Premium gas for 2021 TRD Pro?

Again, you're missing the point and your synopsis doesn't disprove anything, its just one side of the CBA on 87 vs 91. No one is talking about peak HP or MPGs. Pulling timing under load to prevent knock will reduce the power you need when you most need it. Day to day driving its not a big deal and you'll never know the difference. Towing or hauling heavy loads (or hard acceleration for some applications) is where you need it. I tow a trailer, so I'd much rather have the power when I need it than the ECU deciding to pull timing and thus, cutting power. The peak HP and MPG numbers between the two are within the margin of error, no one is debating that. Its what the motor is giving you in the meat of the powerband thats more important. No one drives around in 2nd gear at 4500 RPMs to get peak HP, and no one is hyper-mileing a Tundra to squeeze out a few extra MPGs. And no one is talking about longevity of the motors, that's has way more to do with oil and air filtration than fuel octane. Also, not sure where you're getting the +20-30% on cost. The difference between 87 and 91/93 in most places is around 7-8%, or about the cost of a Starbucks coffee per fill-up. Again, you're stuck on the fringes of measurable data, peak HP and final MPGs, (and somehow you brought motor longevity into it now)... its the time in between where your ECU decides to protect the motor in favor of power that it makes a difference. If you're never in that situation then it doesn't matter, but some folks are, and it does matter.

 

87 octane and I add a bottle of Lucas deep clean fuel system cleaner every 2,000 miles.
It improves mpg and performance has been great for 40k miles, no loss of power, and drives like a dream.

https://lucasoil.com/products/fuel-treatments/lucas-oil-deep-clean-fuel-system-cleaner

 

Peak HP or better MPGs are not the point here. The advertised "381HP/401TQ" 5.7l makes less than 300HP/320 TQ at the wheels, and way less down lower where most people drive day to day. Now take a 4th gear, 3,500 RPM pull up a grade with a trailer on 87 octane and have the ECU cut your power by 20-30 HP to prevent detonation. You're gonna feel it, especially when you're only making about maybe 70% of your peak whp (we're talking right at 200 whp at this point). Don't get hung up on the advertised dyno run peak numbers and observed MPGs, its how the ECU is "managing" your motor in the real world that makes the difference.

The logic and facts are solid, the cost benefit analysis for your particular situation is solely yours to make. If you use your truck like a commuter car then its not worth the extra cost, if you use your truck like a truck then it may be worth it.

 

Interesting points. I'll have to do some research the next time I'm laid up for a while. Not that I don't believe you (don't take it personal).
The part that has my brain locked up is this:
Essentially, this all means that by default, the engine wants to run at 0* timing (TDC) and it takes for there to be pre-detonation and for the sensors to pick it up, for the ECU to pull the timing back (after TDC?). But,....at that point, the knocking already occurred. If this occurs every single time you tax the engine above normal commuter driving, then that means there's knocking pretty much all the time on 87 and that's no small thing for long term damage. Not to mention, they're waiting for damage to occur before adjusting, instead of programming it so damage doesn't happen in the first place.
Just seems like a lot of extra design and ECU programming to protect the engine.
I would think that they (Toyota) would recommend min 91 octane and have a disclaimer for using 87. Especially if you tow or have a heavy foot. That part doesn't make sense to me.
In the OP, the quote says that the ECU pulls different timing for different levels of octane. Granted, I'm no Toyota engineer/ECU programmer, but that sounds off. It would make more sense that there are certain setpoints for timing (based on RPM?), regardless of octane and if the knock sensors pick up any pre-detonation, timing is pulled back further.
It's hard to imagine that they would recommend 87, knowing that people are going to tow, drive like assholes, etc if there's a chance of engine damage.
And if that's the case and they simply mitigate it by pulling the timing, it's still hard to imagine that the ECU is constantly monitoring "how much" knock and making constant adjustments on its own. Essentially, "knowing" what octane levels are and adjusting accordingly.
Seems like an extremely complicated system to be computing all that, at the speeds in which the internal systems of these engines operate.
Again, I have no idea what I'm talking about. Just thinking out loud about what I think makes sense and what doesn't. I have no problem with being wrong, surprised or educated.

 

Timing is definitely constantly adjusted for detonation.

 

I got way better performance with the 87 over the 91. It wasnt even close.

 

Because of this thread, I filled up with 93 the other day at Sam's Club. I know it isn't scientific or anything but I noticed much more power and actually thought it was in tow/haul mode after driving a few miles. Also, my mileage improved from 13 to 15.5 mpg. I like it. Well worth the extra $6.50 I spent.

