Posted by clare at snyder.on.ca on January 2, 2007, 7:08 pm
On Tue, 2 Jan 2007 11:04:16 -0500, "C. E. White"
I have personally had vehicles that cost less to run on premium than
regular - but that was back when the price difference was
significantly less. My daughter's twin cam Neon gets enough better
mileage on mid premium to almost pay the difference (at $.05 per
liter difference), and it doesn't ping like it does on regular.
Recommendation is premium on that car.
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Posted by Derek Broughton on January 2, 2007, 4:10 pm
I certainly hope so, since my Volvo dealer insists that I need "supreme" and
says exactly that.
By recording the mileage between fillups, and the size of the fillup.
Posted by CJT on January 2, 2007, 5:14 pm
Derek Broughton wrote:
I expect those hopes to be dashed.
since my Volvo dealer insists that I need "supreme" and
The e-mail address in our reply-to line is reversed in an attempt to
minimize spam. Our true address is of the form che...@prodigy.net.
Posted by Derek Broughton on January 2, 2007, 5:57 pm
...and my wife does what he tells her...
Posted by Scott Dorsey on January 2, 2007, 5:06 pm
will result in
No, there is no truth to this at all. The higher octane ONLY has better
Now, if you have a knocking problem with your car, and the knock sensor
starts delaying the timing, you will get poorer gas mileage. So in that
regard, if you HAVE a knocking problem, higher octane gas will give you
better acceleration and better mileage. But it would strike me that,
unless the car is designed to run on high octane gas, it would be better
to fix the problem causing the knocking.
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."