When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Some of these myths have gained the esteemed status of old wive's tale. Some we buy into just because that's what we've always heard. Others may have some basis in fact and just may have been nullified by newer technology.
By Jeffrey Smith
Last edited by Curated Content Editor; Aug 9, 2017 at 08:09 AM.
"Premium gas in your car is a big waste of your hard earned money, that is, unless you drive a high-end sports car that has a high compression engine"
Umm, the IS REQUIRES premium fuel. What were you thinking when you wrote this article? It's not a myth.
It really is case-specific. Again I cite the current VW GTI. When it came out in 2015, the fuel door said PREMIUM. In 2016, it said regular. It's the same car, identical.
Premium is absolutely a waste of money and no benefit, to a vehicle designed for 87. Some people claim that 93 or 91 yields them better mileage, or the car is smoother, or cleaner, or this and that, which is not what octane is measuring...
"Premium gas in your car is a big waste of your hard earned money, that is, unless you drive a high-end sports car that has a high compression engine"
Umm, the IS REQUIRES premium fuel. What were you thinking when you wrote this article? It's not a myth.
There is nothing wrong with the article as written. The IS, in fact, is one of those high-end, sport-oriented vehicles with a high-compression engine that the author is referring to....although, in some cases, the engine's computer will back off on the spark-timing and make other adjustments if regular is used.
Last edited by mmarshall; Aug 7, 2017 at 06:57 AM.
"Premium gas in your car is a big waste of your hard earned money, that is, unless you drive a high-end sports car that has a high compression engine"
Umm, the IS REQUIRES premium fuel. What were you thinking when you wrote this article? It's not a myth.
This is absolutely true. I don't understand why this article wrote this. If anyone wants to do further research, almost every Toyota or Lexus conforms to SAE guidelines in that the rated power of their Toyota or Lexus is based on what fuel rating was used during testing. This is no myth. A Lexus LX570 will not make 383hp if regular fuel is used, on the other hand, a Toyota Land Cruiser only needs regular fuel to make 381hp. I know its a two HP difference but conforming to the SAE guidelines is what is important.
In contrast, my 04 4Runner was advertised with 235 hp based on premium fuel. But, at the time Toyota was allowed to slap regular fuel required in the manual. My 04 does not make 235hp when I used regular fuel. The SAE guidelines were changed to prevent this misleading advertising method.
Last edited by Toys4RJill; Aug 7, 2017 at 06:57 AM.
This is absolutely true. I don't understand why this article wrote this. If anyone wants to do further research, almost every Toyota or Lexus conforms to SAE guidelines in that the rated power of their Toyota or Lexus is based on what fuel rating was used during testing. This is no myth. A Lexus LX570 will not make 383hp if regular fuel is used, on the other hand, a Toyota Land Cruiser only needs regular fuel to make 381hp. I know its a two HP difference but conforming to the SAE guidelines is what is important.
In contrast, my 04 4Runner was advertised with 235 hp based on premium fuel. But, at the time Toyota was allowed to slap regular fuel required in the manual. My 04 does not make 235hp when I used regular fuel. The SAE guidelines were changed to prevent this misleading advertising method.
As I mentioned in my post above, engine-computers can make some changes to accomodate lower-octane fuel and prevent knocking (spark timing, air/fuel mixture, etc...), but if the engine was designed primarily for premium fuel, it will usually run best with it. The regular gas-changes in the computer are intended mostly for when one cannot get the required octane, such as when south of the border in Mexico, having to fill up with that junk fuel they sell. Yes, one can run the engine around the clock that way (with regular fuel), but that is not necessarily what the engineers intended.
Premium is absolutely a waste of money and no benefit, to a vehicle designed for 87. Some people claim that 93 or 91 yields them better mileage, or the car is smoother, or cleaner, or this and that, which is not what octane is measuring...
I am not sure if you remember things in 2005. But here is an old article discussing HP and fuel octane. Its not as simple as saying its a waste of money. Funny enough, those idiots irunning Ford in typical American car industry fashion continued to skirt the system.
WSJ--A VERY Good SAE Horsepower Article
EYES ON THE ROAD
By JOSEPH B. WHITE
Counting Horses
New Standards for Gauging Horsepower
Are a Sensitive Subject in Car Business
August 22, 2005
Honey, they shrunk the horsepower!
Consumers who pay attention to horsepower numbers -- and there are a lot of them -- may have noticed that some 2006 cars have less advertised horsepower than they did for 2005. The Toyota Camry, for instance, the No. 1 selling car in America, will be advertised for 2006 with a 190 horsepower, down from 210 in 2005. The Acura TL, rated at 270 horsepower in 2005, is rated at 258 horsepower in 2006.
