93 octane gas only?
 

Does the boxster / S require 93 octane gas only?

allegedly (it's recommended). i'm sure there'll be disagreement, but i don't think you'll blow up if you run 87. you most likely won't be as fast, and i probably wouldn't flog the car through extreme heat/mountains/etc.

Nola Mike wrote:
> you most likely won't be as fast

Actually, it's rather the opposite -- lower octane (with no pinging) will give you more power, and hence, better MPG. Here's something from a previous discussion I had with my Ducati racing friends:

The term "Premium" is extremely misleading when it comes to gasoline. People assume that when they buy "Premium" they are buying the best there is to offer. This couldn't be further from the truth. 87 octane has more potential horsepower than 93 (or higher) octane. Octane is a rating. It is a calculation that predicts when pre-ignition will occur in any given engine. The lower the octane number the more volatile the gasoline -- by comparison, the higher the octane number the less volatile (combustible) the gasoline. Then why do racers use higher octane? Simple, the higher compression and more ignition advance an engine has, the more likely pre-ignition will occur -- hence, they need high octane fuel to prevent this from happening. If you want your engine to run the best possible, then run the LOWEST octane that you can without pre-ignition (pinging). If different terminology was used to distinguish grades of gasoline, people would think more accurately about it -- for example, instead of calling it "Regular" call it "Highest Volatility" and instead of "Premium" call it "Least Volatile".

I have run 91 with no issues.

Stick with 91/93 octane. Your engine will run best on it, and get the best efficiency.

In engines with higher compression ratios, where higher octane is recommended, you can lose power and possibly damage the engine if you use lower octane fuel.

Vice versa is not really true, either. In a vehicle that runs normally on regular, you gain NOTHING by using higher octane fuel.


Higher octane ratings in fuel only increase the fuel's threshold for detonation. In high compression engines, or forced induction systems, it is necessary.


You bought a Porsche. You didn't skimp. Don't skimp on fuel.

This is a damn ass thread... especially from a guy who owns a yellow Lambo and Ferraris. Pteam for Poseur Team?

Although, lately I see a lot of LAMBOS driving around Chelsea NY. Hmmm...Not like theirs anything wrong with that!

That doesn't seem to be quite accurate.

"It is important to note that the theoretical energy content of gasoline
when burned in air is only related to the hydrogen and carbon contents.
The energy is released when the hydrogen and carbon are oxidised (burnt),
to form water and carbon dioxide. Octane rating is not fundamentally
related to the energy content, and the actual hydrocarbon and oxygenate
components used in the gasoline will determine both the energy release and
the antiknock rating."

In short, octane rating defines how fast the gas burns, and how resistant it is to pre-ignition. It does not define how much energy content the gas has, so lower octane gas can't make more power. It doesn't have any more energy to offer than higher octane gas, it can just be burned in a less-demanding environment. Running a turbo or a high compression ratio? Then you need a better-behaved fuel (a higher octane rating). Same energy content, but better manners.

JackG wrote:
> That doesn't seem to be quite accurate.

I'm sorry if I rain on anyone's parade -- but the lower the octane you can get away with (without pinging), the more power.

-- peer

No rain here... the science just doesn't back you up on this. It seems you have a misconception on what "volatile" means. It is not a measurement of energy content.

You wrote "87 octane has more potential horsepower than 93 (or higher) octane." "The lower the octane number the more volatile the gasoline -- by comparison, the higher the octane number the less volatile (combustible) the gasoline."

You are asserting that the more volatile gas is, the more horsepower it can produce. That's simply incorrect. They have different burn characteristics, but the same amount of energy. Energy produces horsepower, not volatility.

I couldn't have said it any better. You're absolutely right! For example, my last car that I had used regular gas, then I dropped a Jackson Racing Supercharger in it and I had to switch to a higher octane fuel. More oxegen per ltr. of gas burns faster and therefore runs leaner, not richer. If a car requires a leaner mixture of gasoline I would not use a richer version because if will not co-inside with the cars CPU and air/fuel ratio. :cheers:

Did you run out of Vagisil???

