87 octane should work fine in the Ody.

 

87 octane should work fine in the Ody.

Not only should work fine, but is actually what the manufacturer recommends. Correct me if I'm wrong (like I even NEED to say that ) but a vehicle is engineered for a certain grade of fuel, and all emissions and mileage tests, for example, are based on consuming that type of fuel.

This is actually a cost factor, for example, in comparing the Sienna and the Ody, since I believe Toyota recommends 91 octane for the Sienna while Honda reocmmends 87 for the Ody.

--Jason

 

Also, on the brand issue, it's worth noting that the "brand" of your gas station does not necessarily have anything at all to do with the "brand" of the gas they pump. I served some clients in the oil and gas industry once upon a time, and learned that the refining and processing business is essentially just a vendor for the retail sales business. Your Exxon station might get its fuel from an Exxon truck, but could just as likely get it from a Texaco/Unocal/BP truck.

I tend to look for a branded gas station just because I perceive some higher likelihood that they aren't monkeying around with theirpumps or their fuel mixtures. Mind you, I have no basis AT ALL for concluding this, I just feel that he bigger a company is the harder they work to ensure that some yokel somewhere doesn't horribly embarass their trillion dollar brand name with some hare-brained consumer ripoff .

--Jason

 

Thanks for the reply!

So if toyota sienna recommand use 91 vs honda odyssey use 87, then honda odyssey is actually more competive and fuel costless than sienna!

 

This would appear to be the case, though I'm waiting for someone else who knows the Sienna to confirm the 91 recommendation.

 

Now don't go off starting false rumors. Toyota recommends 87 octane, just like Honda does.

david.

 

David,

JBS is right. Toyota recommends premium unleaded in the Sienna. The manual says 87 octane is acceptable. (but you may not achieve the same HP or gas mileage).

P.S- I actually read the Sienna owner's manual when I was shopping for the van.

 

The gas quality is a valid question. Evidently there is a new voluntary "Top Tier" standard supported by GM, Honda, Toyota, and BMW.

Here is a link that provides some info:

http://www.gm.com/company/gmability...ny/gmability/environment/fuel_economy_emissions/emissions/detergent_092704.html

Here is another link:

http://www.sigma.org/meetings/handouts/TOPTIERslides.pdf

Another one:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/technology/chi-0412190322dec19,1,6191175.column?ctrack=2&cset=true

Last link, although you can find plenty through google:

http://www.imakenews.com/flashpoint/e_article000253616.cfm

 

I just play it safe and go mid-grade and always at Chevron.

 

I popped over to Siennaclub and confirmed that the Toyota manual recommends premium fuel. While browsing, I came across a terrific article at the Federal Trade Commission website:

http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/autos/octane.htm

talking about how there is not a benefit to using higher octane than your manual recommends. As long as your engine is not making knocks and pings, you need only use the octane level recommended. At least according to the FTC, your engine won't run better, or cleaner, or longer with higher octane fuel.

Interesting read . . .

--Jason

 

One of the car mags ran some tests to figure out the whole "regular vs premium" deal, and more or less came to the conclusion that in those motors that are *designed* for premium fuel, they'll generally attempt to "dumb down" in order to accommodate regular fuel at the cost of power. A couple of motors couldn't handle the transition too well, but most did.

The inverse, a "regular" fuel motor being given premium, did not have any substantial benefit for using higher octane gas. They actually had a curious anomaly where a Honda V6 (Accord?) posted slightly *less* power with premium, but they noted that it was within their margin of error, so it's likely a wash.

Based on this, my speculation is that the Toyota 3.3L is a "premium" motor, but is being marketed as a "regular" motor because of consumer backlash to having to stuff premium into a "non sports car". Thus why premium is "recommended" but not "required".

