOCO/BP, Mobil/Exxon or any other of the major players in this regard.
I use BP exclusively, which is not on the list, in my vehicles and I will wager they are as clean internally as similar vehicles using fuel brands on the list.
Still, in all my experiences and working with engines of various types in the current age and with the current fuels being dispensed, there is not a huge difference between ARCO, Getty, Texaco/Shell, AMOCO/BP, Mobil/Exxon or any other of the major players in this regard.
03-29-11, 05:17 AM
#34
RX330inFL - I also do not buy into the 'Top Tier' myth from a refinery source standpoint. 13+ years of subscriptions to oil & gas journals taught me as much. We tested the USTs and had alot of information about refineries.
But I expect additives are the result of much research; not sure how much of their value is sheer marketing, but am interested in the opinions and experience base of this forum about their effects.
But I expect additives are the result of much research; not sure how much of their value is sheer marketing, but am interested in the opinions and experience base of this forum about their effects.
Last edited by quantfutur; 03-29-11 at 06:39 PM.
03-30-11, 12:01 AM
#35
Intermediate
Hong kong, only option available is 98 octane....i thought getting regular was 95 octane but reading on wiki states that they phased it out long time ago. Only thing available is 98 octane.....my gas mileage is horrible, but i don't know if there is a direct correlation between octane level to MPG.
03-30-11, 10:21 AM
#36
I have been using regular gas in my 2004 RX330 since I got it 10/2003 and have never had any problems. The manual states you can use regular, however, the newer models require the higher octane as well as synthetic oil.
03-30-11, 11:41 AM
#37
See this thread.
https://www.clublexus.com/forums/rx-...-octane-2.html
And for the record your owners manual actually states:
Select Octane Rating 87 (Research Octane Number 91) or higher. For improved vehicle performance, the use of premium unleaded gasoline with an Octane Rating 91 (Research Octane Number 96) or higher is recommended.
03-30-11, 12:19 PM
#38
Hong kong, only option available is 98 octane....i thought getting regular was 95 octane but reading on wiki states that they phased it out long time ago. Only thing available is 98 octane.....my gas mileage is horrible, but i don't know if there is a direct correlation between octane level to MPG.
03-31-11, 02:57 PM
#39
So, as you mentioned: premium was undoubtedly the best choice
04-17-11, 10:29 AM
#40
Three tanks of 87 octane and I am getting the carbon smell. Not only at start up but it lingers in the garage when I go back to start it up in the morning. The performance doesn't seem to be affected, but nonetheless I am going back to 91 octane. What can I say? ... it was an experiment.
04-17-11, 11:18 AM
#41
Lexus Champion
OT but why do we put up with the ethanol farce? It doesn't increase mileage, it makes fuel less efficient, it doesn't decrease pollution, it increases costs, it is playing havoc with world wide food costs and now the burned residues are getting onto the water table with some tasty carcinogens.
Can anyone explain why neither political party will take on big agra on this loser?
Can anyone explain why neither political party will take on big agra on this loser?
04-17-11, 11:56 AM
#42
OT but why do we put up with the ethanol farce? It doesn't increase mileage, it makes fuel less efficient, it doesn't decrease pollution, it increases costs, it is playing havoc with world wide food costs and now the burned residues are getting onto the water table with some tasty carcinogens.
Can anyone explain why neither political party will take on big agra on this loser?
Can anyone explain why neither political party will take on big agra on this loser?
There are fortunes to be made by supporting the Ethanol lobby. If Ethanol was not subsidized by the government it would cost a fortune.
One more point to add. Ethanol production uses something like 4-6 gallons of fresh water to produce a single gallon of ethanol. A typical ethanol plant uses around 500 gallons of fresh water per minute. When your wells run dry you can also thank your local ethanol plant. We will soon run out of both food and water.
04-17-11, 02:01 PM
#43
The answer os simple... MONEY
There are fortunes to be made by supporting the Ethanol lobby. If Ethanol was not subsidized by the government it would cost a fortune.
One more point to add. Ethanol production uses something like 4-6 gallons of fresh water to produce a single gallon of ethanol. A typical ethanol plant uses around 500 gallons of fresh water per minute. When your wells run dry you can also thank your local ethanol plant. We will soon run out of both food and water.
There are fortunes to be made by supporting the Ethanol lobby. If Ethanol was not subsidized by the government it would cost a fortune.
One more point to add. Ethanol production uses something like 4-6 gallons of fresh water to produce a single gallon of ethanol. A typical ethanol plant uses around 500 gallons of fresh water per minute. When your wells run dry you can also thank your local ethanol plant. We will soon run out of both food and water.
Ethanol as an additive is definitely better than what we have had in the past, namely lead and MTBE.
Another solution brought to us by BIG GOVERNMENT and BIG AG.
04-17-11, 04:04 PM
#44
Advanced
However, the statement above would imply some type of damage may occur to the engine if you run 87.
I would really like to see evidence of that. Thanks.
04-17-11, 09:39 PM
#45
My car is a 2005 RX330 that has, until 3 weeks ago, always been run on premium. It has gone 107k.
I previously drove a 1999 RX300, which required 87 octane. I started to get a carbon smell with that vehicle at around 150k; cat. went at 187k which is when I sold the car.
I really have no explanation for the carbon odor except that it seems to be due to the lower octane. I assume that something different is happening with the exhaust if it is giving off the odor. I don't like the smell and don't want to risk having to replace the cat. at this mileage, so I'm going back to 91. Have gotten different opinions from mechanics about 'high compression' and whether or not my car can run on 87 without damaging the engine (long-term). I would prefer to get an official statement from Lexus other than 'for improved vehicle performance', as I would like to understand exactly what is at risk.