It's called the placebo effect. I hope you are enjoying the extra money you are spending on each tank of gas. :thumbsdow
It's called the placebo effect. I hope you are enjoying the extra money you are spending on each tank of gas. :thumbsdowToo many discussion on this already.... but just want to put what I get.
In my area (Tampa) only has octane 87, 89, and 93.
I tried all grades of fuel and car currently has 22k miles.
I noticed that the higher the octane, the more responsive the throttle is. I can pull to hwy easy and can get front tires burn easy. The only draw back is since it is responsive, I drive aggressive and so the MPG is not that good.
If I drive normal, all grades give about the same MPG.
2013 Accord Sport
Synthetic, Eco always off.
What's weird is that the hp and torque specs are almost identical. The Accord actually has a few MORE hp and tq. WTF is up with that?agree with the OP.. those guys that are saying its a waste are mostly 4 banger owners..
remember we have the same motor with Acura RDX-- and guess what??? they uses 93 oct..
Same in all aspects? Heads, internals, etc?agree with the OP.. those guys that are saying its a waste are mostly 4 banger owners..
remember we have the same motor with Acura RDX-- and guess what??? they uses 93 oct..
as many people will attest on here they have tried different octanes with no advantage. most improvements are due to driving habits.My car gets maybe 1-2 MPG better consistently with 89 octane :dunno:
Different engine computer software requires different octane. If this were 1980 and both engines had the same carburetors than they would have the same octane requirements.http://www.acura.com/Engine.aspx?model=RDX&modelYear=2014
States the RDX 3.5-liter has 273hp/251lb-ft. with a 10.5:1 compression ratio and requires 91-octane.
http://automobiles.honda.com/accord-sedan/specifications.aspx
States the Accord 3.5-liter has 278hp/252 lb-ft. with a 10.5:1 compression ratio but requires only 87-octane.
Same compression ratio and multi-port fuel injection but different fuel requirements? What gives? For the V6, there may be some truth to those who claim better performance and higher mpg when on higher octane fuel. For this to be true, it means one thing. Their engines MUST ping on 87-octane, which in turn causes the computer to pull timing. If the RDX’s and Accord’s V6 are nearly identical but the RDX requires premium, it is plausible the Accord V6 does in fact ping on 87-octane.
If you use a few tanks of gasoline your milage will probably average the same with either 87 or 89. It will just cost you more money using 89 octane. It's difficult to compare using one tank of gasoline to compare one MPG.My car gets maybe 1-2 MPG better consistently with 89 octane :dunno:
In addition, to state the obvious, you are paying more (around $0.35 per gallon more where I live) for 93 versus 87. If you fill up four or five times a month like me, that would mean just about $20-25 more per month. Not a huge amount, but it is something.The only draw back is since it is responsive, I drive aggressive and so the MPG is not that good.
If I drive normal, all grades give about the same MPG.
I understand that. Do you know anything specific about both cars’ software programs? Wouldn’t you think that because the Accord’s V6 has MORE torque and horsepower that it would be the engine with a MORE aggressive software program (A/F ratios, ignition timing, etc.) If anything, the Accord’s engine should require the higher octane based on its higher output. But the fact that both engine’s outputs are nearly identical would lead me to conclude that both software programs are nearly identical. I’m beginning to wonder if Honda states 87-octane for marketing purposes. If they recommended 91-octane, would they lose sales? Just a thought.Different engine computer software requires different octane. If this were 1980 and both engines had the same carburetors than they would have the same octane requirements.
The RDX does not REQUIRE 91, it recommends it. There's a difference between recommended and required. I know several people who drive Acuras which have never seen a drop of 91, with no problems. I wonder how much of it has to do with status symbol of honda vs acura.http://www.acura.com/Engine.aspx?model=RDX&modelYear=2014
States the RDX 3.5-liter has 273hp/251lb-ft. with a 10.5:1 compression ratio and requires 91-octane.
http://automobiles.honda.com/accord-sedan/specifications.aspx
States the Accord 3.5-liter has 278hp/252 lb-ft. with a 10.5:1 compression ratio but requires only 87-octane.
Same compression ratio and multi-port fuel injection but different fuel requirements? What gives? For the V6, there may be some truth to those who claim better performance and higher mpg when on higher octane fuel. For this to be true, it means one thing. Their engines MUST ping on 87-octane, which in turn causes the computer to pull timing. If the RDX’s and Accord’s V6 are nearly identical but the RDX requires premium, it is plausible the Accord V6 does in fact ping on 87-octane.
Please show us where in your 2013 Accord owners manual it says 89 octane or higher is recommended?