It's probable that the rated hp/torque for the 3.3L is based on premium fuel because of this "recommendation" (but nobody knows for sure since Toyota's not admitting one way or the other). I say this because if you're going to be writing up numbers for a vehicle with two fuel choices in mind, you *know* the marketing goons are going to demand you put the better numbers on the brochure. (Some car reviews, such as cars.com do state that the numbers were based on premium gas, so :dunno: )

However, since most of us live our lives without pushing our cars to the limit, the power loss may not be that perceptible, especially since the 3.3L is tuned to be a little "torquey" so the off-the-line would feel ok even with a little loss. One major exception (and thus part of the recommendation) would be when you are towing.

But uh... to get back on the thread topic, I generally stay away from the "no-namers". No ARCO either. Partially because of their inability to take credit cards at the pump, partially due to a widespread rumor around here that the gas is uh... a little watery.

(actually it's from my old Pontiac, which never seemed to run right with their gas... ran rougher when cold, and dieseled a little sometimes when hot)

Especially now with the Top Tier stuff coming out, I usually go with Chevron or Shell around here... since the Texaco merge the Shell stations aren't as expensive as they used to be.

--> Andy

(forgot to add, regular all-around. Only the WRX gets premium. )

 

Not only should work fine, but is actually what the manufacturer recommends. Correct me if I'm wrong (like I even NEED to say that ) but a vehicle is engineered for a certain grade of fuel, and all emissions and mileage tests, for example, are based on consuming that type of fuel.


--Jason

A standardized test fuel called indolene is used in the emissions/mileage test (the "tests" are actually one and the same). I believe that indolene has an (R+M)/2 octane rating of approximately 92.

 

Also, on the brand issue, it's worth noting that the "brand" of your gas station does not necessarily have anything at all to do with the "brand" of the gas they pump. I served some clients in the oil and gas industry once upon a time, and learned that the refining and processing business is essentially just a vendor for the retail sales business. Your Exxon station might get its fuel from an Exxon truck, but could just as likely get it from a Texaco/Unocal/BP truck.


--Jason

You are correct to a point . At the risk of repeating myself from a different thread, the following are some things to consider regarding gasoline:

1) With the exception of proprietary products (Amoco/BP Ultimate is the only one I know of) all gasolines are "fungible". This means that the gasoline produced by any given refiner travels through common pipelines and is shared. For example, a gasoline made at Company "X's" refinery doesn't necessarily or exclusively end up at a Company "X" station. The refiners all produce the fuels to (at least) minimum agreed upon industry standards so you don't get someone putting complete junk into the system.

2) After travelling through the pipelines the fuel ends up at "terminals" with large storage tanks where it is subsequently put into the trucks that deliver it to the stations. The additive packages are added at the terminal as the fuel is going into the truck. Thus an independently operated terminal could service multiple brands of fuel because the "differentiation" is simply putting a different additive package in as the fuel is loaded into the tanker. The base fuel in such cases is exactly the same.

3) Higher grade (octane) fuels are usually formulated with better additive packages. This can mean simply an increased dose of the same package used in a lower grade fuel or a more sophisicated additive package as well as a higher dosage. The additive packages help prevent fuel deposits on critical areas in the engine such as intake valves and combustion chambers.

4) The larger oil companies generally spend more on research and testing of such additive packages as opposed to just buying one "off the shelf".


So, what's the point of all this?

1) There are some cars that can benefit from using premium on the basis of the increased octane. This could be either because they don't have a sophisticated control system and therefore knock on regular (potentially damaging the engine) or because they have a sophisticated enough control system that they can take advantage of the increased octane.

2) Be aware that octane is not the only differentiating factor between grades of fuel. The additive packages vary not only between grades but between brands.

3) My personal preference is to avoid the lowest cost or "no name" brands because I have less faith in the amount of effort that has gone into the additive package. I am willing to pay a little more for that "peace of mind". If you are the opposite of me but haven't had any real issues then there's probably no compelling reason for you to change.

4) I tend to run regular in our vehicles (barring any knock issues) and a few times a year put in several tanks in a row of premium simply to help "keep things cleaner"

 

is 'shell' okay brand?