None of these cars is likely to feel less powerful than before. Nothing's really changed about the engines. What's changed is the way auto makers test cars to determine advertised horsepower.
Measuring horsepower in an automobile isn't like measuring the length of a football field. In the latter case, 100 yards is a 100 yards. But when it comes to horsepower, there's been latitude for a certain amount of what General Motors technical fellow David Lancaster calls "creative interpretation." Under the Society of Automotive Engineers' former engine-power-testing protocols, established in 1990 and reaffirmed in 1995, Mr. Lancaster says auto makers didn't necessarily have to account for such things as the power loss caused by a power-steering pump, or the effect of electronic controls.
There were other loopholes. A car maker could test a car using higher-octane premium gasoline -- which would boost an engine's performance -- even if consumers were told that premium wasn't required. (In fact, for most cars, premium gas isn't really a requirement.)
Under the new SAE rule, car makers are supposed to conduct their horsepower tests under conditions that are closer to the real world. If the car is supposed to run on regular, then regular gas must be used during the test. And components on the test engine must be production components.
"We put language in the standard that says explicitly that the intent of the standard is to give an accurate representation of power in the vehicle," says Mr. Lancaster, who headed an SAE committee that redrafted the procedures.
GM says it intends to take an extra, optional step and "certify" all its horsepower ratings. Among other things, the procedure to certify horsepower figures involves conducting tests in the presence of a witness. European auto makers are already subject to a similar procedure. But while the No. 1 auto maker intends to test new engines under the new standard, but won't go back and retest existing power plants.
At Ford, Karilyn Lytle, manager of V-engine and performance evaluation, says the new rules will have a "very minor" impact. Ford has a policy of testing three production engines three times each to get its horsepower numbers. If the result of those tests is that an engine scores 197 horsepower, "we no longer round" to get to an even 200.
Ford doesn't plan to go the extra mile and "certify" its horsepower ratings, Ms. Lytle said. The process costs money and takes time, and "we haven't felt the need." Like GM, Ford is re-rating engines as new models or new engines come into production.
That's the policy Nissan is following as well. Nissan has propelled its recent recovery in the U.S. market by offering models with more horsepower than its main rivals in several important market segments. But since Jan. 1, when testing to the new standard was required, Nissan has only come up with one new engineapplication to test under the new rules, says company spokesman Dean Case. That model, the Infiniti FX 45 luxury crossover sport utility, is rated at 320 horsepower for 2006, using the new SAE rules. The 2005 model was rated at 315 horsepower -- but Mr. Case says the 2006 would have had an even number if it had been evaluated under the old regime.
By contrast, Honda re-tested all its engines to the new standards, says spokesman Mike Spencer. For Acura, Honda's luxury division, power numbers decreased by 5 to 12 horses, depending on the model, he says.
"We re-tested everything right away," Mr. Spencer says. "We want to make sure consumers have the most up to date and accurate information."
Doug Murtha, corporate product-planning manager for Toyota's U.S. sales arm says the company tried to re-test as many 2006 models as it could. "The majority of the '06 model engines will have been re-tested by introduction," he says.
For Toyota, the new rules mean some changes in practice. The V-6 Camry had been tested using premium fuel. But Toyota doesn't label the car as "premium fuel required." So now the Camry will be tested using regular gas.
What difference does all this make? The performance of a Camry won't change because it has a lower-rated horsepower.
But in the more-is-better world of automotive-power ratings, it's not necessarily a good thing to have a mid-size car that was rated at 210 horsepower drop back below the 200 horsepower number -- which is now the magic number in that segment.
The move to inject some more rigor into the business of horsepower claims touches some sensitive nerves in the car business. In Detroit, the new horsepower rules have been spun as a needed antidote to envelope pushing by certain Asian auto makers -- a Detroit News story last week on the subject was headlined "Asians Oversell Horsepower." In Motor City West, otherwise known as Los Angeles, there's a simmering suspicion that rivals in the Motor City are spinning the new standards to maximum advantage.
The good news for consumers is that the new standards appear to close some loopholes, and should make for advertised horsepower ratings on future vehicles that come closer to reality. Of course, a horsepower figure derived from lab testing isn't going to correlate exactly to the performance delivered to real wheelson a real road, industry engineers say. So enthusiasts who like to test their rides on a chassis dynamometer will still have something to do.
The real challenge for the next several years will be figuring out which cars have been tested under the new SAE standard (which you could call the Truth in Horsepower protocol), and which have been tested under the old Room for Interpretation standard. Some car makers (Nissan for example) are spelling out which cars are tested under the new SAE J1349 protocol in press materials.
Ford's Ms. Lytle suggests a simple way to avoid anxiety about all this: "Drive it and see if you like the performance.
