Acura MDX SUV Forums banner
21 - 29 of 29 Posts

·
Registered
2017 Acura MDX Tech FWD
Joined
·
2,004 Posts
Not extensive tests, no. It was certainly true in another car I had, and some limited testing seemed to bear that out with my MDX so i quit monitoring honestly. Gas is not created equal. Many pumps here now say “may contain ethanol” and they wholesale buy what is cheapest, so you never know.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I've done some tests over multiple vehicles and using different fuel stations (had the pleasure of Costco for my MDX, Shell/Chevron/Wawa/Walmart for the other vehicles) where there was no improvement with 93 Octane in the MPGs and Range.

I do got plans to literally do these same tests with the Type S before I go crazy with modding it.

Sent from my SM-G781V using Tapatalk
 
  • Like
Reactions: mmmmark

·
Registered
Joined
·
68 Posts
There is no modern engine that is immune to carbon deposits eventually forming on the valves. Engines don’t operate perfectly all the time so even if you think your engine is running without issue, chances are it’s accumulating at least a little carbon on the valves or somewhere down the line - even if using top tier V-Power, Costco 93, Sunoco 93 that have detergents. Once or twice per year, add a bottle of BG 44K - it’s costly (not sold everywhere - Google where to buy it) but it’s the brand that the best mechanics use not just for fuel injector cleaning but for other services too. You’ll pay $22-$29 per bottle but I’d rather use BG than the more diluted and less effective cheap stuff sold at (you fill in the blank). That said, no person can know at what rate they’re accumulating carbon deposits nor can they know how bad the deposits are at any given time without opening up things and taking a look which is both impractical and costly. I’m not a BG sales guy and don’t benefit in any way by recommending their stuff, but it works. If you want to research further, go ahead. There are other products that work too - to varying degrees - and I can’t say which of them is better than the other but I can say with a high degree of certainty that “you get what you pay for” applies in the case of additives.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,216 Posts
You sure mpgs drop by 1 MPG? I've done some testing and found out the most fuel efficient octane is 87 and its also nets you the longest range.

Sent from my SM-G781V using Tapatalk
Your statement is redundant. Also, I saw your testing. It’s probably flawed. However, with what Shell charges for premium, even with a decrease in mileage, you’ll probably save money using regular or midgrade . I use mid when I use Shell. Otherwise, I use Costco Premium.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,216 Posts
I've done some tests over multiple vehicles and using different fuel stations (had the pleasure of Costco for my MDX, Shell/Chevron/Wawa/Walmart for the other vehicles) where there was no improvement with 93 Octane in the MPGs and Range.

I do got plans to literally do these same tests with the Type S before I go crazy with modding it.

Sent from my SM-G781V using Tapatalk
Do you have a job yet?
 
  • Like
Reactions: wasjr

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,633 Posts
Here's my scientific statistics..... I ran the cheapest 87 in my 2002 MDX and never had any issues with it. No knocking, no perceived loss of power (ie still had enough giddie up for me) and retired the vehicle with 340,000 miles on it. When retired, the engine was still performing flawlessly....the rest of the car was falling apart!
Prior to the MDX, I owned a 1991 Volvo 740. Same results....used 87 octane (mostly not "top tier") with no adverse results for 300,000 miles. Conversely, my wife's BMW did indeed knock at a lower octane, so we have used 91 (when available) or 93 for its 240,000 miles.
None of these vehicles had any issues with using lower octane fuels and I would certainly not waste my time and money seeking out a "top tier" brand.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
335 Posts
Here's my scientific statistics..... I ran the cheapest 87 in my 2002 MDX and never had any issues with it. No knocking, no perceived loss of power (ie still had enough giddie up for me) and retired the vehicle with 340,000 miles on it. When retired, the engine was still performing flawlessly....the rest of the car was falling apart!
Prior to the MDX, I owned a 1991 Volvo 740. Same results....used 87 octane (mostly not "top tier") with no adverse results for 300,000 miles. Conversely, my wife's BMW did indeed knock at a lower octane, so we have used 91 (when available) or 93 for its 240,000 miles.
None of these vehicles had any issues with using lower octane fuels and I would certainly not waste my time and money seeking out a "top tier" brand.
but the TOP TIER is really more about detergents....not octane.....the OP was asking about spending money to buy additives like Techron and others rightly pointed out that you can make sure you have plenty of detergents with Top Tier gas. That said, I assume other gas brands also have some detergents
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,633 Posts
but the TOP TIER is really more about detergents....not octane.....the OP was asking about spending money to buy additives like Techron and others rightly pointed out that you can make sure you have plenty of detergents with Top Tier gas. That said, I assume other gas brands also have some detergents
Or, maybe the detergent is mere marketing crap!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
635 Posts
Not extensive tests, no. It was certainly true in another car I had, and some limited testing seemed to bear that out with my MDX so i quit monitoring honestly. Gas is not created equal. Many pumps here now say “may contain ethanol” and they wholesale buy what is cheapest, so you never know.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
In Florida all unleaded gas has 10% ethanol in it unless you see a pump that says ethanol free. I buy the ethanol free for use in my mower and generator but it is expensive.

If one uses top tier gas, even not premium, there is no need to add anything to your gas. Beating “the dead horse” about premium vs regular gas is useless.
 
21 - 29 of 29 Posts
Top