Lowest gas prices in your area?

[2005GLI]

So with the constant drop of gas in the U.S., whats the lowest price in your hometown *or* area that you''ve seen for regular, super/ultra and diesel?

Lowerst regular price i''ve seen here in Bergen County,NJ is $1.81 at some no name gas station. Lowest super/ulra 93 is $1.99 it might even be cheaper today, prices were beeing changed around towns last night. Cheapest diesel price i''ve seen is $2.95.

My truck takes 93 octane since I have a custom computer tune. It cost me the other day only $45 to fill up from near empty. I nearly hugged the gas station guy. Thats the lowest it cost me in honestly at least 2+ years. Highest was close to $90 at gas' highest in the summer. Kinda makes me want to go out and do more photography.

[snyderman]

Just paid $1.669 for gas yesterday! Big difference -- $21.50 vs $52 a couple of months ago! Go to gasbuddy.com and type in my zip code: 44281. We've got some pretty cheap gas (for a change) in NE Ohio right now.

dave

[JulieNick]

88.8/litre in south west Nova Scotia

[gjl711]

Lowest I have seen is $2.04. I can't remember the last time it was below $2.00

[2005GLI]

88.8/litre in south west Nova Scotia

is that good or bad?

[gjl711]

The one thing about gas prices though is that so many local taxing authorities use gas as a revenue generating opportunity. I live near two different county boarders. In one they tax the crap out of gas and it is always 25 or so cents higher than in the county I live. However just west of us they tax less and are always 5~10 cents cheaper. So with taxes thrown in it's hard to know what gas really costs.

[JulieNick]

is that good or bad?

Lowest it's been in 4 years but still not good. There is approximately 4 litres per gallon so that would be $3.55/gallon

[rc13k]

It want as low as $0.82/litre here in Ontario. I think it's at $0.83 right now.

[FocalPrincess]

We're at about 2.15 for regular right now.

[sevillafox]

$2.09 for regular cheapo stuff....E85 was $1.95

[FlyingPhotog]

We're threatening to crack the sub $2 barrier at my Costco in Chandler AZ (PHX Suburb)

[Chet]

Varies greatly for 87 octane, anywhere from $1.93 to $2.19 within a 15 mile radius.

[mattograph]

Paid $1.89 last night.

[75D]

Montreal area is around $0.85 per litre, but will jump on Thursday when the gas companies rip us off for the weekend.

[canonnoob]

I think the last time I saw it and paid attention was sub 1.80 or right around there..

[SoaringUSAEagle]

$1.75/ga here. (-3 cents with certain gas cards)

[boomer3297]

$1.84 in Joyzee!!!!!!

[[CaliGirl]]

$2.39 in Burbank, CA this morning.....

[SoaringUSAEagle]

;6712919']$2.39 in Burbank, CA this morning.....
By the time CA sees <$2/ga gas, the rest of us will be free :D

[FlyingPhotog]

$1.84 in Joyzee!!!!!!

As if there aren't hands manipulating your gas prices. :rolleyes:

NJ has always had some of the cheapest gas in the USofA and the really weird thing is, it's all FULL SERVICE...you can't pump your own!

Eh, Fuggedaboudit...

[tonybear007]

$2.04 in Opa Locka Florida.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
EOS 3 (35mm film), EOS 40D, Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L, 70-200 f/4L, TAMRON SP AF17-50mm f/2.8
Getting Great Images from Your EOS 40D (http://mycanoneos40d.com)

[Mike Butler]

$1.81 in South Carolina

[dave kadolph]

$1.79 on the way home today.

[gary88]

The cheapest here in downtown Chicago is $2.39. The cheapest in the western suburbs is $1.96.

[Calzinger]

Jeez, I'm seein' $2.60+ (93 oct) here in New York.

[DaCubanSkillz]

As if there aren't hands manipulating your gas prices. :rolleyes:

NJ has always had some of the cheapest gas in the USofA and the really weird thing is, it's all FULL SERVICE...you can't pump your own!

Eh, Fuggedaboudit...

I'd agree but over the summer, the gas was nearly the same as the DC area. The DC area is pretty high compared to Jersey. When I did go to Jersey to visit my family, I felt like hugging and giving the gas pump a little kiss because it was cheaper at that time. I even remember telling the gas pump that I'd miss her as I turned into the street to go back to VA..lol.

The cheapest I've seen within 10-15 miles from DC is $1.99 at an Exxon.

Here is a website that lists all the lowest and highest prices of gas:

http://www.virginiagasprices.com/

Change Virginia to whatever state you live in and it'll pull up the gas prices there.

[SoaringUSAEagle]

60 miles north of here, gas is $1.51/ga.

[Matty777]

Don't rent a Car over here, a fraction under $7 a gallon! :rolleyes::rolleyes:

[SoaringUSAEagle]

Don't rent a Car over here, a fraction under $7 a gallon! :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Wow - glad I'm not over there!

[Travisj]

$1.81 in South Carolina


$1.83 in the lower part of SC and $1.46 in Graniteville

[Crime Dog]

$1.69 for Regular here in Northwest Ohio.

This is my first post. New to the forums...have just been lurking and trying to glean as much info/education from you all as possible on photography. Great forums! Thanks for all the knowledge that is shared here.

I'm hoping to get a Canon 40D, with a Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM in the next 6 months or so. Still saving my $$$.

