Do you have to run premium fuel in this vehicle with a 3.0? I know it is a ford engine and the US ford version runs regular gas. So why the premium on this one? Will it hurt to run regular? Can the computer be adjusted to have less performance? thanks in advance, Bob

 

I run regular octane. Runs great.

 

I run mid w/ no problems(my CEL was a vac issue lol)

 

Nothing but the very best for my cat.

 

Same here!

 

Must be some reason your tag says "premium fuel only", don't ya think? Some have run on regular with no problems and some have had lots of performance issues using lower octane. I trust what the engineers tell me and then invest in oil company shares.

 

I always run 93 octane in my X...

 

Ditto!

Heck! I alternate medium/premium in my Mustang GT and Lincoln MKZ, and they're supposed to run on 87 octane.

 

I always run premium in my Mustang Gt... And usually mid grade in my Murano, unless 93 is on sale someplace..

BUT always 93 in the Jag..

 

The varying performance found by different folks boils down to driving habits mostly. Aggressive drivers usually don't fare as well as easy drivers. The knock sensing and resulting timing retard basically cover for the lower octane fuel most of the time. However, if low octane keeps the knock retard function in action most of the time, and you step on it and NEED the knock retard for power, at times there is not enough left in the range to truly protect the engine. That is rough on the engine, your fuel economy, and ultimately your wallet. Not to mention other consequences like higher engine temperature.
It just doesn't really make too much sense to me to penny pinch with the fuel. I'd rather keep my engine happy!

 

Just a thought...

93 Octane is $3.00 a gallon

and

89 Octane is $2.90 a gallon

and

With a 16 gallon gas tank, that means it costs you $1.60 PER FILL UP more if you use the higher octane...(and that cost is going from Empty to Full)

Is the risk of engine problems (one octane vs. another) worth $1.60?

 

Very well put!!

 

yes; well put, indeed.

 

Why, if I may ask..........

 

Yeah that. You're wasting money.

First off, I use 93 in my 2.5 ... our family is sufficiently blessed that I can afford to do that.

That said, the way I drive, I'm probably wasting my money, too. Unless you push your car to accelerate fairly aggressively (i.e. large throttle opening), you probably would be just fine with regular 87. Those are the primary conditions (i.e. high cylinder pressures) which induce autoignition (i.e. spark knock). Staying away from those conditions means the octane requirement is lessened.

 

Well, for the X-Type, it's what's specified. I don't want to gamble with the engineering specs.

For my Mustang GT? I bought it new in 2003. She's my garage queen...a 2003 Mustang GT Convertible. I don't drive her much. She has just over 6,000 miles. I've been using Mobil 1 since the first oil change and is done twice a year. So, I just use the higher octane to try to keep the injectors and the chambers cleaner. My OCD.

For my MKZ? I bought her new in 2008. She's a 2009 MKZ that I bought during my mid-life crisis mode. Okay, one of many but that's beside the point. Besides, I really love the cooled seats in the summer. I get the oil changes done at the Lincoln dealership so she gets the synth blend oil. I'll probably stick with that at twice a year. Again, I don't drive her much either. Currently, she has a tick over 1,600 miles. I use the higher octane gas for her, as well, to keep her engine clean. Once again, my OCD.

In general, I use the higher octane since the Mustang GT and MKZ don't cycle through the tank frequently. After all, these two and the X-Type are my favorites. For my other vehicles that are used more frequently, I stick with the regular grade. I've been told that I'm wasting money by putting in the higher grades for these cars. However, if I'm paying my hard earned money (unfortunately, I wasn't blessed and had to work hard to get where I am now and for my luxuries) for them to stay nice, why not -- even if it's for the peace of mind -- right? After all, they're not the ones writing the checks each month.

 

I sometimes alternated between 89 mid and 93 premium. The car runs the same performance wise as far as I can tell, but I notice that I get the rattling sound on 89 at times. That scared me enough to go strictly premium now.

My Lincoln Aviator specs for 91 or more, but I notice no difference at all using 89.

 

Excuse the editing for brevity. Contrary to most advertising copy, regular and mid level octane gas contain more than sufficient cleaning additives and in most cases an identical amount to high octane gas. From a technical point of view- why would low compression engines require less cleaner, especially on the injectors since they're OUTSIDE the combustion chamber?

Also, high octane fuel doesn't store any better than lower octane gas. There is no sound reason for using them where not required.

 

Seems odd no one is mentioning compression. Higher octane is also necessary for these engines due to the compression ratio. Not to mention the increased power benefits and cleaner burn-off. I don't care what you drive, 93 octane is 'better' gas than 87. Period.

 

Actually, my using the higher octane isn't due to the heavy marketing done by Shell, Exxon, etc. Rather, it was something that was engrained in me by my dad who was a master mechanic in the older days. So, imagine how long I've been doing this. Anyway, as I've stated before, I'll do things the way I think would be best. Besides, another $2.50 difference (approx. $0.15 average more per gallon from regular) for each car that's filled up maybe 5 to 6 times a year won't break the bank for me. Now, my kid's college expense, however, might.

Thanks, though, for your concern!