S2000 Talk Discussions related to the S2000, its ownership and enthusiasm for it.

92 vs 94 octane

Thread Tools
 
Old May 10, 2002 | 08:20 AM
  #1  
Indecision's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 2,204
Likes: 0
From: Burnaby
Default 92 vs 94 octane

This topic probably exist somewhere, but I'm too lazy to search

Which one should I use for the S? I've noticed on my Prelude that it's very happy on 94 rev much smoother and reduce in engine noise.

Same goes for the S?
Reply
Old May 10, 2002 | 08:33 AM
  #2  
DarioManfretti's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,277
Likes: 0
From: Lyndhurst
Default

I only use Sunoco Ultra 94 in mine. I've heard the higher the better and Sunoco has the highest in my area.
Reply
Old May 10, 2002 | 08:48 AM
  #3  
xviper's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 37,305
Likes: 18
Default

92 octane is the highest I can get in Alberta. When I visited Vancouver Island last year, I ran 94 octane for 2 tank fulls. I could not feel any difference. Higher octane is not always worth the money. When your S2000 gets to be over 5 years old (the mechanics here will know why), then maybe but when it's new, I think you're just wasting your money. But then, it's your money.
Reply
Old May 10, 2002 | 09:23 AM
  #4  
STL's Avatar
STL
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 1,579
Likes: 1
From: St. Louis
Default

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Indecision
[B]This topic probably exist somewhere, but I'm too lazy to search
Reply
Old May 10, 2002 | 10:39 AM
  #5  
Indecision's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 2,204
Likes: 0
From: Burnaby
Default

[QUOTE]Originally posted by xviper
[B]92 octane is the highest I can get in Alberta.
Reply
Old May 10, 2002 | 10:47 AM
  #6  
DoGMaN's Avatar
Registered User
Gold Member (Premium)
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 10,790
Likes: 0
From: I make Erock better
Default

For me its simple, if I'm going to pay for Premium fuel and I have the option to pay the same amount for 94 octane as I will for 91 or 92....why not get the 94?

Only fuel I've ever put in the car is Sunnoco Ultra 94, its easy for me to get and its always the same price as the other "premium" fuels.
Reply
Old May 10, 2002 | 11:21 AM
  #7  
FormerH22a4's Avatar
Registered User
Gold Member (Premium)
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 4,015
Likes: 2
From: Calgary
Default

If it is the same price then go for 94. I noticed that when I was in Van, 94 gave me a noticeable increase in feul economy.
Reply
Old May 11, 2002 | 06:57 AM
  #8  
Whitelightning's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 842
Likes: 0
From: Kinston
Default

use 93... it is in the middle... That is all I have ever seen around here..
Reply
Old May 11, 2002 | 09:07 AM
  #9  
honda606's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 5,937
Likes: 7
From: houston
Default

Higher octane isn't always the best thing for an engine. I realize that Honda says to use Premium Unleaded in the S2000 but in the Prelude??

First of all most engines, unless V8 or higher, don't have anywhere near the ability to burn off that high a level of octane. This is a bad thing not a good thing. Do some research and you will find this to be very true.

As far as the performance/mileage aspect of this debate, octane changes in a 4 cylinder engine are really not going to be noticed at all. Occasionally I will cycle a few tanks of 89 octane through my beater, 1991 Accord EX, but the 92 is pointless. Honda engines, with the exception of the S2000's, were not designed to run on anything other than basic 87 unleaded.
Reply
Old May 11, 2002 | 09:09 AM
  #10  
Indecision's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 2,204
Likes: 0
From: Burnaby
Default

[QUOTE]Originally posted by honda606
[B]
First of all most engines, unless V8 or higher, don't have anywhere near the ability to burn off that high a level of octane.
Reply



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:19 PM.