Your trucks computer system and you...

There has already been several threats on this conversation. This is where the mapping comes into play with everything else that it's reading

 

Do you have documented info to support this, OP chime in if you have anything to add to this please.

 

The test that you're basing your knowledge on is 16 years old FYI motors and motor technology has come a long way 16 years. A slower burning fuel will always produce more efficiency, especially in a motor like the atkinson's Motor . And yes there is plenty of documentation already on this,in this decade.!

 

I know nothing about the exact engine control Toyota uses so I can't be sure but I am 99% sure it has no way to optimize itself for different grades of fuel. The reason behind this is because if your vehicle were to adapt to say 93 octane fuel and then you went to 87- it could cause engine damage before the computer learned otherwise.

Saabs and Trionic were a different story- they actually use spark plug ionization as a primary sensor input and can therefore adjust engine parameters on a per revolution basis and therefore you do see the vehicle adding timing, boost, etc with higher octane fuels (to a limit of course) the flip side is if you suddenly give it different fuel it adjusts immediately. The down side is you must use the right plugs, they must be gapped correctly, and every so often you get to spend $400 on a new ignition cassette...not to mention a host of other quirks and concerns.

Does this mean you will never see a benefit from higher octane fuel in a Tacoma? Of course not- extreme conditions are definitely real but rare and your vehicle should operate just as optimally 99.9% of the time without it.

 

Seems like you're knowledgeable so will this still happen to some aspects of the engine/powertrain/tranny with a manual transmission?

 

Of course, just one less electronic controlled item (transmission)- so the learning will all be engine related.

 

Maybe this philosophy of learning could be applied at the manufacturing and design level?

 

No doubt! Once those exhaust bearings get broken in, the thing sounds like a beast!

 

Is this option available for those with M/T? Please explain.

 

Wow you just introduced a lot of variables. E-10 is more likely to absorb water because of the alcohol which then can degrade performance...so it depends. As for E-0 90 and 93 the performance should be no different in a vehicle that is not designed to take advantage of the higher knock resistance under most circumstances.

 

These always become arguments about the benefits, or lack of, of higher octane fuel

will it ever end?

 

Yes. M/T is 'Moon Transfer' isn't it?

 

I thought it was mega torque from reading about how much better it is...

 

You're bringing apples to a discussion on oranges.

Before you try to make fruit salad, no e10 will ever perform as well as any e0, even in the same grade.

As a side note e anything should be discarded for the general public. It takes more energy to grow and process than fuel it offsets. And that's your tax dollars at work, with no substantial benefit towards any of the original stated goals of the e project.

 

Rook player?

 

Well, is guess your right rock lobster, The delicate and minuet details of this argument will never end.

 

Thanks, Clearwater. I was born in Tampa actually. So I get this. I just wanted to help those who are not as familiar with the beach.

 

Always go with recommended octane level. Ethanol will not reduce performance, but will reduce economy (fuel mileage).

 

I would buy and run any E-0 fuel before any with ethanol. If I could get that in 87 great. If I had to go 89 I would. Don't know if I would spring for premium unless I was storing the truck for a deployment. Ethanol sucks for storage reasons.