When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
At the end of the day there are just so many ways I could save $80 a month if I wanted to…$20 a tank sounds like a lot but at the end of the day it’s really not.
I get it. It’s onIy 2hp. I can’t explain why we run 93 in the LX, we just do and always have.
If a car stalls next to you at the red light, you’re in a race!! If @AMIRZA786 BMW friend stalls (brake boost) next to him at a light or from a roll, Amira is about to lose.🤣
Do not stall up a hybrid. I think they are slower off the line when you try to stall up. Just mash the gas like you would in an EV.
Did I hear my name called in vain? Thanks for dragging me into this @BayeauxLex 🤣
I also care about saving money on gas, especially with prices here being near $5 a gallon, but that said, if a car was designed for 91 and above, I would use 91. I always used 91 on my Camry SE which had the 3.3L V6 (recommended), in my 2018 Si and IS350 (min requirement). Putting 87 octane in you really don't notice it much until you put your foot down hard and the car pulls timing. 2 hp is 2 hp, why deprive myself of it. But I understand if people want to put a lower octane in their vehicles, it's not going to kill the car. For sure wouldn't put 87 in high performance vehicles.
I have to say, the start stop works really well on my friends M4 Comp. I would 100 percent keep it on for normal driving. When you hit the "M" button on the steering wheel, it disables it until you go back to Normal
If you only ever drove at redline, peak horsepower might be an important metric. Because you don't, I agree with you that it doesn't matter, especially given the small difference.
But what does matter that you don't acknowledge is that the torque curve on the way from idle to redline are dramatically different, and the LX has significantly more total area under its curve than the LC has under its curve. That's usable real-world power and improved everyday drivability that doesn't show up on a stats sheet.
To use an extreme example, my former daily makes less than 250 peak hp, even with its stage 1 tune. Not a lot by today's standards. But the area under its torque curve is MASSIVE, which in normal driving means little tiny squeezes of the throttle result in instant seat-squishing response.
where are you seeing that it has significantly more total area?
I’ll run some premium on it for a few tanks and try to notice any torque difference. It’s 2lb/ft more.
And no, Steve, you’re wrong. I don’t care about fuel costs. But I care about wasting money. Truck doesn’t need premium. That is a fact to me no matter what you think.
There you go. A RWD truck is making the same wheel TQ and HP as the AWD LX is......aka the LX is making a good deal more power.
280-300whp and 310tq is typical for the trucks tested in 2wd vs AWD for the LX.....and yet the LX has more TQ everywhere except right at the top where the HP rating is aka your 2hp difference. Again keep in mind if the trucks were done in 4x4 they would suffer more for TQ than they already are vs a same year LX.
Again let me say it clearly. The LX generated more TQ, for more area of the curve to the wheels IN SPITE OF THE AWD SYSTEM. Aka the tune is different
On premium you can match a tundra, on 87 you will lose. I couldn't find a stock Land Cruiser dyno chart with the 5.7 but I would expect 5% lower than the LX across the board.
I’ll run some premium on it for a few tanks and try to notice any torque difference. It’s 2lb/ft more.
I don't think 2 ft-lbs will be noticeable by any normal driver with normal physical-senses. Certainly not worth the big difference in price between 87 and 93 octane.
The main thing, though, is to make sure your vehicle's engine computer will retard the spark-timing a little if it detects ping from using lower octane. That will prevent possible engine damage from the pinging, but also make it run a little hotter....shouldn't be a big deal if the thermostat, cooling-fan, water-pump, and anti-freeze coolant are in good shape. If not, then stick with the higher octane and/or what is recommend in the Owners' Manual.
where are you seeing that it has significantly more total area?
Here's the LX curve, based on the engine specs:
And here's a dyno of an LC200. The lower black lines are stock, the upper red ones are with aftermarket headers and can be ignored:
The correction factor on the dyno is a touch high (note that the peak is slightly higher than the spec for either version of the engine). But that works for this comparison because it ensures that we're not handicapping the LC.
Notice how much faster it ramps, resulting in more torque until they even out at around 3500 rpm.
And he’s also right it’s been beaten to death, 87 vs 93 in LX and tundra. Majority runs 87. Does it make it right? No. Let’s get another opinion. @JDR76 What grade fuel do you run in your Tundra, loaded and unloaded and how does it perform in your opinion?
I run 87 in my Tundra. I have a fairly long towing trip coming up that I could try premium in to see if there's a difference, but I assume not as, to my knowledge, the Tundra isn't tuned to take advantage of a higher octane, though I know some people report differences.
Not going to keep going around and around about this but If you didn’t care about fuel costs you wouldn’t be concerned about an extra $20 a tank. You clearly do care.
Not caring means you don’t even think about what you spend on fuel. You just buy the right and best fuel. Everybody who cares about the cost of fuel is concerned about wasting money. Difference is what one person sees as a waste someone else doesn’t. I don’t see spending $20 more a tank to get the best performance however slight a waste
I saw something @bitkahuna posted a ways up about going to Costco to save on fuel in a $150k car, I don’t do that. I only run Shell when I can help it. I just try and fill up on Tuesdays when premium is .20 off lol
I thought the difference is way less than $20. Also I thought Costco was top tier station
There you go. A RWD truck is making the same wheel TQ and HP as the AWD LX is......aka the LX is making a good deal more power.
280-300whp and 310tq is typical for the trucks tested in 2wd vs AWD for the LX.....and yet the LX has more TQ everywhere except right at the top where the HP rating is aka your 2hp difference. Again keep in mind if the trucks were done in 4x4 they would suffer more for TQ than they already are vs a same year LX.
Again let me say it clearly. The LX generated more TQ, for more area of the curve to the wheels IN SPITE OF THE AWD SYSTEM. Aka the tune is different
On premium you can match a tundra, on 87 you will lose. I couldn't find a stock Land Cruiser dyno chart with the 5.7 but I would expect 5% lower than the LX across the board.
So at minimum I should run premium when pulling a load.
Originally Posted by JDR76
I run 87 in my Tundra. I have a fairly long towing trip coming up that I could try premium in to see if there's a difference, but I assume not as, to my knowledge, the Tundra isn't tuned to take advantage of a higher octane, though I know some people report differences.
I thought the difference is way less than $20. Also I thought Costco was top tier station
It depends. It’s about $1 a gallon so if you fill up 20 gallons it’s $20.
Costco is top tier. Shell is still the best detergent package though. I don’t have a Costco with a gas station here and I don’t want to stand in line anyways.
Okay, so what I'm getting is there's a different torque curve and/or more oomph on premium. Not sure how much 2lb/ft are going to do, I've never had a complaint about low end torque since I bought it but yes I do want to see for myself.
I'll just use premium for the next month and report back.
@BayeauxLex I find it amusing that you have a Tundra that you use verrrrrry hard and it's fine on 87 with 230k+, then you baby the LX with the same engine.
And for everyone, isn't Exxon still good gas? That's what I usually put in the Benz.
@BayeauxLex I find it amusing that you have a Tundra that you use verrrrrry hard and it's fine on 87 with 230k+, then you baby the LX with the same engine.
And for everyone, isn't Exxon still good gas? That's what I usually put in the Benz.
Because the engines aren’t tuned the same. Putting premium in a tundra doesn’t necessarily give it the torque curve of the LX.
07-17-24, 08:10 AM