HAHAHAHHA, LOL :D

High Test Gas
 

A gallon of gas whether high test or regular has the same amount of energy. The engine of your Boxster will convert the chemical energy of the gas to mechanical energy to move the car. Porsche designs its engines under the assumption you will use 93 or 91 Octane and sets ignition timing to ensure there is no knocking and the car gets the max power and fuel economy for the expected Octane. When you use lower Octane fuel the car will have a tendency to knock so the knock sensor will sense the beginning of engine knock and tell the ECU to adjust (retard) timing to protect the engine. Eventually if you consistently run low test the ECU will automatically assume there is something unusual and either automatically retard timing or spit out an error code (according to some Porsche Gurus the ECU will adjust after about 25 to 30 hours but I have never seen it in writing.) That assumes all of the protective features work proberly. If not, for example if you go full throttle and there is no early indication of knock you could knock before timing is retarded and harm your engine.

Since the car will frequently have retarded timing while running 87 Octane, it will not be operating at peak efficiency and thus produce less power and worst Gas Mileage. Cars that are designed for regular will see no improvement by using high test. However, many chip tuners get their best results by programming for 93 Octane vice the 93 or 91 octane spec called premium in various states and recommended by Porsche.

ATB.
Tom

I don't think I've run into higher than 91 octane. Is there a station that routinely sells 93 octane as their premium? I ran into 100 octane racecar gas once, but it was 5 bucks a gallon. Ouch!

Mike

come to east coast and see 93s. well, i think it all depends on which state you are in but in VA/DC/MD you have choice of 87, 89, or 93 and no option for 91. i think i saw 91 in Ontario and NJ.

i think i read somewhere that there are 2 methods of calculating the octane rating. maybe 91 served in CA is same as 93 served in DC area?

Octane Rating
 

It varies by state or locale. 93 Octane is available on the east coast, 91 is the max in many states. You will also see different maximums in Mountain areas. So ... yes it is available but probably not in your area. However, unless your Boxster has been chipped, the factory ECU is tuned for both 91 and 93 Octane U.S. gasoline. It should provide optimum power and torque with either. Increasing Octane to 95 without reprogramming the ECU probably won't buy you anything either. The ECU will be unable to advance the timing to take advantage of the higher Octane. Although I suppose you could burn hotter plugs which may get you something.
ATB,
Tom

are you asking me if i want some of your extra stash? no thanks bro i am not gay. not like theres anything wrong with that.

:D

Octane threads go nowhere.

Kind of like Oil threads.

:D

Quote:
"Octane threads go nowhere.

Kind of like Oil threads."


Interesting, though, for us Newbs. I was always under the impression higher octane gas was yielded more power. Now I know better.

LOL got me.... but im not gay either, not that there is anything wrong with being gay. :)

Higher octane gas doesn't yield more power, but it does allow you to develop more power by running more spark advance, more boost, higher compression, ect.

In a modern computerized engine that is designed and tuned to take advantage of high octane gas, you do develop more power automatically when using the correct, higher octane gas.

In an engine optimized to burn 87, you don't make or lose HP by using 93. You just pay more money.

Or global warming threads. :p

:D

Nothing but
 

I dont put anything but premium 91 or 93 in my boxster.

I have never put regular in it.

However, when I am towing my cars I put premium in my truck, it eliminates the knock and the motor becomes more efficient. If I run mid grade instead of regular I get better gas mileage. I am assuming that is because of a more efficient burn.

It all depends on what the car was tuned for and what it is rated for. My friends Dodge pickup CANNOT run anything but regular because it will burn out the O2 sensors.

hmm I just noticed this reply porscheracer, thats a pretty F'ed up reply. If you notice all I did was ask "Does the boxster / S require 93 octane gas only?" because I havnt owned a boxster in about 6 years and that was a non - S version. Especially since my girlfiend is driving it everyday right now I need to make sure that the proper gas is going into the car.

Maybe CJ Boxster was on the right path about you when he asked if you forgot your Vagisil???

JackG wrote:
> In an engine optimized to burn 87, you don't make or lose HP by
> using 93. You just pay more money.

