What octane are u running ?

Tell me about it, almost blew them welds off the intake manifold and fried piston rings

 

check your mileage, I repeatedly found a mileage boost with 89 that made up the price difference from 87 on my 2016 Tacoma with the V6. I now run 91, no mileage boost, but I've been told by several mechanics that the extra additives in premium do make a difference in engine deposits. I can't confirm that, however.

I work with some guys who swear that they had better mileage from pure gasoline, but I saw none.

 

Fuel atomization and distribution is improved by injecting it directly into the combustion chamber under high pressure. Not having the lean spots makes the engine less susceptible to predetonation, allowing higher compression.

And no, compression isn't compression. Things like combustion chamber design, cam profile and even the material the head is made from make an engine more, or less, tolerant of high compression.

 

So is the compression of the motor at ignition not 11.8:1? Direct injection doesn't change that. And variable valve timing allows the engine to tolerate lower octane gas by reducing timing when a knock is detected, but that doesn't mean the engine prefers it. For instance, I don't prefer to keep explaining how these concepts work, but I tolerate it for benefit and education of others.

 

I didn't say the compression ratio isn't 11:8:1. That is simple math. But not all compression is equal. Comparing a 60's engine, to one from 20 years ago, to one from today, isn't a valid comparison. That was my point.

Variable valve timing isn't what reduces timing. That is ignition timing. It is done by a knock sensor and a computer. Lots of engines have knock sensors and the ability to retard timing, but do not have variable valve timing.

You keep posting half truths, not complete facts. Like increased efficiency not manifesting as increased fuel economy.

I'm done with you.

 

87. I get the fuel pump chirp with some gas. Went with 91 chevron for awhile, but I would still chirp here and there. Ever since it got cold, truck hasn't chirped on cheap 87. So now I run the cheapest 87 I find. Runs great. We will see when summer comes again if the chirp comes back I have to run expensive gas because my windows are down and I go crazy hearing it chirp at stops. Pisses me off lol.

I don't worry about gas mileage. It's a truck. I drive it relatively hard. It gets decent gas mileage, but I get smiles too. It's a win win.

 

Have you driven 33k miles in my truck?
Then maybe you should be quiet about what you don't know.

Higher octane fuel absolutely makes my truck run better. I and several others have mentioned that on regular we have misses, pinging, or general drivability issues. You keep saying higher octane fuel makes no difference and you just couldn't be any wronger.

 

If increased driveability is wroooooong...
I don't wanna be riiiiiight!!!

This thread has devolved into a shit show. You would think we're trying to convince everyone to buy premium, which is not the case. Where the hell is the OP in all of this nonsense and chaos...?

 

Page 583 of the manual even says to switch fuels if you have issues lol.
But hey, there's a lot of guys here smarter than Toyota, so...

 

89. Figured better mileage than 87 with 91 being unnecessary since the manual says 87. But who knows !

 

Placebo effect is real. The mind knows it paid for something it believes is better, and makes a person believe it is, despite facts to the contrary.

 

To be honest, the manual says no lower octane than 87. Then on another page it says 87 or higher...

 

So data logs mean nothing? Right.
I'm still waiting on some facts that my truck is better on 87 than 93.

 

So I guess I’m safe at 89!

But at the end of the day, it’s a Toyota so I’m sure she will run for a long time as long as you keep up with maintenance

 

Probably, but my truck has a bad miss on 87. I don't really care to tolerate it when 93 fixes it. Why not have a smooth operating truck and have it last a long time?

 

Good point. Wish we had 93 here in Cali!

 

Yeah, a lot like a compression ratio in the 60s isn't the same as it is today... Did the way compression is measured change over the last 50 years? Perhaps I should hop in my DeLorean and travel back to 1955 to ask Doc Brown. Last I checked in physics and chemistry class, compression in a graduated cylinder is the same on a plane or in a train, or in a box with a fox. But only half of that statement is true, apparently.

 

I did say "ideally" under carburetors. Superficially, they all should, since rationally when you think of less volume flowing through the venturi, it means lower vacuum drawing fuel into the stream. Practically, its a little more complicated than that. There are many carburetors that in fact DO adjust automatically. Here's a US patent filed by Nissan in 1977: http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4129622.pdf . Here is a sales website for one; https://technologyelevatedco.com/smartcarb/

 

Ok, so let me help you get some better mileage out of your truck....
When you are coasting down a hill with your foot off the gas, it actually shuts the engine OFF ENTIRELY. Zero fuel consumption. If you put it in neutral, it has to keep the engine running, since otherwise the engine would STOP. This costs fuel.

So down hills... leave it in gear. Fuel consumption will fall to ZERO when the engine shuts off.

 

And not only that, but even the 4.0 said "premium recommended": http://www.russauto.com/ncinv/modelinfo/brochures/05Tacoma4WD.pdf (see page 25).