LOL just because you are obtuse doesn't mean the rest of us are. The "evidence" is there for finding but you want us to hand feed it to you I never said I didn't supply it you are just too ignorant of the subject to see it for what it is.

Like I said just do yourself and the rest of us a favor and learn something on your own.

And like I have said 87 is just fine if you putt putt around like a little old lady or are trying to squeeze out the last nickel in your wallet. But if you like performance higher is better take your pick.

And "O" my God I am heartily so very very sorry for my auto corrects behavior in miss spelling the name that you really really aren't. So did you identity theft Brain (spelled correctly) or are you Shaun or who are you really???

 

Well let's just say good bye now.

You keep demanding proof but it is already there if one is intelligent enough to understand it and have some knowledge of the subject beyond what you have demonstrated in your questions.

You accept nothing even when it is put in the simplest terms possible and do NOTHING to advance your own knowledge or contribute to the discussion do us a favor and learn something on your own so you can CONTRIBUTE to the knowledge base not just demand data that you wouldn't understand or believe anyway.

Like I have said and you didn't comprehend 87 is find if you are putt putting around town like a granny and or like to squeeze the life out of the last buffalo nickel in your wallet but if you are interested in performance higher is better.... no wait let me qualify that statement before "The other GUY" pops in with advice on how 80 octane is better...

If one is using gasoline for a fuel and want the optimum performance the engine runs the best with the ignition timing at just before detonation no matter which octane you are using or which type of engine you are using that is a constant with all 4 cycle internal combustion engine forever and the FIT does just that for you.

And higher octane is better UP TO A POINT that is determined by the use and design of your particular engine/vehicle combination.

So take your pick.

 

 

Well, loudbang, I guess it's easier for you to say "The info is there, go find it" when the purpose of this forum is to share information, not to insult people. I guess it's easier to say mean things than to actually answer a question.

I do know quite a bit about engines, and I understand how higher-octane fuels can increase power. So no need to continue to call me ignorant. What I've been asking for is actual data. You know, numbers?

From today's NY Times:
Owners of cars that carry a premium-fuel recommendation can safely operate their vehicles with regular unleaded fuel; however, the engine will lose roughly five horsepower and one to two m.p.g., Mr. Skorupski said. (he's a tech guy at VW of America)

Okay, that's for engines that suggest higher-octane fuels. Presumably an engine that doesn't suggest higher-octane fuels wouldn't get MORE of a boost from octane... so now we have some data. 1-2 mpg on a 30 mpg car is a much smaller percentage than the 10% cost premium for premium gas. And 5 hp (presumably that's an average, and it'd be less for a lower-HP engine) is something, but not a lot (especially considering how little of our driving is at the peak part of the HP curve; I doubt that the 5 HP number applies across the whole power band).

Any other data to share would be welcome, especially from a real source like a car manufacturer, a well-respected research facility, a university...

Because a lot of things that people think are so, just ain't. So saying "Everybody knows this..." isn't helpful. Everybody knew that ulcers were caused by stomach acid, until proven false.

 

Thought you were through with us??????

And see what I have been advising for what only seems like years and years you finally got off the couch and actually found information you have been demanding all by yourself.

It's about time you followed my advice and did just that. Good job.

But you still are a "contranarian" (my word) you find data on another site AND STILL DON'T believe it or have to add all your "qualifiers????" you will never believe anything even if the data came up and bit you on the butt LOL.

 

OK now that you have found the data you demanded it proves beyond any shadow of a doubt that I was correct from my first post.

We stipulate that you finally have a modicum of understanding of the subject we can move on to more technical aspects of this discussion.

We ask nay demand (just like you) that you calculate the BSFC of your fit. This is the only reliable criteria used to judge the efficiency of any internal combustion engine. We grant that you may not want to pull your engine and run it on a dyno so we will grant you the leeway of doing the calculations while in your car and driving.

You may pick one of the many ways to do it and we will believe your data. BUT you must include the myriad of useless qualifications you demand of us to include miles driven, time of fuel purchase, month and day of purchases, temperature of fuel at purchase, humidity, time of day of average driving, capacity of your fuel tank to the last cc, diameter of your tires, air pressure of your tires and any other qualification you can come up with that meets your picky standards.

You will have to calculate at least if not more than 10 tanks of fuel to eliminate or mitigate any variances in calculations.

Then we can minutely discuss (pick apart) your calculations endlessly like you did in this post. Then we can discuss how your data may be specious due to minute changes in conditions.

When we finally agree with your calculation we can discuss how we will use your BSFC to endless debate if your Fit is exactly the same as any other or not.

When we finally agree on a number we can discuss how changing parts can and will cause changes in the BSFC of any engine and how the mods on any one car will effect the others or not.

