Will adding 91 octane gas improve horse power?
- Thread starter hek8560
- Start date
hehe.
I use 89octane.
car is responsive than mikeM 2.0L. heheheBe careful guys, he's gonna fire back.. His Mazda is the best thing evaaaaaaahhhh.
Technically yes, but it will not be noticeable at all and it is not worth the extra cost.
Higher octane fuel is more difficult to combust. When it does combust, it creates a slightly more powerful explosion in the cylinders than lower octane fuel. More powerful combustion means more hp.
However high octane fuel exists for higher power or forced induction (turbo/supercharged) engines because they are more likely to pre-ignite (A.K.A. Engine knocking). That is when the combustion in the chamber starts before the cylinder fully compressed. This damages the engine and causes a loss of power. That is why most turbocharged cars, supercharged cars, high revving cars, and high hp/liter engines require premium fuel.
In a car tuned for 87 octane, using higher octane fuel will not make your car healthier or last longer. It wont give you a noticeable increase in power. The power increase is so minimal that the 0-60mph time would likely be the same down to 3 decimal points. Some cars cannot even use higher octane fuels because their ECUs are not programmed to adjust to varying octane fuels. Also, with a higher octane fuel, you need more air and more spark to ignite the fuel more efficiently. In some cars, that might mean that you will need more powerful spark plugs or a better air filter to combust higher octane fuel efficiently.
Higher octane fuel is more difficult to combust. When it does combust, it creates a slightly more powerful explosion in the cylinders than lower octane fuel. More powerful combustion means more hp.
However high octane fuel exists for higher power or forced induction (turbo/supercharged) engines because they are more likely to pre-ignite (A.K.A. Engine knocking). That is when the combustion in the chamber starts before the cylinder fully compressed. This damages the engine and causes a loss of power. That is why most turbocharged cars, supercharged cars, high revving cars, and high hp/liter engines require premium fuel.
In a car tuned for 87 octane, using higher octane fuel will not make your car healthier or last longer. It wont give you a noticeable increase in power. The power increase is so minimal that the 0-60mph time would likely be the same down to 3 decimal points. Some cars cannot even use higher octane fuels because their ECUs are not programmed to adjust to varying octane fuels. Also, with a higher octane fuel, you need more air and more spark to ignite the fuel more efficiently. In some cars, that might mean that you will need more powerful spark plugs or a better air filter to combust higher octane fuel efficiently.
- :
- San Antonio, Texas
- :
- '15 CX-5 Miata AWD
Solution: ecu tune and high flow panel intake or cai/sri.
Your first paragraph is not accurate. Higher octane fuel has no more or less energy than low octane. Higher octane fuel simply better resists premature detonation which can damage an engine. This misinformation is everywhere.
http://www.nicoclub.com/archives/gasoline-octane-myths.html
Last edited:
Chris did you see Corksport's new cold airbox yet?
- :
- San Antonio, Texas
- :
- '15 CX-5 Miata AWD
Yes. Considering my climate I will probably get it, but for now no because once my charge pipe is connected my intake will be in the rear bumper.
+1
Once you get to an octane where your engine stops detonating/pinging your good. any more octane is a waste, plus the regular is most likely fresher cuz people are buying more of it. Do you really want to put stale 91 in your tank?
So to answer your question if you put 91 in your tank, your car wont start and you will ruin your engine and void your warranty ..... AND it causes "door dings"
But if you can put some non-ethanol gas in there, your Mazda will be very very happy!!
Last edited:
- :
- Plano, Texas, USA
- :
- Plano, Texas, USA
"Once there's no need for a high peak horsepower, there's no need for a huge turbocharger-and that means much less lag. Indeed, peak boost happens early, resulting in a healthy 310 lb-ft of torque at 2,000 rpm, which then fades from there."
"If there's a drawback, it's that the CX-9's torquey engine promises more muscle than it's able to deliver when all-out passing power is needed. At very high engine speeds, boost (and output) begins to drop off. And the 2.5-liter gets a bit raucous."
