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.
I would like to hear if somebody tried with higher octane fuel and got better results.
Post #2. Perhaps in that case the knock sensor interference is reduced by using higher octane fuel and the driver is sensitive enough to notice. There are multiple similar claims like that; and I suppose there's a technical explanation than just a placebo. Maybe it's that some premium fuels have extra additives that could, maybe, somewhat help the engine. I tend to believe in user experience unless someone presents facts with data analysis (like a Dyno/track comparison of our specific engine running premium vs regular).
My point is: if the user feels good using a higher octane, and feels better performance, there's nothing mechanically wrong about that other that the extra cost (without going to the extremes of AVGAS). It's like the oil change interval flame war. There's no longer the need for a 3k/3mo OCI, but if someone has the time and money, whatever floats user's boat.
Now, using a lower grade octane than the "Recommended Minimum Octane Rating" should be pointed out as wrong as it could have a negative impact on the engine; no the other way around
There's nothing bad about that. Problem here it's the dealer told the OP to use Premium apparently as a requirement, which is not true.
There are so many endless discussions about what's better that it's like discussing sports/religion/politics. Some people use 91+ because they associate the word "Premium" with a better fuel which is NOT really; it's just a higher octane fuel.
Just follow the manual recommendation and as long it's not lower than 87; it's just extra $$$ expended. The manual clearly says: 87 or higher (TOP TIER).
I don't think that Premium gas is "better quality", it simply has a different detonation point than regular gas. Some brands may have different additive packages for their premium blends, but saying it's better quality is misleading.
Originally Posted by rVague
I prefer peace of mind of using better quality gas.
After having two vehicles that required premium fuel for the past 10 years, I was glad that our newer ones do not. I've had zero problems with acceleration and knocking running on regular fuel. The savings adds up significantly in our state where we are hit with massive taxes on our gas. I paid $3.69 per gallon for regular unleaded at Costco yesterday. Premium fuel was $4.25 per gallon yesterday at Costco. At just 10 gallons per week for two vehicles, that adds up to a $582.40 per year savings sticking with the recommended regular fuel. I'm sticking with regular fuel and keeping the savings in my bank account.
My daughter just bought a 2024 UXh. The manual clearly states that it is designed for 87 octane. She took it into dealer for a question and the guy said she should use 91. And they will fill it a tank for her with 91. I actually wonder about that....but meanwhile, she is so confused. I believe she should just use 87 unless she has issues. It does get confusing. The ES clearly states 87. If the dealer tells me 91, what should we do?
My daughter just bought a 2024 UXh. The manual clearly states that it is designed for 87 octane. She took it into dealer for a question and the guy said she should use 91. And they will fill it a tank for her with 91. I actually wonder about that....but meanwhile, she is so confused. I believe she should just use 87 unless she has issues. It does get confusing. The ES clearly states 87. If the dealer tells me 91, what should we do?
87. The manual is never wrong. Sales people often are.
My daughter just bought a 2024 UXh. The manual clearly states that it is designed for 87 octane. She took it into dealer for a question and the guy said she should use 91. And they will fill it a tank for her with 91. I actually wonder about that....but meanwhile, she is so confused. I believe she should just use 87 unless she has issues. It does get confusing. The ES clearly states 87. If the dealer tells me 91, what should we do?
I would trust the engineers at Lexus and what they put in the manual.
My daughter just bought a 2024 UXh. The manual clearly states that it is designed for 87 octane. She took it into dealer for a question and the guy said she should use 91. And they will fill it a tank for her with 91. I actually wonder about that....but meanwhile, she is so confused. I believe she should just use 87 unless she has issues. It does get confusing. The ES clearly states 87. If the dealer tells me 91, what should we do?
Check out the Lexus link @Demanufacture posted on post #21. https://support.lexus.com/s/article/...rade-shou-8129
Based on that, "Recommended Minimum Octane Rating" for the 2024 UXh is 87. There's nothing wrong with using 91 or 100 octane. Just less $$$ in you wallet.
Also there's the tendency to associate the word "Premium" with something better. So now she's a Lexus owner; so it it should put something better in the tank they say.
As @F3Woody wrote "The manual is never wrong. Sales people often are."
Does using the recommended 87 fuel get the advertised HP and torque ratings?
It'll be interesting to know for this specific generation. I know that for some models with the 91 (recommended) or 87 (minimum) they use the 91 for advertised specs.
Also it will be interesting to know why if High Compression Engines use 91+. The A25A-FXS at 14.0:1 compression ratio just need 87. Maybe it can be re-tuned for extra HP on 91+?
Also it will be interesting to know why if High Compression Engines use 91+. The A25A-FXS at 14.0:1 compression ratio just need 87. Maybe it can be re-tuned for extra HP on 91+?
It could likely be re-tuned, but the whole point of the smaller engine is to increase fuel economy, so it would be counterproductive from that stand point.
It could likely be re-tuned, but the whole point of the smaller engine is to increase fuel economy, so it would be counterproductive from that stand point.
Actually it’s more for emissions compliance rather than mpg.
09-20-24 | 12:12 PM