 

mejmea,

Interesting comments, but I would find it more reassuring if I had some factual data to back it up. Do some name brands actually post additive ingredients (and quantity) of their fuels, and octane variations?

 

mejmea,

Interesting comments, but I would find it more reassuring if I had some factual data to back it up. Do some name brands actually post additive ingredients (and quantity) of their fuels, and octane variations?

Probably not - they are most likely proprietary brews that they wouldn't want copied. For instance, if Chevron published what is in Techron others could copy it.

As for the common base fuel - here in the Boston area most gasoline comes from an Exxon or Irving terminal AFAIK. The tank trucks drop in the additives for the particular brand gas they are delivering. Around here you even see independent tankers with the diamond signs that can be changed to show what brand they are delivering.

 

mejmea,

Interesting comments, but I would find it more reassuring if I had some factual data to back it up. Do some name brands actually post additive ingredients (and quantity) of their fuels, and octane variations?

Doug,

The short answer, as hypothesized by robr2, is that the additive technology is proprietary.

The long answer to both of your questions is below. Some of it you can independently verify, some of it you'll just have to take my word for it based on my representation that I used to work in this area (no wise cracks about crediblity please. This is, after all, an internet forum )

Additives (you'll have to take my word for it).

Before any (reputable) company will make claims that their additive package or fuel blend is "better" than someone elses, or will lead to lower emissions, there is a lot of lab work (engines on test stands, vehicle tests, etc) done to provide substantive data. Some companies will rely on test data from the additive supplier whereas others will additionally run their own test programs to independently substantiate such data. Additive packages are continuously evaluated as engine techology changes, additive chemistry changes etc. If you consider that having a widespread problem because of a bad additive package could cost an oil marketer a lot of money, it makes sense that the ones that are concerned about reputation pay attention to such things. As an example, I know for a fact that the claims of lower emissions and deposit forming tendancies for Amoco/BP Ultimate were preceded by a massive amount of testing and analysis.

Information about octane (you can independently verify this if you choose to do so)

Octane is determined by standardized ASTM tests in which a fuel is run in a specialized octane test engine and the engine is run at two different operating conditions. One of the conditions is more severe (i.e. more likely to cause knock for a fuel with a given octane number) than the other. Fuels that are blends of n-heptane (octane number = 0) and iso-octane (octane number=100) are used as "calibrated" fuels which are compared to the test fuel in order to determine it's octane number. The more severe test generates what is known as the "Research" octane number while the less severe test generates what is known as the "Motor" octane number. If you look at the dispenser next time you're filling up you will notice that it says something to the effect of "87 octane (R+M)/2 method" etc. This simply means that the posted octane is the average of the (R)esearch octane value and (M)otor octane value. Refiners know how to blend the hundreds of hydrocarbon compounds that make up gasoline in order to get the octane that is needed and continually test the final product to make sure it meets requirements.

Finally, as a point of interest. You sometimes see a dispenser with only one hose but capable of dispensing 3 grades of gasoline. This is possible by a couple of different methods. One is that there is still 3 grades of fuel in the below ground tanks and it simply switches between tanks depending on what you select. The other is that there are only two tanks below ground (Premium and Regular) and the midgrade is blended internally to the dispenser by mixing the appropriate ratios of these two.

Sorry for the long-winded answer but, you asked for it!

 

What about the quality of the tank at the station?

I've always wondered about contaminants that might be present in old or poorly maintained subterranean tanks at the gas station. Who knows what kind of gunk accumulates there or arises in slow reactions with hydrocarbons.

All things being equal, I prefer to get my gas from a newer station rather than an older one.

 

Re: What about the quality of the tank at the station?

I've always wondered about contaminants that might be present in old or poorly maintained subterranean tanks at the gas station. Who knows what kind of gunk accumulates there or arises in slow reactions with hydrocarbons.