Well, actually the best matching octane/timing would be a compression that's just on the limit to ping. However, since pinging is bad for the engine, the manufacturers are usually exaggerating the recommended octane rating just to be on the safe side.

-- peer

OCTANE V. Ping
 

For high compression high reving engines, advancing timing just before ping occurs is great for steady state driving on the flats. Anti knock sensors are inserted to ensure there are no instances where knock actually occurs in the transients although the use of High Octane gas ensures a reasonable engineering margin of safety. Continuing to retard timing to prevent knock will adversely affect both power and MPG. For many cars the computer will log instances where the anti knock sensor retards timing. Dealer Repair shop use it for troubleshooting to see if there is an engine management problem. In BMWs if there is consistent indications of knock onset without an accompanying engine problem they will assume low octane fuel is used (BMW also logs over-rev situations on their cars and has used the data in warranty claims in the past.) I do not know what the new Porsche computer logs but it does log more than they did in the past. Under current EPA rules and automotive engineering standards. Exagerating Octane requirements in order to squeeze additional performance is prohibited. The Mazda RX-8 performance was downgraded due to engineering sleigh of hand by mazda. When independent testing was conducted, the output was downgraded and Mazda had to compensate their new RX-8 owners. My personnel experience with high octane/high performance engines. Expect a decrease of about 10% in gas mileage and similar HP decrease from using regular vice the recommended premium gas. So you will loose in the end plus possibly put your engine's long-term life at risk during hard acceleration. while my 'test" were not scientific other folks experience concurs.

ATB,
Tom

trube78 wrote:
> Expect a decrease of about 10% in gas mileage and similar HP decrease from
> using regular vice the recommended premium gas.

A ping-free engine will not gain any power by increasing the octane rate.

-- peer

You're missing the point. If an engine is designed to use, and benefit, from 93, it will most definitely lose power when using 87. The engine management computer will detect pinging, and will retard timing, enrich the fuel mixture, etc. to stop the ping. It will be ping-free, but will be down on power and will use more fuel on 87.

Running 93 will gain you power in this case.

So I'm trying to understand what octane rating I really need here in the great white north:

My manual says:

1. "Your engine is designed to provide optimum performance and fuel economy using unleaded premiuim fuel with an octane rating of 98 RON (93 CLC or AKI).

Porsche also recognizes that these fuels may not always be available. Be assured that your vehicle will operate properly on unleaded premium fuels with octane numbers of at least 95 RON (90 CLC or AKI), since the engine's "Electronic Oktane knock control" will adapt the ignition timing, if necessary."

2. On the fuel filler door of my Box it says "Minimum octane RON+MON/2 = 93"

Some quick net research tells me that AKI (Anti Knock Index) is the same as (R+M)/2.

Therefore the manual and the fuel filler door don't agree, and I'm left wondering if I really can run 91 or 92 instead of the much pricier and rarer 94 I'm currently using.

It sounds some of you are running 91 without any issues, but I'd like to know if that's more universally the case before I switch.

And I'm also curious if USA cars have the same label on the fuel filler door that I have.

not necessarily. even if the engine specifies 93, it won't gain hp/mpg UNLESS pinging actually occurs when using 87. this won't always/usually happen, unless you're driving hard, up steep hills, hot weather, etc. my saab specifies premium also; it's a bit different that it's low compression, but the turbo is much more likely to detonate than a streetable high compression engine. instead of retarding timing, it reduces turbo boost. so i can actually see when the computer kicks in by watching the boost gauge. surprisingly, this only occurs in extreme heat, a/c on, up steep hills, with the pedal floored. otherwise i always get full boost.

nola mike wrote:
> even if the engine specifies 93, it won't gain hp/mpg
> UNLESS pinging actually occurs when using 87.

