General Fit Talk General Discussion on the Honda Fit/Jazz.

Switched to premium; instantly went from 33-35 mpg to 35-37 mpg.

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jul 5, 2011 | 12:47 AM
  #101  
Goobers's Avatar
Member
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,295
From: Wandering around.
5 Year Member
Originally Posted by SilverBullet
Is that on premium? In the winter I use mid grade. I bet I pass you during the day a few times.

Here is more info about reformate and operating conditions. http://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/hand...pdf?sequence=1
I doubt we've passed each other much... I tend to sleep in during the day until I go to work. Really gotta work on my sleep cycle.

But yeah, on premium.

All these papers... I'll be honest, seriously going over my head. Maybe my head is too muddled up... another topic thread is not making sense either. O_o
 
Old Jul 5, 2011 | 01:13 PM
  #102  
Texas Coyote's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (3)
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 7,388
From: Anderson County Texas
5 Year Member
Originally Posted by Goobers

But yeah, on premium.

All these papers... I'll be honest, seriously going over my head. Maybe my head is too muddled up... another topic thread is not making sense either. O_o
A lot of what Silver Bullet is finding and sharing is wasted on me... I feel good if I can comprehend 10% of most of the stuff... The scangauge is about as high tech as I need to show me what I need to know but an air/fuel ratio gauge will be needed if I tune for more power.... One thing is for sure, the ECU on these cars has a mind of it's own and is difficult to trick.
 
Old Jul 5, 2011 | 01:56 PM
  #103  
Krimson_Cardnal's Avatar
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 3,417
From: Capital Distric New York
5 Year Member
I've gotta agree Coyote - they've seem to be trying to take the 'trick' out of tricking cars.
 
Old Jul 5, 2011 | 02:34 PM
  #104  
Texas Coyote's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (3)
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 7,388
From: Anderson County Texas
5 Year Member
The ECU reflash by Hondata was the reason I chose to go with the KWSC high boost kit.. The only time I got over 40 MPG was driving along the Gulf Coast on the way home from Mexico.. It was in the summer so the A/C was on and I still can't figure out why I got such good mileage... Running at 80 and 90MPH in cool weather I always got 37.5 to 39 MPG and a lot of the time when I would stay below 65 the fuel mileage was lower... I think that if you just drive these cars for fun like you would a small displacement motorcycle with out letting fuel mileage be of concern, then you will see gains in fuel mileage using 93 octane that you won't see with 87.....If you are not placing a load on the engine and using a higher percentage of the power band the ECU isn't going to alter its tune to where you benefit from the octane increase... Once it does make the change the ignition advances higher with a light load and will continue to if you are placing a load at a wide throttle setting on occasion, like when passing or accelerating down an entrance ramp..
 
Old Jul 5, 2011 | 03:09 PM
  #105  
Krimson_Cardnal's Avatar
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 3,417
From: Capital Distric New York
5 Year Member
A while back you were nudging me to 'get on it'. I was new around here and still breaking in the engine. I have become more spirited and will wind 'er out to 5K every now and again. Thing is, I don't put he pedal to the floor. 85% throttle is about it, I just wait for the FIT to get there - really doesn't take too long. I think, like you're saying, the ECU sees a high RPM and a moderate load but not a full throttle. It seems to make a difference.

Coming on this forum one of my objectives has been to try and understand how my FIT "works'. An open mind and listening to those who have knowledge and experience has taught me a lot - and at 64yrs that's pretty cool.

The Fit's ECU seems unique in a way. It will set-up to realize a premium grade fuel, or so it seems. If only we could get the corn out we would all be feeling the difference in the seat of out pants - that is, if you wear them..
 
Old Jul 5, 2011 | 04:04 PM
  #106  
Texas Coyote's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (3)
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 7,388
From: Anderson County Texas
5 Year Member
You have gotten younger since you began posting here KC. You were giving me a hard time about supercharging my car and were totally focused on the Fit's versatility and economical operating cost... You did own up to what a fun car it is to drive... I sometimes think about picking up a second one so I can relive driving balls out wot to the red line and milking every thing it has to give without fear of attracting to much unwanted attention to myself.... I did get my first speeding ticket in 26 years at the top of a hill that curved while I was shifting out of 3rd gear... That was before I added all of the trick stuff I have on it now. If I could handle the 105 degree heat I would be working on some new additions that should make a huge difference according to DSM.
 
Old Jul 5, 2011 | 04:18 PM
  #107  
Krimson_Cardnal's Avatar
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 3,417
From: Capital Distric New York
5 Year Member
You're right, I have, but I've got to hold on to my economy position - it's why I bought it.

Now once my buddy get's his floor lift installed in the new garage I helped him design things might change a bit - but I'm thinking it'll most likely help me with oil changes and swapping tires for now.
It sure is a nice two bayer, plenty of room to work, plus it's got A/C and the cable for NASCAR and will have heat for the winter.

