Honda Civic / Del Sol (1992 - 2000) EG/EH/EJ/EK/EM1 Discussion

93 vs 89 octane

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jun 15, 2005 | 06:38 PM
  #1  
2s10w4u's Avatar
Thread Starter
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Default 93 vs 89 octane

will i actually get more miles per tank on 93 octane than 89 with my stock 94 cx?
Reply
Old Jun 15, 2005 | 06:59 PM
  #2  
Ricey McRicerton's Avatar
Honda-Tech Member
 
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,334
Likes: 1
From: Raleigh, NC
Default Re: 93 vs 89 octane (2s10w4u)

No, use 87. You're wasting money on the 93.
Reply
Old Jun 15, 2005 | 07:49 PM
  #3  
rawkus's Avatar
Honda-Tech Member
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 498
Likes: 1
From: Lafayette, IN, United States
Default Re: 93 vs 89 octane (Ricey McRicerton)

Theoretically, you should use the lowest possible octane you can get away with on a motor for most efficency.
Dan
Reply
Old Jun 15, 2005 | 08:05 PM
  #4  
wheels01's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
From: Calgary, AB, Canada
Default Re: 93 vs 89 octane (2s10w4u)

Try it for your self, and let us know. I personally got about 500+km easyper tank with my D16Z6 on both reg and premium. Now with B16 and low final drive I am happy with 500 even, thats on Premium. Cant run regular to test.
Reply
Old Jun 15, 2005 | 08:32 PM
  #5  
ThrowSomeDs's Avatar
Honda-Tech Member
 
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 1,738
Likes: 0
From: Somewhere in the Pacific
Default Re: 93 vs 89 octane (2s10w4u)

Yea gas mileage is a factor for most of us. Buuuuttttt if you wanna just go all out on payday hit sunoco up and get 98 im sure you will like that
Reply
Old Jun 15, 2005 | 08:34 PM
  #6  
blurrrcivic94's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Default

your cx motor shouldn't need anything more than 87...
Reply
Old Jun 15, 2005 | 08:38 PM
  #7  
generation7's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
From: Knoxville, TN, US
Default Re: 93 vs 89 octane (2s10w4u)

With a stock car always use the recommended octane. To my understanding, the higher the octane the harder it is for the fuel to ignite (which is why people runnin boost use for their very high compression, or people with un-boosted high compression to avoid preignition)

So, unless your car has high compression it will have a harder time ingiting the air/fuel. it could actually lower your mileage.

Honda knows what theyre doing, listen to them
Reply
Old Jun 15, 2005 | 08:42 PM
  #8  
rawkus's Avatar
Honda-Tech Member
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 498
Likes: 1
From: Lafayette, IN, United States
Default Re: 93 vs 89 octane (generation7)

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by generation7 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">With a stock car always use the recommended octane. To my understanding, the higher the octane the harder it is for the fuel to ignite (which is why people runnin boost use for their very high compression, or people with un-boosted high compression to avoid preignition)

So, unless your car has high compression it will have a harder time ingiting the air/fuel. it could actually lower your mileage.

Honda knows what theyre doing, listen to them </TD></TR></TABLE>
You're a smart bastard. Generation7 is absolutely right. I should also add, it takes longer to burn too.
Dan
Reply
Old Jun 15, 2005 | 08:59 PM
  #9  
98b18black's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
From: Knoxville, TN, USA
Default Re: 93 vs 89 octane (generation7)

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by generation7 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">With a stock car always use the recommended octane. To my understanding, the higher the octane the harder it is for the fuel to ignite (which is why people runnin boost use for their very high compression, or people with un-boosted high compression to avoid preignition)

So, unless your car has high compression it will have a harder time ingiting the air/fuel. it could actually lower your mileage.