Exactly, and this has been my point all along. As stated in my first post, I believe there would be less confusion in regards to octane ratings if it wasn't represented numerically along with some superlatives:

"The term "Premium" is extremely misleading when it comes to gasoline. People assume that when they buy "Premium" they are buying the best there is to offer. This couldn't be further from the truth. 87 octane has more potential horsepower than 93 (or higher) octane. Octane is a rating. It is a calculation that predicts when pre-ignition will occur in any given engine. The lower the octane number the more volatile the gasoline -- by comparison, the higher the octane number the less volatile (combustible) the gasoline. Then why do racers use higher octane? Simple, the higher compression and more ignition advance an engine has, the more likely pre-ignition will occur -- hence, they need high octane fuel to prevent this from happening. If you want your engine to run the best possible, then run the LOWEST octane that you can without pre-ignition (pinging). If different terminology was used to distinguish grades of gasoline, people would think more accurately about it -- for example, instead of calling it "Regular" call it "Highest Volatility" and instead of "Premium" call it "Least Volatile"

-- peer

While I agree that the term "premium" is slightly misleading to the uninformed, it is also appropriate. The numeric system confuses you, so it's not perfect either.

Higher octane fuel is better behaved. It doesn't detonate in high compression or turbo/supercharged engines as easily. It's necessary in many high performance engines that would simply self-destruct running "regular". It has highly desirable burn characteristics compared to "regular". It is indeed "premium" fuel. It is indicated as such by the higher octane number.

The lie you continue to propagate is "87 octane has more potential horsepower than 93 (or higher) octane". That is simply untrue. Both regular and premium have the same energy content, and therfore the same capability to produce power. They do have different burn characteristics, making the premium fuel necessary in some engines that require it.

Many modern engines that require premium will not ping when fed regular. The engine computer adjusts to compensate for the less than ideal fuel. You may not see it until the boost gauge gives you an indication (which is likely a last-ditch effort to save the engine, not the first), or you may not notice it at all. The engine management computer is doing its job. The manufacturer has nothing to gain in requiring premium fuel if it wasn't needed. They do it for a reason, and it's not to give a liberal arts poetry writer something to argue about, on a subject matter in which he seemingly doesn't have a clue. It's because the engine was designed to take advantage of premium fuel, thereby producing more power, and it requires it.

Take a freakin' engineering class... :matchup:

i'm not confused; numerals refer only to the volatility of the fuel.

how is it better behaved? does it ask permission before pre-detonating? it doesn't detonate as easily, that's it. look into your own advice as to what the numeric system means. it has nothing to do with the quality of the fuel. how about diesel engines? the "premium" tendency to not detonate would be opposite what you'd want in that case. in fact, once detonated, the flame front is governed by the combustion chamber, not the octane of the fuel. the only undesirable burn is pre-detonation, which is an unorganized explosion--hence the engine knock. what are these "highly desirable burn characteristics" you're talking about?

agreed, except for the "necessary" part.

that's the point of the thread.
what would be the "first" ditch effort to save the engine? no, this is the first and only adjustment made in response to pre-detonation. if i (and the knock sensor) don't notice pinging, then it ain't happening. and agreed, that's the engine management system doing its job--preventing potential engine damage.

the manufacturer specifies it because under some circumstances, you won't get as good performance, and possibly fuel economy, on lower grade fuel. not always, not even usually. they specify it because it gives an extra margin of safety which may or may not be needed. it's quite possible that the engine detunes under some circumstances when using lower grade fuel. is that dangerous to the engine? no. does it degrade performance under these circumstances? yes. which engineering class explained to you the differences between premium and unleaded fuel and their effects on sports car performance? right, that's what i thought. if yer gonna flame, maybe you should have some facts or references to back up your bs?

This is getting out of hand, but I'll play one more time...

Quote:

"i'm not confused; numerals refer only to the volatility of the fuel."

Unless you're peer posting under a different handle, I wasn't referring to you. My post was a follow-up to his post. Are you peer?


Quote:

"how is it better behaved? does it ask permission before pre-detonating? it doesn't detonate as easily, that's it."

Bingo. It is better quality (better behaved) because it doesn't detonate as easily.

"how about diesel engines?"

Non-sequitur.

"what are these "highly desirable burn characteristics" you're talking about? "

Resistance to pre-ignition.



Quote:


""making the premium fuel necessary in some engines that require it.""

"agreed, except for the "necessary" part."

Really? You know more than the OEM's? Cool.