My old Caddy is just down the street. I've shown Bill the pure joy of 285horses @WOT from 35MPH in second gear till she shifts... that gets my yaya's off.

You've simply got pure passion - I think it's the Texas Sun brother.
 

Last edited by Krimson_Cardnal; Jul 5, 2011 at 04:20 PM.
Old Jul 5, 2011 | 04:32 PM
  #108  
Texas Coyote's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (3)
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 7,388
From: Anderson County Texas
5 Year Member
My ex wife's mother go tired of driving a Mercedes after her husband passed away and bought a 94 STS.. Man did I ever love driving that car... My former mother in law would tell me to go ahead and see how fast it will go... I told her 120 was fast enough on the road we were on... She was a very class act lady but almost overnight dementia set in and she was in a different world and had no idea who anyone was.... I figure something like that is liable to happen to me so I want to go fast and get where I'm going before I forget where I'm going... That is when I feel like going anywhere and I think I might feel like going to town for a 6 pack of St. Pauli Girl.
 
Old Jul 5, 2011 | 07:36 PM
  #109  
Krimson_Cardnal's Avatar
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 3,417
From: Capital Distric New York
5 Year Member
I'm liking peak organic - brewed in Portland Maine.
 
Old Jul 9, 2011 | 04:22 AM
  #110  
Goobers's Avatar
Member
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,295
From: Wandering around.
5 Year Member
Finally finished off this tank. Took 5 days... I usually do it in 3 or 4.

as posted on another thread.
Originally Posted by Goobers
My personal best tank...

Gas pumped:9.395 gallons
Mileage driven: 351.2
Displayed MPG: 38.5
Calculated MPG: 37.38

And this includes about half of the miles for doing deliveries!

Now... back to my regularly psycho driving style.
Oh... on premium gas.
 
Old Jul 9, 2011 | 10:50 AM
  #111  
Steve244's Avatar
Member
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,661
From: Georgia
5 Year Member
In spite of your own data comprised of 42 premium fills, 34 regular fills, showing no significant difference in MPG between regular and premium, your devotion to premium grade is touching. Weird but touching.

My best tank was 38+. On regular... with combined city and highway driving.

For a good read, see SilverBullet's link to a manual on fuel. Here's an excerpt from the 4th page (bottom right):


A number of myths about octane have grown over the
years. There is a widespread perception that the greater the
octane the better the performance. However, once enough
octane is supplied to prevent engine knock, there is little, if
any, performance improvement. One exception to this would
be in vehicles equipped with knock sensors. In these vehicles,
if octane is insufficient, the computer will retard the timing to
limit engine knock. If the vehicle is operating in the “knock
limiting” mode (retarded timing), using a higher octane fuel will
allow timing to be advanced, resulting in some level of
performance increase. However, even in these vehicles,
tests have shown that there is no perceptible performance
improvement from using a fuel of higher octane than that
recommended by the vehicle manufacturer.

Another myth is that using a higher octane fuel will result
in improved fuel economy (increased miles per gallon). Octane
is nothing more than a measure of anti-knock quality.
Fuel economy is determined by a number of variables including
the energy content of the fuel. Some premium grades of
fuel may contain components which increase energy content.
In those cases, fuel economy may improve slightly as a result
of higher energy content, but not as a result of the higher
octane. Two fuels of identical octane could have different
energy content due to compositional differences
 
Old Jul 9, 2011 | 11:41 AM
  #112  
ItstheWoo's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Member
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 79
Originally Posted by Steve244
In spite of your own data comprised of 42 premium fills, 34 regular fills, showing no significant difference in MPG between regular and premium, your devotion to premium grade is touching. Weird but touching.

My best tank was 38+. On regular... with combined city and highway driving.

For a good read, see SilverBullet's link to a manual on fuel. Here's an excerpt from the 4th page (bottom right):
In the very excerpt you quoted, there is information that contradicts your anti-prem stance. Additionally, the article is a general article, and there is no indication that they used the Honda Fit in their research.

On my end, with highway driving at ~75 mph, I am getting a little under 36 mpg while before I only got 34 mpg.
 

Last edited by ItstheWoo; Jul 9, 2011 at 11:43 AM.
Old Jul 9, 2011 | 12:09 PM
  #113  
Steve244's Avatar
Member
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,661
From: Georgia
5 Year Member
Originally Posted by ItstheWoo
In the very excerpt you quoted, there is information that contradicts your anti-prem stance.
I must have selective reading disorder. I don't see it.

Is this it?
Some premium grades of fuel may contain components which increase energy content. In those cases, fuel economy may improve slightly as a result of higher energy content, but not as a result of the higher octane. Two fuels of identical octane could have different energy content due to compositional differences.

The qualifying word is "some." Some will not. Some will have less energy content. It has nothing to do with octane.

Originally Posted by ItstheWoo
On my end, with highway driving at ~75 mph, I am getting a little under 36 mpg while before I only got 34 mpg.
Before you got "around 35mpg." I guess selective memory is an issue too...