I agree with jr4div2 to an extent. I think it's misleading to call the required use of premium fuel a myth in a broad sense. There are lots of Lexus vehicles, in fact most, that require premium. I am aware that it's possible to run the car on lower-octane gas, but in doing so, you are leaning on the ECU to protect the engine... In the IS owner's manual, it even says use of non-premium fuel is potentially harmful. From page 537:
Select premium unleaded gasoline with an octane rating of 91 (Research Octane Number 96) or higher required for optimum engine performance. If 91 octane cannot be obtained, you may use unleaded gasoline with an octane rating as low as 87 (Research Octane Number 91). Use of unleaded gasoline with an octane rating lower than 91 may result in engine knocking and signifi- cantly reduced performance. Persistent knocking can lead to engine damage and should be corrected by refueling with higher octane unleaded gasoline.
I agree with jr4div2 to an extent. I think it's misleading to call the required use of premium fuel a myth in a broad sense. There are lots of Lexus vehicles, in fact most, that require premium. I am aware that it's possible to run the car on lower-octane gas, but in doing so, you are leaning on the ECU to protect the engine... In the IS owner's manual, it even says use of non-premium fuel is potentially harmful. From page 537:
I agree with jr4div2 to an extent. I think it's misleading to call the required use of premium fuel a myth in a broad sense. There are lots of Lexus vehicles, in fact most, that require premium. I am aware that it's possible to run the car on lower-octane gas, but in doing so, you are leaning on the ECU to protect the engine... In the IS owner's manual, it even says use of non-premium fuel is potentially harmful. From page 537:
Thank you for doing some research. So nice to see someone actually check the facts and not just jump to conclusions.
Thank you for doing some research. So nice to see someone actually check the facts and not just jump to conclusions.
Now, I haven't gone so far as to use my car as a tester for 87 gas... Not sure I want to take the risk given my tendency to use most of the travel range of the gas pedal.
However, I have tested ethanol-free gas versus E10 - and I can say there's basically no butt-dyno difference in the two. But that's a different story.
Now, I haven't gone so far as to use my car as a tester for 87 gas... Not sure I want to take the risk given my tendency to use most of the travel range of the gas pedal.
All good. Wouldn't want you to use your car as a tester. It just annoys me that there are some who just refuse to look at the facts.
Using premium fuel has always been a very real thing. I am not saying that people who have 87 octane requirement to go out and buy premium. I am just saying that cars can be designed to run at peak efficiency with premium.
Also, according to John Davis of Motorweek. Back in the 70, 80s, and 90s. It was also a marketing thing as according to him the well heeled consumers would wonder why a high car would not have premium fuel requirements.
I've run my Maxima for almost 19 years on regular. The knock sensor was replaced about 3 years ago--when I got a knock sensor code, I immediately started using premium until the knock sensor was replaced, at which time, I went back to 87. This means that for nearly the entire life of the vehicle, it did not put out the 190 HP/ 205 ft. lbs. as advertised by Nissan Motors. On my BMW I have on 3 occasions "blended" the 93 down to 89 (owner's manual states 89 is the minimum required implying that 87 cannot be used), and on the Lexus, I have blended the 93 down to 91. As far as I know, CA routinely does not have fuel above 91 octane, so when mfgs say "premium," usually they are referring to 91.
Of course octane is very real, as it pertains to predetonation. But to imply one's car runs cleaner, smoother, mpgs go up, that is as far fetched as when Jack traded a cow for beans...
I am not saying that people who have 87 octane requirement to go out and buy premium.
In most cases, if a vehicle is specifically designed to run on 87 octane (and 87 is recommended), it's best NOT to use higher octane. It will not give you any more power, and, in fact, may make it more difficult to start, because premium gas has a different vapor pressure that could affect the air/fuel mixture. Just as engines that are designed for premium work best with premium, engines designed for regular work best with regular.
Well...so much for fuel. I've got a comment on the part about using not household detergents for washing cars by hand. It's true that they are harsher than purpose-designed car-wash detergents, and will strip wax off (actually, so will car-wash detergents...they just take a little longer doing it LOL). The point, though, is that today's clearcoat paint finishes are so durable and protective that they almost never need wax. The top layer of clearcoat ( which, depending on the manufacturer, may be a double-layer) usually a double-layer) usually protects the pigment-color paint underneath it until the clearcoat itself starts to wear or peel off...which, from what I've seen, is rarely less than ten years. The clear paint-protection layers optional on some new vehicles add even more protection. So, with that much protection, there isn't a whole lot of damage that household detergent can actually do to your car. Most of the time, though, I don't need detergent at all, except for sometimes around the wheels...plain water and as sponge will usually do it.
Last edited by mmarshall; Aug 7, 2017 at 11:35 AM.