Fuel Type Used...

I have read that Sunoco article before.

The 2020 Ford Raptor that I owned said it required 91 or better octane in the owners manual. This makes sense since the Raptor HO engine is tuned to produce 450 hp and 510 lb/ft torque compared to the standard 3.5L ecoboost at 375 hp and 470 lb/ft. Many people on the Raptor forum would run them on 87, but there was a loss of power and MPG. Many of the guys who could get 93 or 94 octane fuel in their areas reported good things. But that doesn’t mean the 3.5L Tacoma naturally aspirated engine can use all that octane. I’ll experiment with a couple tanks of 91 on my next road trip and see if it makes a difference, but I won’t be expecting anything ground breaking to justify the extra cost all the time.

I’ve always run my turbocharged vehicles (300zx turbo, 300zx twin turbo, Volvo C30 Polestar, Ford Raptor) on 91+.

 

Suggest not to put too much emphasis on the grade "names". This is all Market labeling.

Use the Octane rating recommended for your vehicle.

I haven't seen the "Regular" label in this area for years. Generally, there is Super, Super Premium, Premium and Diesel.

 

Yes and the pump should be labeled with the octane ratings for petrol and cetane rating for diesel fuel also. The name doesn't always indicate what each fuel is. I've seen lower grades have 85 and 86 octane at stations in some areas.

I been mostly using 87 octane from BJ's wholesale club. I'm still coming up on 5000 miles but not ever heard it make the engine ping.

 

Agreed. To determine if the 2GR-FKS engine and ECU can take advantage of 91 octane rated fuel would require datalogging the ECU to see what kind if ignition advance it is using, and no matter what I highly doubt the performance/efficiency gains would be "worth" the cost if you were to somehow quantify it. On a hot, sea-level density altitude day I could see the higher octane making a significant difference. On a cold, high density altitude conditions day, much less so. It will be impossible to know how much the knock resistance of the fuel effects engine health long term, too.

 

I’ve always filled up per the manufacturers instructions and never had a problem. Why get better gas if your vehicle does not require it.

 

you could read the thread and get a couple ideas.

 

your signature line is spot on.

 

Good one.

I'll admit that my reply was pointless. I deleted it.

Still, I haven't seen any reason to run premium in a vehicle that doesn't require it. Even your most recent post suggests there wouldn't be, or that it would be too insignificant to justify the cost.

 

Regular 87 has been good for me!

 

I only said that it's possible that it would be of little benefit. I will all but guarantee that it will be of some benefit, weather it is enough to justify the cost is up to each individual. Also, without datalogging it's probably impossible to measure any changes because they are not going to be extremes. Requiring 87 doesn't mean the EFI system will not make adjustments if it is able to with a high octane rated fuel. Until there is some data to show if/how much higher octane fuel changes things, it's pointless to argue if it makes a difference or not. I only offer my knowledge of how the EFI system works on modern engines, which shows that higher octane usually makes a difference. In the pursuit of better efficiency and more power, this will only motivate the engineers of the ECU to push the limits of the recommended fuel used.

 

I use regular but run Lucas through about twice a year.

 

Keep in mind that the octane listed on the pump is only the minimum. Most of this discussion is meaningless unless everybody is actually testing the fuel for octane and energy content. With ethanol fuels, the energy content is lowered, but the octane is raised. For all anyone knows that cheapest handle at the pump may actually have the highest actual octane.

 

I also use non-ethanol fuel, either 88 or 90 octane, depending on what station I fuel at. The truck seems to run better, I see about 1 to 1 1/2MPG better miieage and it's also better for the fuel system corrosion wise long term.

 

You should add non-ethanol to you voting list.

 

I obviously haven't researched this as much as you have.

I was just thinking about fuel economy mostly. I have only heard a few people say that they experience increased fuel economy from running premium, but it never seems like enough to justify the cost.

I have personally run a tank of premium through a vehicle out of curiosity a handful of times, and never saw a benefit. I suppose this could vary from one vehicle to the next, though.