All things being equal, I prefer to get my gas from a newer station rather than an older one.

You are correct in that underground tanks can be kind of nasty but perhaps not for the reasons you think. The whole gasoline distribution system is open and thus there is generally going to be some water in the underground tanks. In metal tanks this can lead to corrosion and thus corrosion particles. Since the gasoline floats on top of the water, you generally are not going to get water in your tank unless there is an excessive amount in the underground tank. (Many of the electronic system used to monitor underground tanks include the ability to detect excessive amounts of water.) There are also bacteria that actually feed on stuff in the tanks. The underground temperature is typically around 50-55 deg F so hydrocarbon reactions are gong to be minimal.

IMHO the age of the station is not as important as the maintenance. There are filters in each dispenser (similar to the oil filter on your car) which are intended to make sure nasty stuff doesn't make it through to your vehicle. Changing these filters regularly is important in the ultimate fuel quality that you receive.

 

Re: Re: What about the quality of the tank at the station?

<Lots of info snipped>

Thanks for this info. There's a lot of stuff here I didn't know!

Wayne

 

Re: Re: Re: What about the quality of the tank at the station?

Thanks for this info. There's a lot of stuff here I didn't know!

Wayne

Man, you are EVERYWHERE!

No wonder you have almost 2700 posts.

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: What about the quality of the tank at the station?

Man, you are EVERYWHERE!

No wonder you have almost 2700 posts.

Well, at the moment, I have a VPN connection into the network at my work. I'm logged into a couple of UNIX servers running some off-hours maintenance, and they're none too happy about doing this when they're also busy spinning a backup tape. I also have a remote desktop connection to my laptop, which is sitting in it's docking unit on my desk, and on which I'm performing an upgrade to Office 2003. That takes a while too. For all this waiting, I'll get to take some time off during the day some time a little later, because I'm officially "working" but can't do any work at this moment.

That must mean it's Odyclub time!!!



Wayne

P.S. 2700 posts, huh? Wow, I **REALLY** need to get a life.

 

--Jason

Just noticed your userid and just curious. Does it stand for John Birch Society (e.g. www.jbs.org) or your initials?

 

Re: What about the quality of the tank at the station?

I've always wondered about contaminants that might be present in old or poorly maintained subterranean tanks at the gas station. Who knows what kind of gunk accumulates there or arises in slow reactions with hydrocarbons.

All things being equal, I prefer to get my gas from a newer station rather than an older one.

You hit the nail on the head! The condition of the tanks matters MORE than the brand of gas or type of additive. Further, with more additive don't we get less gas (albeit a teeny amount less)?

 

Re: Re: What about the quality of the tank at the station?

You hit the nail on the head! The condition of the tanks matters MORE than the brand of gas or type of additive. Further, with more additive don't we get less gas (albeit a teeny amount less)?

RL,

Relative to the additives, they are at parts per million levels so with regards to volume (i.e. getting less gas) it is an insignificant amount. With regards to the chemistry of the fuel and what it does (or doesn't) do inside an engine, however, it is extremely significant!

Check this page and click on the "video of intake valve deposit formation and cleanup" link. It's a little bit cryptic but pretty cool.

Also take a look at this article. Although it was published in 1990, it is pertinent because that is the era in which fuel additive technology and understanding was undergoing significant changes as the vehicle fleet was still in transition from carburetors to throttle body fuel injection to port injection. The introduction of fuel injection caused major changes in additive technology and testing. This article gives a good overview of why deposits form and why they are important.

I understand people's concerns about the condition of the underground tanks, but you could have a station with new tanks and cruddy gasoline as well as one with old tanks and cruddy gasoline. It is, like things on your car, a question of paying attention to maintenance. I have not heard of someone's vehicle being damaged by crud from an underground tank and if it did happen I would venture to bet it was because the filters under the dispenser were not properly maintained. Perhaps the thing to look for is a station that looks well cared for (dispensers, nozzles, hoses etc in good shape).