Honda knows what theyre doing, listen to them </TD></TR></TABLE>

I second that....It's a perfect explanation
Reply
Old Jun 15, 2005 | 09:20 PM
  #10  
d16singlecammer's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 592
Likes: 0
From: LAtoLBback2LAagain, CA, USA
Default Re: 93 vs 89 octane (95d15red)

With that said what is the recommended fuel for a d16Z6
Reply
Old Jun 15, 2005 | 09:27 PM
  #11  
92b16vx's Avatar
Honda-Tech Member
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 2,393
Likes: 1
From: Corpus Christi, TX
Default

86 Pump Octane Number, 91 Reseach Octane Number or higher is what it recommends in the Helms.
Reply
Old Jun 15, 2005 | 09:37 PM
  #12  
Status Sean's Avatar
Honda-Tech Member
 
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 2,945
Likes: 0
From: Seattle, wa, king
Default Re: (blurrrcivic94)

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by blurrrcivic94 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">your cx motor shouldn't need anything more than 87...</TD></TR></TABLE>

Reply
Old Jun 15, 2005 | 10:37 PM
  #13  
98b18black's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
From: Knoxville, TN, USA
Default Re: (rw92civic)

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by rw92civic &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Your CX shouldn't need anything more than 87 </TD></TR></TABLE>

Or else your just throwing your money away....if your gonna do that I'll take the few cents of every gallon you use to fill up...and soon I will have something new for my car....mwahahah....But seriously don't throw your money away
Reply
Old Jun 15, 2005 | 10:39 PM
  #14  
Good ol' Screwtape's Avatar
Multi-paradigm
 
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 3,476
Likes: 0
From: San Diego, CA
Default Re: 93 vs 89 octane (rawkus)

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by rawkus &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Theoretically, you should use the lowest possible octane you can get away with on a motor for most efficency.
Dan</TD></TR></TABLE>

No, not theoretically. Realistically.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 92b16vx &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">86 Pump Octane Number, 91 Reseach Octane Number or higher is what it recommends in the Helms.</TD></TR></TABLE>

That doesn't help because most (or all?) U.S. pumps don't use either of those rating systems alone. Here in Cali., at least, they use the Research Octane Number + Motor Octane Number divided by 2, method. Or R+D/2 method...which is obviously just the average rating of the Motor Octane and Research Octane ratings.

I haven't done very much research on the subject, but everyone's right. If you have a stock D16 motor, or any stock motor, put the factory-recommended fuel in there. No more, no less.

I'm sure if you had searched you would have found the answer to your question easily, as you're not the first to have asked it.

If you need a further simple explanation, the higher the octane rating, the higher the resistance to combustion the fuel has. Fuel needs to be able to resist a certain amount of heat due to the compression stroke of the piston cycle. Physics and Chemistry 101- the more you compress something the hotter it gets.

So for example if you have a high compression motor (as in the air/fuel mixture gets compressed ..a lot more than a lower compression motor)..say, 13:1 compression for example, and you throw in 87 Octane fuel in there, the compression stroke of the piston will heat that fuel up enough for it to spontaneously combust, usually while the piston is still well on its way UP and before the spark plug could even do its job, and thus creating a downward force acting against the ideal travel of the piston.

The result is what you call "engine ping" or the many names they have for it, and power loss, and blah blah blah.

On the other hand, if you have say a 8:1 compression motor, and you put 91 Octane fuel in there, you're wasting money and valuable fuel, first of all. And the fuel itself will have TOO much heat resistance for your poor motor to fully burn it. And i've heard this results in unburnt fuel deposits on your valves, and wears out your catalytic converter prematurely since you're sending unburnt fuel out through the exhaust.


Modified by Screwtape: at 11:59 PM 6/15/2005
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
genetsang
Tech / Misc
20
Jun 11, 2003 09:49 AM
sal_blkej2
Acura Integra
5
May 20, 2003 01:20 PM
spencedogg
Honda Civic / Del Sol (1992 - 2000)
54
May 13, 2003 01:58 PM
dip-set
Tech / Misc
14
Jan 15, 2003 04:53 AM
S13Koop
Acura Integra Type-R
19
Nov 23, 2001 11:16 AM




All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:12 AM.