|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 7,100
Addicted CEG\'er
|
Addicted CEG\'er
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 7,100 |
Originally posted by acrdklr:
i cannot remember where exactly i read this but somewhere in the paperwork/manual for my svt i read that you should always run 91 as a minimum but if for some reason you did run 89 or 87 the computer would alter the timimg or something like that so as to prevent detonation
In an attempt to prevent, maybe... like Demon said.. nothing is 100%.... I certainly wouldn't wanna risk my entire engine to save $2.48 per fill up...
(difference of 12.4 gallons at 1.80[regular] and 2.00[premium])
(YES.. I know premium may not be the same there.. but the average is 20 cents difference....)
Hell, just cut out that extra soda/hotdog/chips/donut every week. I mean, JUST ONE!! There are much better ways of saving gas.. like..
- Drive less
- drive easier
- don't open up your secondaries(below ~3200 @WOT or ~3700 normally)
I think I would choose any of those before choosing a method that could hurt my engine..
Ray
'99 CSVT - Silver #222/276
In a constant state of blow-off euphoria.
Originally posted by Kremitthefrog:
I like to wear dresses and use binoculars to watch grandmas across the street.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 3,045
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 3,045 |
i was not suggesting a course of action but rather answering his question. i always use 91 and would use better if it were alvailable here in cali.
00 black/tan svt, #2052 of 2150, born 2/1/00
formerly known as my csvt
"Nothing in the world is more dangerous than a sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." -Martin Luther King, Jr.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 7,100
Addicted CEG\'er
|
|
Addicted CEG\'er
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 7,100 |
as was I... I wasn't trying to infer that you were saying it was acceptable to do so, I was merely attempting to add my .02 to the end of your statement. More so for a clearer understanding, in the future, to other viewers...
(afterall, isn't that why we all chip in? to make the answer more evident, and concise?)
No harm, no foul, dude.. on either of our parts...
GAME ON!!!!!!!!
Ray
'99 CSVT - Silver #222/276
In a constant state of blow-off euphoria.
Originally posted by Kremitthefrog:
I like to wear dresses and use binoculars to watch grandmas across the street.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 340
CEG\'er
|
|
CEG\'er
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 340 |
Originally posted by projectSHO89:
Originally posted by 98SVT_LEO:
Get rid of the SVT b4 you run cheap gas through it. I use 87 for my 5hp lawnmower......not for a well designed 2.5l engine.....common sense....stuff
Common sense would be to read the Owner's Manual, already quoted above.
It is the result of much engineering design and testing. If the engineers who designed the system had believed that a higher octane was mandatory, they would have specified that it as the only grade of fuel to be used.
Almost all Ford vehicles are designed to run just fine on regular pump grade fuel. There are only a few vehicles for which premium only is required and the Contour SVT certainly isn't one of them.
Steve
You're wrong. 
Right on my dash and right in my SVT owners manual, it states *Premium Only* 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 235
CEG\'er
|
|
CEG\'er
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 235 |
Filled my fuel tank with mid-grade instead of Premium.
Result: My 402 CEL that has been on for about 6 months went out this morning.
Guess I will be running Mid-Grade till it gets really warm out. 
I am a troll..........
2004 C5 Corvette Coupe, Mag Red/Light Oak, Auto
Polished Wheels, Titanium Exhaust
2002 Chevy Malibu V6, remote start
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 802
Veteran CEG\'er
|
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 802 |
I had the same problem with my 98 SE!I ran 92 in the tank and CEL went out  .
New Pics of OUTKAST 1!Sept2006
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 839
Veteran CEG\'er
|
|
Veteran CEG\'er
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 839 |
Originally posted by incubusjunkie614:
Originally posted by Stinger00:
holy [censored] you guys are so cheap.
I'm a college student living on my own in California and I still put premium in the car every time. Good gas too, no cheap ass rotten robbie. It's like an extra $1.25 a fill up.
-holmes
yea im in high school, and i dont complain about the 93 octane....hell i cant wait to put in some 100+ octane....that'll will be fun
No offense, but I had more free money in high school than I do now. I assume its gonna only go downhill from here.. the older you get, the more you gotta pay for.. blah. Can't wait for kids!
Still though, I'm not exactly the kinda person who likes to throw money away and I still never would put ANYTHING but premium in my baby. Come on, its a couple extra bucks here and there, don't be stingy people.
The Spickle
New Car: Infra Red '04 FSVT
Former Car: Black '98 CSVT, #3137/6535 "The Unluckiest car.. ever"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,066
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,066 |
Quick question, I've been filling up with 92 Octane here in Vancouver since I got the car (couple of months), do you think that's the reason for my wonky fuel mileage ? The highest here is Chevron's 94 octane, maybe I should switch to that ... $1.10 / liter though .. ow 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602 |
All you folks ARGUING and DEFENDING the low octane in an SVT point are MISSING the BIG POINT. Running lower octane then the PCM is programmed for will significantly LOWER GAS MILEAGE!!!So now you are getting less miles per tank. So much for saving that extra money because you now need to fill up more often. Not only that but you still get all the other bad drawbacks as well. Significant power loss, extra wear from light detonation, and a possibility for severe engine damage if the knock sensor doesn't catch it in time. Not only that but Several engines did not even come with a knock sensor (FORD screw up IMO) It is a well documented fact. If you have one of those you can kiss your engine saving timing pull goodbye!!! Then your engine in hot weather.  Morale of the story is DON'T BE A CHEAP ASS!!! 
2000 SVT #674
13.47 @ 102 - All Motor!
It was not broke; Yet I fixed it anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602 |
Originally posted by ODC:
Quick question, I've been filling up with 92 Octane here in Vancouver since I got the car (couple of months), do you think that's the reason for my wonky fuel mileage ?
The highest here is Chevron's 94 octane, maybe I should switch to that ... $1.10 / liter though .. ow
SVT or non-SVT
SVT's like the best standard grade premium you can find. (roughly 91-94)
The higher the octane the better the timing curve though the 00 models have an unfair advantage here with the infinitely better PCM & strategy.
Non-SVT's require 87 octane.
Sometimes 89 is required to stop detonation on older engines that have carbon buildup but it does not increase power or mileage. Actually it decreases both to run octane higher then the PCM is programmed for.
2000 SVT #674
13.47 @ 102 - All Motor!
It was not broke; Yet I fixed it anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
