Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 20:41:50 +0100 From: "Charles C." <c.k.christacopoulos_removeme_nospamee.ac.uk> Subject: Re: Premium vs. regular unleaded?
Gary Fritz wrote: > I've been wondering this for a while, but I didn't want to enter that > Australian-argument thread, so here's a Saab-only question: > > What would happen if I ran my 2002 9-5 Aero on regular unleaded, instead of > premium? I did check this on a 1997 9000 (2.0 lpt) and found the consumption to have been better by 8% or by 4-5% (I guess it might have depended on what I did with each tankful). From memory my calculation at the time was that at 4-5% better consumption it evened(?) out the price difference .... etc. I stayed with premium fuel because I "honestly" thought the car run smoother at around the 3rd tank. (Could it be that I felt what I wanted to feel? Who knows who cares.) > > My wife thinks it will save us money. I'm concerned it could cause damage > to the engine, or at the very least cause enough power drop that you'd lose > the cost savings. > > Then let's extend the question to her car: she has a 1984 Porsche 911. > It's supposed to have premium, and it doesn't have the fancy electronics > that my 9-5 has. What happens if she feeds HER car lower-octane fuel? Best not to make comment, I can see what Ausies would say :-( ... but given the age of the car the more octanes (and thus less preignition if I am not mistaken) the better. :-) Charles -- Please remove _removeme_ to reply.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