A high compression or turbo engine "requires" high octane gas. You own story about your boost gauge proves that. The protection that the OEM builds into the engine management is just that... protection. The engine wants/needs/requires premium to operate in its design performance envelope. The OEM tells you that. You're smarter than they are?



Quote:

"that's the point of the thread."

Actually, the thread was started by someone asking if 93 was necessary. You replied "allegedly (it's recommended). i'm sure there'll be disagreement, but i don't think you'll blow up if you run 87. you most likely won't be as fast, and i probably wouldn't flog the car through extreme heat/mountains/etc."

Actually, it is recommended, not just "allegedly". You don't "think" it will blow up. That makes us all feel more secure. You agree it will lose power. That's my point... thanks.


Quote:

"what would be the "first" ditch effort to save the engine?"

Retarding timing, enrichening the mixture, cutting fuel/spark are some that come to mind. You do realize that the boost is produced by exhaust gases, right? It could be you are seeing the results of other adjustments when you see boost drop. Kill spark, kill fuel, reduce exhaust gas, boost drops.

"no, this is the first and only adjustment made in response to pre-detonation. if i (and the knock sensor) don't notice pinging, then it ain't happening. and agreed, that's the engine management system doing its job--preventing potential engine damage."

Did you write the software that runs the engine computer? Are you completely sure that the turbo boost is the only response that it has? Cite? Besides, the knock sensor can hear pinging before you do.



Quote:


"the manufacturer specifies it because under some circumstances, you won't get as good performance, and possibly fuel economy, on lower grade fuel. not always, not even usually. they specify it because it gives an extra margin of safety which may or may not be needed. "

Is it performance, or safety? You bounce around in your thought about why they specify premium. And you also wrote that you "don't think you'll blow up if you run 87", but now it's for safety? What exactly is it you do think?

"it's quite possible that the engine detunes under some circumstances when using lower grade fuel. is that dangerous to the engine? no. does it degrade performance under these circumstances? yes."

No... it's a fact that it detunes. The OEM's state that is exactly what they do.

"which engineering class explained to you the differences between premium and unleaded fuel and their effects on sports car performance? right, that's what i thought. if yer gonna flame, maybe you should have some facts or references to back up your bs?"

I'm waiting for your cites, references, and engineering classes to back up your BS. If you require them for me, surely you have them for your own BS, right?

BTW.. I didn't flame you. You seemed to take it personally. Maybe you should learn to read a thread, and remember what you said back in post two of this thread, " i'm sure there'll be disagreement". There is, and you're surprised?

BTW... pony up for a shift key. Capital letters... what a concept. :rolleyes:

:cheers:

I wonder why some people on this forum often resort to personal attacks, as if they were struggling with a self-esteem issue that brings an animosity towards other forum members (who they obviously have never met, or know).

F.ex, while everyone in this thread stuck nicely to the issue at hand, JackG decided to go off on some frivolous personal attacks:

> They do it for a reason, and it's not to give a liberal arts poetry
> writer something to argue about, on a subject matter in which he
> seemingly doesn't have a clue.
>
> Take a freakin' engineering class.

I'm not sure if the above was addressed to me, though, I'm fairly certain that JackG knows little to nothing about what classes his fellow forum members have taken over the years.

-- peer

Seems to me that whenver I see the tuner parts guys showing a dyno chart for their latest exhaust or intake, headers, etc. they are almost always running the car on race fuel (higer than 93) to arrive at their higher HP claims.
The admission that widely available "consumer" gas was not used during the dyno is usually burriend in the fine print.

My comments were obviously about, and intended for, you. You could only have missed that if you are as ignorant as you have said that we Americans are.

I was merely trying, again, to straighten out the fallacies you keep posting about gasoline. You have shared info with us all, here and on your web page, that makes it obvious you don't have an engineering head on you. However, I stepped over the line a bit, so I'll retract.

In the future, when you post misinformation again, you can still expect to be corrected.

Have a good day.

JackG wrote:
> you don't have an engineering head on you.

As I said earlier, little do you know about me or my education, so please stop pretending.

-- peer