From the linked Car and Driver article:

Car and Driver
Regular or Premium?
Is premium fuel worth the premium price? Can you hurt a high-octane car by running it on the cheaper stuff?
BY FRANK MARKUS
November 2001

"The results were more dramatic with the test cars that require premium fuel. The turbocharged Saab's sophisticated Trionic engine-control system dialed the power back 9.8 percent on regular gas, and performance dropped 10.1 percent at the track. Burning regular in our BMW M3 diminished track performance by 6.6 percent, but neither the BMW nor the Saab suffered any drivability problems while burning regular unleaded fuel. Unfortunately, the M3's sophisticated electronics made it impossible to test the car on the dyno (see caption at top).

Our tests confirm that for most cars there is no compelling reason to buy more expensive fuel than the factory recommends, as any performance gain realized will surely be far less than the percentage hike in price. Cheapskates burning regular in cars designed to run on premium fuel can expect to trim performance by about the same percent they save at the pump. If the car is sufficiently new and sophisticated, it may not suffer any ill effects, but all such skinflints should be ready to switch back to premium at the first sign of knock or other drivability woes. And finally, if a car calibrated for regular fuel begins to knock on anything less than premium or midgrade, owners should invest in a tuneup, emissions-control-system repair, or detergent additives to solve, rather than bandage, the root problem. Class dismissed."

Sounds to me like they are saying a car designed to run on premium fuel will show a significant retardation of performance with regular fuel.

They also warn to be on the watch for "knock or drivability" problems because the engine could be damaged.

 

So I guess the Honda and Porsche engineers have a thing or two to learn from the members of this forum.

I still use premium, and always will. Don't get me wrong. I just don't think people who have different opinions and preferences should be flamed because their opinions are different from the majority opinion.

I see no difference between the folks who use super/turbochargers who put extreme loads on their engine, and someone who uses regular fuel. The one difference seems to be that SC/TC voids your warranty. I wonder which is more damaging to the car.

I see the same thing when someone claims to have good gas mileage. They get flamed for not driving the car "the way it was meant to be." Why can't the folks drive their car the way they want?

 

How many of those Porsche engines have 11.1:1 compression? Apples and Oranges. It costs me an extra $1.60 when I fill up to put premium in it. I can't believe ANYONE with an S2000 can't afford to pay that difference.

 

I'm not speaking of affordability - it's absolutely true that if that difference means you can't pay the bills you shouldn't have a car like this.

I'm just wondering why people get flamed on certain topics so easily.

 

I'm in NJ so Sunoco Ultra 94 for my baby


One time they put 50 cents of regular in there I made them suck out all the gas and fill me up again

 

HELP!!!! I have got a twist to this question! I can get 92 octane from BP but they r not a "toptier" supplier (see larry webster article in Car & Driver Aug 2005, page 30) or go with 91 octane from a toptier supplier? A toptier company certifies its gas has the best additives for the health of your engine. Again go with 91 from toptier or 92 from non-toptier supplier???

 

This is a funny thread. I find it amusing how many of you think alike.

I'm shopping for an S2000, will probably buy one. But I'll be honest with you. I'm saving every nickel and every dime I can to make this purchase (ok, yes, this has a lot to do with my aversion to financing, but that's not the point).

Not everybody purchases a vehicle for the same reasons. I think it's silly to suggest that it's a waste if someone isn't driving the car to it's full potential. Yes, I understand that this is a sports car. But some people may buy the car simply based on the styling and enjoyment of top down driving.

The answer to the OP's question is that you can run 87 octane in your car if you want to save a little money at the pumps. You won't save a lot of money. And the downside is you will have to go easy on the engine to keep predetonations to a minimum. But if you are ok with less power, you should be fine.

 

If you are going to be an ass about your answer to a question that was never asekd then you shouldn't answer teh questino.


Just beause the guy is asking if you can put 87 oct. into the car vs. 91+ doesnt mean he can't afford the gas. Of coures if you can afford the car you can afford another $0.31. So if you aren't goign to answered a question a polite way then you shoudln't even begin answering it.

Like your mom used to tell you - "If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say it"

 

well i think part of it has to do with the fact that some people are so adamant about doing the opposite of what the manufacturer says because they feel they somehow know better. like i said, wait til someone puts 10w30 oil in their diff because they feel they know better than what the manufacturer recommends.

 

Still waiting for those references to what Honda engineers "have said".