So i thought 'why not try 93 octane'....

I kid you guys not the truck is noticeably smoother.

The typical response to this is 'nope, modern cars are optimized for 87 octane' or something to that effect.

well that's all fine and dandy but the truck I'm driving likes the stuff. in reading up on tunes I noted that the dap fellow says very clearly these trucks retard timing at lower octane levels. stock. if this is true then you most definitely do get more juice from the higher octane.

 

I ran 93 in my previous cars that were built for performance, never tried it in the tundra. Might give it a try, should give slightly better mpg too?

 

I've been blending 89/93 for a couple months now. Getting around 1 MPG better overall. Averaging 17.7 vs 16.8 on 87 octane. It was the DAP tuning thread that prompted me, too.

 

Some vehicles respond better to 93, I haven't tried it in the tundra yet as I burn too much fuel and cost would kill me. But my 2012 tacoma all I run is 93, if I put 87 in it the truck will ping And run worse.

 

Just check your spark plugs when you change them. If they have little white specks on the electrode (piston side) then the higher octane is preventing complete combustion and damaging the engine.

No white specks, you're good to go.

 

I've been using Maverick 87 pure gas for 2 months now. Usually $2.50 per gallon. Better response and I went from 10.2 in town to 11.3 mpg and totally driving the same. Don't need 93 ethanol mix. just need pure dino. Going to eat some corn flakes now.

 

I used to have a gas station 1 block from my house that had 1 pump with no ethanol, but I had to move for work and now the good stuff is nowhere to be found.

Unless your running really high compression ratios, turbocharged or supercharged using 0% ethanol makes more difference in engine performance and longevity than using premium fuel.

I still don't know why the mid-grade fuel is even sold. It has no functional purpose from an engineering stand point. I guess it's for people who should use premium, but are too cheap. Or maybe for people who feel bad about not doing proper maintenance so they through a few bucks at "better" fuel every once in a while to sooth their mind.

 

I never used 87!

 

Big fan of maverik’s pure gas. We have 88 out here in Vernal, ut. Definitely get better mileage with it than any other type of fuel. Same price as premium out here. Glad I left corn country for dino country.

 

You're at around 4k feet elevation, right? You won't find 87 octane at higher elevations. Since there's less oxygen in the air up there it make engines more likely to knock (early detonation, not rods knocking) so you need higher octane to prevent that from happening. 88 at your altitude behaves the same as 87 at sea level.

 

I mean we have 88 ethanol free gas, pure gas, clear gas. We have lots of 87 (E10 or E15) out here. Lots of 85 (E10 or E15), too.

 

I'm in Denver at 5280ft. Leadville is at over 10,000ft and you can buy 87 octane gas there too. Not sure where you are getting your info. When I purchase 87 it's not because I'm cheap, it's because our trucks are tuned/programed to be most efficient running 87. Burning higher octane is simply a waste of money. You can get a tuner to "re-calibrate" your engine where running 93 would be best for example I suppose. There is no "better" gas, only what's "best" to use. 93 is not better than 85 if your car is tuned to burn 85. The last thing you want to do is to spend money for something you don't need just to "feel better".

 

You have that backwards. At higher elevations, engines are less likely to detonate, requiring less octane.

 

I saw no difference between 87 and 91 timing advance

 

paying more attention to the truck I'm not prepared to say for sure it's stronger. definitely smoother.

 

Your wallet gets lighter hence the better fuel mileage

 

You are correct Sir.

My apologies. I'll blame it on a long day on the road.

 

Im at 5

Im at 5,280 and I dont see you?

 

All good! You actually had me questioning what I had been thinking all these years LOL but then I was like no no that’s not it ha ha

 

I'm about 20 ft higher...........

 

I like your dog. Post more dog pics!!

 

EDIT....No Corn Flakes... no corn left....(yeah, I'm stretching it a bit)

 

Ah, there you are

 

We fellow Marines have great eyesight............

 

We can shoot a flea of a ticks ass at 500 yards with iron sights

 

Not brag...just fact................

 

I believe some vehicles require a little higher octane just not 93. I tested 93 in Taco no MPG improvement and nothing on butt dyno. Did run a tank pulling bay boat back from LA. Ran same speeds and all interstate 1 measured mpg increase. May try it towing with Tundra but hard to gauge mpg improvements when a headwind can drop it by 2. I would have to duplicate wind conditions. Last trip light tailwind got 10 but trip home in 25 mph headwind got 8. A 1 mpg improvement in Tacoma did not cover extra cost.

 

Yes, no, maybe so...check this:
https://www.caranddriver.com/features/regular-or-premium

 

I can do that at a click and a half with a 2.75" folding-fin rocket! With nothin' but a grease-penciled "x" on the windshield.

 

If there is less air, it is less likely to ping/detonate. The A/F is richer and runs cooler and less likely to ping.