- Motor Trend March 2016 issue.
If SA-G 2.5L turbo can gain 23 hp, 10% more horsepower by using 93-octane gas (and premium in our area is 93 instead of 91), I would use premium gas on new 2016 CX-9 without hesitation.
Of course the big EGR cooler we saw in the video is very interesting and unique. Hope this aggressive EGR system from Mazda can really improve the real-world fuel economy as advertised.
Although I've always been against turbo engines due to the concern of their longevity, this particular SA-G 2.5L turbo could make me to think twice and even change my mind.
1
123373
"Once there's no need for a high peak horsepower, there's no need for a huge turbocharger-and that means much less lag. Indeed, peak boost happens early, resulting in a healthy 310 lb-ft of torque at 2,000 rpm, which then fades from there."
"If there's a drawback, it's that the CX-9's torquey engine promises more muscle than it's able to deliver when all-out passing power is needed. At very high engine speeds, boost (and output) begins to drop off. And the 2.5-liter gets a bit raucous."
- Motor Trend March 2016 issue.
If SA-G 2.5L turbo can gain 23 hp, 10% more horsepower by using 93-octane gas (and premium in our area is 93 instead of 91), I would use premium gas on new 2016 CX-9 without hesitation.
Of course the big EGR cooler we saw in the video is very interesting and unique. Hope this aggressive EGR system from Mazda can really improve the real-world fuel economy as advertised.
Although I've always been against turbo engines due to the concern of their longevity, this particular SA-G 2.5L turbo could make me to think twice and even change my mind.
+1 I am very interested in the new CX9 for the added space and stronger engine. If I pulled the trigger it would be the top of the line model which would be around 44 grand according to the pricing releases published. I have been running premium in my 2011 328 for 5 years and can careless about the added cost. My motto is, if I can't afford the gas, than I shouldn't spend 40+ grand on any car!
As Mazda moves more up-level I wonder if they will begin extending the term length of their basic and powertrain warranties?
I thought I saw 50K on the CX-9 signature...until I realized that was Canadian pricing.
I thought I saw 50K on the CX-9 signature...until I realized that was Canadian pricing.
The CX-9 doesn't require premium, it's optional. And I think you mean you "couldn't care less" about the added cost.
1
123373
You are correct!
"Once there's no need for a high peak horsepower, there's no need for a huge turbocharger-and that means much less lag. Indeed, peak boost happens early, resulting in a healthy 310 lb-ft of torque at 2,000 rpm, which then fades from there."
"If there's a drawback, it's that the CX-9's torquey engine promises more muscle than it's able to deliver when all-out passing power is needed. At very high engine speeds, boost (and output) begins to drop off. And the 2.5-liter gets a bit raucous."
- Motor Trend March 2016 issue.
If SA-G 2.5L turbo can gain 23 hp, 10% more horsepower by using 93-octane gas (and premium in our area is 93 instead of 91), I would use premium gas on new 2016 CX-9 without hesitation.
Of course the big EGR cooler we saw in the video is very interesting and unique. Hope this aggressive EGR system from Mazda can really improve the real-world fuel economy as advertised.
Although I've always been against turbo engines due to the concern of their longevity, this particular SA-G 2.5L turbo could make me to think twice and even change my mind.
Yeah that's what separates turbos from N/A engines in that there's a wider spectrum of tuning. The standard as far as longevity goes is probably the Evo's 2.0 turbo engine. They're pretty much bullet proof with very robust internals. I know folks with 100K+ miles with many owners reporting the same thing online with no engine issues.
STI owners may argue their engines get to 100k+ miles as well but I don't think their engine is as well constructed as the Evo's.
Too early to tell about Honda's new turbo cars.
BMW turbos and to an extent VW turbos had weak cooling systems.
Knowing how Mazda approached Skyactiv-G engines, the Skyactiv turbo likely has robust internals (not Evo level or anything like that) but will be easily handle its detuned final HP figures. Interesting to see how efficient its stock cooling system is though.
Last edited:
