Some cars like mine hate 87 summer, spring, fall ,and winter. 87 in my car in the winter is even harsh if traction control kicks on. You would swear I had an anti lag tune from all the backfires.
Sent from my iFail 5s
Sent from my iFail 5s
The funny part is the post is just below my post.Don't make the mistake of ignoring one critical part of every debate on CruzeTalk: Context.
We rarely sit and debate about what fuel should be used in a Mazda Miata. If we are talking about octane levels, it will be relevant to the Cruze unless it is in the off-topic or other owner vehicles section.
Relevant to the Cruze, you stated, and I quote as Spacedout did:
The above, relative to the Cruze 1.8L and 1.4L Turbo, is bad advice.
A great deal of Cadilacs say 91 is preferred but 87 is safe(not counting V cars and 2.0t that clearly states the use of premium only) trying to remember if most of those vehicles were flex fuel or not.This bold blanket statement doesn't apply to the cruze yet you come back to cherry pick the one part of your post that is a true statement as a argument point? Basically that logic is like saying gasoline wont provide MPG in and by itself. As far I I know no one in this thread ever mentioned more energy content in premium before you did. Technically though most of the premium in my state does have more energy, as most here is 91 octane no ethanol vs up to 10% ethanol for lesser grades.
The engine being the key factor, and the engines ability to utilize the knock sensor and adjust timing accordingly. The cruze 1.4T is not the only modern engine to to this, ford even lists power output of their ecoboost engines on regular and premium. Sure octane is not a measurement of energy content, but an engines ability to utilize that octane sure does matter.
Your driving habits, traffic patterns, elevation, and heat with a/c play into the gas consumption. Try and find the cheapest reputable top tier fuel (you trust) in 91/93 and try 2 tanks before it gets colder out if you wish to see if it works. I tried 89 and went to 93 as 89 would still pull some timing from me in stop and go idle with a/c on. Even in the winter 87 would pull timing hard from my driving. Now tuned for 93 grade, 93 is as low as I go.So you are saying 89 doesn't even make the grade? I found 91 overkill and at 40 cents a gallon extra. 89 is 20 cents extra and works just fine? Perhaps the key is to have a new engine like mine with 3K before the system gets gunked up, like every computer I have owned? I don't trust Shell after what they did to Florida and Canada about 10 years ago. Interesting GM twist too?
Yep. I'll see if 93 runs in the LS better than the 87 she is using but I doubt she is even using top tier. My next tank to NJ I'll try out costco by Golden Gate. That gas isn't sitting long at those prices usually.hence the term YMMV.
I may wait till I get back in town then. I wasn't tunes and had stock gaps when I tried it last summer. The BP I have in now is still going strong. Speaking if gaps, I need to regap again.Both of ours cars have gotten several of their worst MPG tanks on Costco gas. The Cruze hates even their 93.