 

Americans waste billions on premium fuel in vehicles that don’t require it.

I searched a lot, but I can’t find a blind test where someone attempts to guess whether their vehicle is running on 87 or 91. I want to see someone correctly guess 8 fill-ups in a row by seat feel only. Particularly in a vehicle with a naturally aspirated engine that does not require premium fuel.

Maybe some of you “it’s totally worth it” guys can do this for us?

• Get some Tundras.com members in your area to help you out.
• Have them randomly fill your truck with fuel.
• Leave all your OBD stuff off.
• Don’t look at the fuel receipts.
• Write down your choice whether it is 87 or 91.
• The other person who is helping you out will write down what each tank actually is.
• After 8 fill-ups, compare your lists.

To make the experiment go faster, you could run, say, 30 miles past E, and fill it only a 1/2 tank each time.

According to some of you, you should be able to easily guess all 8 tanks in a row. Would love to see it.

 

More power AND better fuel economy. All from a slightly higher % of octane?
Sounds magical.

 

I split the difference and run mid grade 89 from Shell 99% of the time. I’ll do a tank of premium every couple of months. The truck does seem to run better with 89 and above compared to 87. I have the 4.6L.

 

Not for me. Didnt notice any power improvements and got way less mileage than 87 or 89.

 

But,.....it says,...."premium".

 

or... you could just take our anecdotal observations and say "interesting! Do what you think is best."

 

Because it is.

 

Cool. What's premium about it?

 

The pump/logo has checkered flags and a blue color(instead of red) around the word “premium”.

 

I've been adding a scoop of salsa to my Bob Evans breakfast bowls for a few months now and haven't had any issues.

 

https://youtu.be/D3kTMkby8wk

2/3rds in he talks about premium gas has more power than 10% ethanol. More power equals better mpg.

 

He's talking about higher octane gas ("premium") that doesn't have ethanol in it.
Not all higher octane fuel is ethanol free. If it does have ethanol, then it doesn't have more power.
So, it's not just "premium". It's gas with no ethanol. You'll get better results with ethanol free 87 also.

 

Yawn…

You fellas have kicked this can half way to the moon! I’m headed back over to the thread where they still think the NSV light bar is the cat’s pajamas.


I’m just kidding. There’s been some good input in this to go with the drivel. I’ve tried 87, 89, & 92 E10 fuels, and can’t tell any difference at all. I drive 25K miles per year in my 2018 Tundra, with a good amount of it towing up to 7,500#. I live in hill country, so I use the throttle plenty. And, I burn a lot of gas…

You want better performance? Re-gear the axles and get a tune.

 

The only difference I noticed is that 87 pings a friggin lot in 6th gear when it's hot outside and moving between 45-55 mph. 91 or up never does. Ethanol never does.

There are motors that have a bigger difference. The Tacoma 1GR single vvt v6 was a good example. 236 hp and 266 lb-ft on 87, and 239 hp 278 lb-ft on 91 by official toyota numbers. Isn't the lexus gx570 listed as 383 hp 403 lb-ft with the only difference being premium fuel

 

I think when this one is settled, we should move to a discussion regarding the best location for a brake caliper. Does it work best when mounted forward of the rotor? On the rearward side? Or is on top the best orientation for the strongest braking performance???

 

I prefer calipers at bottom of rotors. Lower center of gravity.

 

That’s sooooo ‘90s. Get with the times, Man! No calipers at all, to reduce unsprung weight…

 

calipers on the back have more cooling

 

Teasing aside, only the front or back positions make sense for ease of bleeding. The bleeder won’t be at the highest point in a top or bottom orientation.

I hadn’t heard of cooling being superior in a rear mount setup. I’d like to see some wind tunnel proof of that, as it may be a weird air path in that spinning wheel. Seems like a turbulent spot…

 

IDK, but all high end sport have front caliper in the rear of wheel and rear caliper in front of the wheel.

 

Reduced weight of metal lines and brake fluid. Excuse me for a sec...."Yeah, supersize the that for me.". Sorry about that. Driving my carbon fiber Ferrari through the McDonald's drive thru.

 

Pretty hard to argue with your logic here!

My guess is that the caliper location is chosen to accommodate other components like steering.

More importantly, you guys wanna see a picture of a fish?

 

Running 91 in my Ram brought me from 16.2 to 18.3 MPG hand calculated.