Then we can get into the REAL technical stuff like thermodynamics of different octane gasolines (that we touched on earlier) and it's effect on octane choice in a Fit.

So go ahead and start your data runs and get back to us.

WHEW that ought to keep him out of our hair for a few months.

and ps I didn't call you stupid I said you were ignorant and there is a difference.

 

Run regular. The difference won't be noticed.

 

Loudbang,

Must be difficult to argue with someone who wasn't arguing or contradicting at all, but only asking questions. I can appreciate how difficult that must be, and how stressful it is to deal with someone who wants you to actually do something useful instead of just criticizing other people.

I came back because I saw the story in the NY Times and thought I'd share the information. That's the purpose of this website, isn't it?

But I find it interesting that now you're taking credit for what I did! I haven't disputed what you posted, I asked for data. You didn't provide it. All I got from you was You're ignorant, I'm right, You're too obtuse and obstinate to look it up, Everybody knows this, You don't have the education to understand this, etc.

So I find data from a reliable source and clarify how that might apply to the Fit and you're still criticizing me. Instead of continuing to do that, how about YOU clarify how it might apply to the Fit or similar engine that does NOT call for premium fuel. Then you'd be contributing instead of criticizing QUESTIONS.

 

So I guess this means that you don't want to provide US with data when WE ask?

This task may be done with your modicum of skills but no you don't want to spend the time doing it just like your cloying demands for data to us we didn't want to spend our time supplying you with data. Now that the shoe is on the other foot the truth outs you are a hypocrite.

Never took any credit from you I simply pointed out that I was correct and YOUR link proved it.

 

How do you come up with this inside-out logic? I asked for data when you stated something was obvious fact that everybody knew. You didn't provide it. I provided it. So now you think that means that I won't provide data when other people ask?

Troll somewhere else.

 

The data was always there you just don't have the skills to interpret it and extrapolate what you needed from it. All you did was find a link to someone elses work with additional data and post it and I said GOOD JOB.

Good so you are going to calculate the BSFC of the Fit right?

 

Fuel consumption comparisons, car to car, are normally mpg, not expressed as a function of power. However when we look at power, the evidence up-thread shows no difference using 93 octane with a stock Fit (at wot).

To calculate BSFC we'd need to know fuel consumption at specific power outputs. If you have these numbers I'll be happy to plot them for you. Of course to be meaningful they need to be produced for the same car running both 87 and 93 AKI.

 

Your ignorance rearing it's head yet again. Novices use mpg PROFESSIONAL engine builders use BSFC. AS for links go to Hot Rod mag online and peruse the many engine build up competitions and see for yourself. LOL

Look a little further down your own link to post 60

Summary is simple though, back in 2007 multiple dyo runs were run in SoCal by the group active at that time. The ONLY thing that made a noticeable difference was running premium AND running a cooler spark plug, a Denso IK-22. This was good for a consistent gain of 2-3 whp even on a heat soaked car. This was on a otherwise STOCK GD.

So I guess this means you aren't starting a new thread on cylinder loading?

 

Here's my thought:
100,000 miles at 30 mpg is 3333 gallons of fuel. At 30 cents/gal difference between regular and premium that's $1000.

$1000 is a lot of money to spend for 2-3 HP on a Fit. I imagine there are easier ways to get similar improvement...

(I tried googling to find out what speed advantage you'd get from lighter wheels but even when I put in automobile I still got mostly bike stuff- and the auto sites that came up didn't have specifics- anybody know?)

 

Plenty of ways. No passengers. And 3hp is optimistic.

 

Holy crap you're obtuse. Can you not fathom the meaning of the word "and"?

 

Lighter wheels wont give a large advantage, but the advatantage they give is useful in every aspect of the car. Who wouldnt want better performance AND better fuel economy?


Go hop onto a mazda miata websote, they are all about lighter rim packages and provide quite a bit of information on this thing

 

You are beginning to sound like Bill "cigar" Clinton LOL.

 

nice... introducing politics and sex in a car forum discussing premium fuel.

Building on your metaphor, using premium AND changing to cooler plugs is the same as just using premium. gotcha.

This argument is over the benefits of using premium over regular fuel in an unmodified Honda Fit. TPColgett and cru tested other combinations of mods. The only noticeable difference using premium was with the addition of cooler plugs, and even this was a measly 2-3 HP at WOT on the dyno. In the words of TP: "2-3 whp is not even noticeable."

Without mods there is no difference. With mods (albeit simply changing out the plugs) the difference is too small to notice.

 

Nobody ever said the difference would be massive. Wow they changed the plugs too how do you know which made the most difference?

Now we need to know how much difference only changing the plugs using 87 makes.