I got 44mpg on regular!
*






*After 22 miles freeway driving. After making the return trip my average was 40.5mpg.
 

Last edited by Steve244; Jul 9, 2011 at 12:14 PM.
Old Jul 9, 2011 | 12:21 PM
  #114  
Steve244's Avatar
Member
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,661
From: Georgia
5 Year Member
Originally Posted by DiamondStarMonsters

Switched to premium;... 07-09-2011 11:49 AM DiamondStarMonsters You are one dumb motherfucker.
Ad hominem, much?
 
Old Jul 9, 2011 | 12:21 PM
  #115  
kirinzon's Avatar
Member
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 128
From: Pa
The Honda fit manual makes no octane recommendations, rather it states not to use less than 87 octane...more of a warning than a recommendation.


If you are a very old lady (no offense to old ladies) that needs to sit on a pillow to see over the steering wheel and you drive slow then you will see no gains in higher than 87 octane.

However, if you drive your car on a performance level as the car was designed for there are REAL gains to using premium fuel. Especially if you are pulling a mountain or hauling around 3 adults or just putting any kind of a load on the engine.


@steve what do you think happens when your engine is under a load and your using 87 octane and your ecu has to retard the timing...You think maybe your performance decreases? You can't say there is no benefit to using premium octane.

For everyone running cheap gas...make the switch. There is a noticeable difference in performance that you will notice on your first tank...Smoooother running for sure.
 
Old Jul 9, 2011 | 12:23 PM
  #116  
ItstheWoo's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Member
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 79
Originally Posted by Steve244
Before you got "around 35mpg." I guess selective memory is an issue too...
I guess selective reading is an issue for you. 35 mpg was my mileage for mixed city/highway. 34 mpg was my mileage with almost all highway driving.

You sure like to read things the way you want to read them.
 
Old Jul 9, 2011 | 12:34 PM
  #117  
Steve244's Avatar
Member
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,661
From: Georgia
5 Year Member
Originally Posted by kirinzon
The Honda fit manual makes no octane recommendations, rather it states not to use less than 87 octane...more of a warning than a recommendation.
Correct.

Originally Posted by kirinzon
@steve what do you think happens when your engine is under a load and your using 87 octane and your ecu has to retard the timing...You think maybe your performance decreases? You can't say there is no benefit to using premium octane.
It retards timing for a period of time unknown to anyone but Honda's engineers. However data given on this board shows there is no perceptible difference in MPG. There may be perceptible differences in peak power, but other than butt dynos we have no data that shows this. We do have statements from experts that there is no perceptible difference for computer controlled cars in general, where the manufacturer makes no recommendation to use higher octane fuel.
 
Old Jul 9, 2011 | 01:19 PM
  #118  
Goobers's Avatar
Member
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,295
From: Wandering around.
5 Year Member
Steve... ultimately, you're arguments are pretty much theory or hearsay, or even theory based on hearsay.

You refuse to even try it yourself, to make your own judgement. And with that refusal... I'm done with talking to you about it.
 
Old Jul 9, 2011 | 01:51 PM
  #119  
ItstheWoo's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Member
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 79
Originally Posted by Steve244
Correct.



It retards timing for a period of time unknown to anyone but Honda's engineers. However data given on this board shows there is no perceptible difference in MPG. There may be perceptible differences in peak power, but other than butt dynos we have no data that shows this. We do have statements from experts that there is no perceptible difference for computer controlled cars in general, where the manufacturer makes no recommendation to use higher octane fuel.
Points you have not addressed and/or have missed for some reason:
1. People with scangauges have empirically determined that the anti-knock sensor retards timing. One person in this thread said that he observed a timing retardation of ~10 degrees for 87 octane fuel.

2. Having some data show MPG differences and other data show no MPG differences does not mean that your conclusion should be "there is no difference."

3. These "experts" are doing a general investigation and there is no indication that the Honda Fit (or any other car with a >= 10.4:1 compression ratio) was used for their study. It was already pointed out that 10.4:1 is a very high compression ratio for a NA engine.

4. The very article you posted states that it is based upon recommendations by the manufacturer. Honda did not recommend 87 octane, they merely said not to run anything lower. It is not that far of a reach to think that Honda chose to not recommend high octane fuel due to the fact that the Fit is marketed as a gas $$ saving car.

5. For less than $2 more than normal, you can fill up a tank for yourself and find out whether it's worth further investigation. However, if you do this, you should reset your ECU so that you're not operating on fuel trims and timing set for 87 octane.
 
Old Jul 9, 2011 | 01:51 PM
  #120  
Black01's Avatar
Member
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,098
From: VA
I've tried using premium before but I maybe bias because I only tried for about 4-5 tanks. Using the same driving style and condition. I lost mpg and was of course paying more. I have a long commute everyday about an hour and 20 minutes one way. About 90% highway and of course 10% city driving. Running at speed limit 55mph and sometimes 50mph and very seldom at 60-62mph.
 



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:55 PM.