Drive Accord Honda Forums banner

1 - 20 of 80 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
42 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Too 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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,223 Posts
Too 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.
It's called the placebo effect. I hope you are enjoying the extra money you are spending on each tank of gas. :thumbsdow
 

·
loving the V6 growl :D
Joined
·
444 Posts
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..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
884 Posts
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..
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?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
265 Posts
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?

I tend to agree that it's placebo effect, however most modern V6s have a higher compression ratio and recommend the higher octane. Honda does not.
 

·
Four Doors/Two Pedals
2020 Honda Accord Sport 2.0T 10AT
Joined
·
1,172 Posts
The only purpose for octane is to impede ignition, so that the engine does not "diesel," which is to say, ignite under pressure before the spark plugs can fire.

Research has shown that running too high octane can lead to unburned fuel entering the catalytic converter, igniting there and thereby compromising a damned expensive component.

There is a ton of articles and such on the web about octane.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
59 Posts
Only time I would run anything higher than 87 is if I am going on a trip that involves a lot of uphill climbing, like from the bay to Tahoe. Otherwise, there's no benefit with the newer engines. In my old '96 Accord, I did a test where after driving with 87 for a couple years, I decided to pump in 91. Not a placebo effect when the engine had reduced vibrations at idle.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,990 Posts

·
loving the V6 growl :D
Joined
·
444 Posts
or higher seems placebo effect................ based on the internet. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
227 Posts
I know that conventional wisdom says higher octane for these cars shouldn't matter.

I drive the same route to work, etc. Driving habits are the same.

I tried higher octane for a couple months, and consistently got about 2 MPG better (31) , and crisper response.

Changed back to 87 and am back to 29 MPG.

Theory says no way, real experience consistently says yes it is better.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,682 Posts
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,223 Posts
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.
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,223 Posts
My car gets maybe 1-2 MPG better consistently with 89 octane :dunno:
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.
 

·
Rhymes with **** & Quick
Joined
·
1,314 Posts
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.
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.

****
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,682 Posts
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.
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.

For the record, my 2012 6-6 has a 10.0:1 compression ratio and I heard it ping once last week (Shell gas by the way). I’m not saying I’m drinking the cool aid here; I still use 87-octane. But in light of what others have stated and the octane discrepancy between the Acura and Honda engines, I’m no longer 100% comfortable accepting the Honda line that the V6 needs 87-octane. There is a fair amount of evidence that suggests otherwise.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
159 Posts
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.
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.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,570 Posts
Geezo, like comparing apples and oranges here. Acura programing is way diff than Honda at the ecu. Just because numbers look identical, there are factors into weight and drive train.

Having high an compression engine will demand high octane, but Honda preferred to run rich AFR instead of high octane. This makes a Honda less costly to operate, and safer with varying grades of fuel. As 10 years comes down the road, who knows how much lower our fuel grades will be then. This is not something new... GM did this with the L-88 Corvette back in the late sixties. They purposefully set the AFR rich to keep detonation down with the decline of 100+ octane fuels.

About high octane and regular grade... At one time in the early 2000's, we had variable methanol mix during the season. Winter fuel usually got methanol while summer didn't have the mix.

Most high octane fuels also have better quality burn. Shell, Exxon, Sonoco and many others have developed better performing burns with such fuels.

You will get a wee bit of better performance once the ecu reprograms with the higher octane but the costs out-way any benefits.

When I am lucky I find some stations still doing the winter / summer change ups with regular grade fuel. So getting 87 octane with no methanol mix is having your cake and eating it.
 
1 - 20 of 80 Posts
Top