I've played with a friend's Nikon (don't remember which model) before, and my parents got a 40D last year (and don't use it NEAR to it's potential. I've encouraged my mother to take a photography class to make the most of what they've got...and they just won't. Argh! All that power and they're not utilizing it!)

[Calzinger]

Yeesh, does New York have the most expensive gas in our country or what? I saved a receipt from over the summer where I paid $4.39 per gallon (93). Even I've been happy to see prices settling here for around $2.50 recently. Then again, I probably should get rid of this 305 V8 that gets 11mpg at the best of times! :(

[digirebelva]

Some areas of the county $1.62, others a around $1.72

[digirebelva]

Yeesh, does New York have the most expensive gas in our country or what? I saved a receipt from over the summer where I paid $4.39 per gallon (93). Even I've been happy to see prices settling here for around $2.50 recently. Then again, I probably should get rid of this 305 V8 that gets 11mpg at the best of times! :(

How much tax is included in the price?

[Calzinger]

How much tax is included in the price?
Uhm, all of it? I pay exactly what I see.

[m3rdpwr]

Here in the Boston, MA area tonight I just saw the lowest I've seen forever at just $1.93US a gallon.

And to think I topped off my half tank of gas the other day at $2.03 per gallon thinking it would go back up...

-Me

[NZDoug]

Ultra is 1.70/Liter x3.8l/gal=$6.46Kiwi
Exchange rate$1.00=54cents Kiwi so were $3.00 US/gal.

[Cdeming]

The cheapest here in downtown Chicago is $2.39. The cheapest in the western suburbs is $1.96.

Yeah, I'm out in DeKalb and I filled up for $1.98 today! Crazy how much it differs within 60 miles, huh?

[boomer3297]

As if there aren't hands manipulating your gas prices. :rolleyes:

NJ has always had some of the cheapest gas in the USofA and the really weird thing is, it's all FULL SERVICE...you can't pump your own!

Eh, Fuggedaboudit...

Fuggedaboudit, we're now at $1.74

[[CaliGirl]]

By the time CA sees <$2/ga gas, the rest of us will be free :D

:( Gee thanks!!


$2.23 this morning in Burbank, Cali

[SoaringUSAEagle]

;6727039']:( Gee thanks!!


$2.23 this morning in Burbank, Cali

You're welcome! :D We're down into the 1.60s now.

[Calzinger]

I wonder if we're going to see any chance in sales on those three ton SUVs. Hell, with prices this low, I'd get that MB biturbo V12! :D

Funny part is that it'd still get better gas mileage than my current heap. 11mpg is pretty sweet, gasoline gauge moves as quick as the odometer. :(

[SoaringUSAEagle]

I wonder if we're going to see any chance in sales on those three ton SUVs. Hell, with prices this low, I'd get that MB biturbo V12! :D

Funny part is that it'd still get better gas mileage than my current heap. 11mpg is pretty sweet, gasoline gauge moves as quick as the odometer. :(

Now that's pretty funny. F to E in .2 seconds! :D

[DozerLYP]

Darn, here it's still at $2.07

[Mister_ej1]

columbia, sc...think the lowest ive seen is around 1.70/gal

[digirebelva]

Uhm, all of it? I pay exactly what I see.

Not exactely...you generally have federal. state and/or local taxes included in the price of gas...ours is 17cents tax per gallon..its all included in the price you see...but its there

[Calzinger]

Not exactely...you generally have federal. state and/or local taxes included in the price of gas...ours is 17cents tax per gallon..its all included in the price you see...but its there
Ah, got ya. I wonder if this website is accurate. http://www.gaspricewatch.com/usgastaxes.asp

[artra]

1.83 Dublin, GA

[gary88]

I topped off for $1.97 in the suburbs today. 16 gallons cost about $32. Suddenly having a gas guzzling V8 isn't that bad anymore :)

[NathanS]

1.97 a gallon? That is amazing.. We up here in alberta pay about 79c/litre for gas! Way cheaper than the 1.40$/litre it hit this summer!

[[CaliGirl]]

$2.13 tonight in west hills, CA

[digirebelva]

I topped off for $1.97 in the suburbs today. 16 gallons cost about $32. Suddenly having a gas guzzling V8 isn't that bad anymore :)

Dont get used to it, its not going to stay down there forever ;)

[digirebelva]

Ah, got ya. I wonder if this website is accurate. http://www.gaspricewatch.com/usgastaxes.asp

Probably pretty close, I know a lot of states were thinking about raising gas taxes this summer but most considered it political suicide with gas hitting $4 + gal, now they might try it..you know they want us to try more fuel efficient vechicles, great we do that, but guess what that means less fuel is being bought...which means less tax revenue etc...so then they are going to want to raise the fuel tax to make up the difference...in the end we still get screwed..:(

[shadowman]

$1.72

Western Massachusetts. They might as well give the stuff away!

[thomascanty]

By the time CA sees <$2/ga gas, the rest of us will be free :D

Head to your local station and demand your free gas. I saw a story on the news last night that there's a station in Pasadena that's at $1.89...

[digirebelva]

Just saw on the news this morning there is a station on one side of town with prices in the $1.52 range...I need to go and get a picture of it...so i can show my daughter when she gets older..:D

[Calzinger]

Probably pretty close, I know a lot of states were thinking about raising gas taxes this summer but most considered it political suicide with gas hitting $4 + gal, now they might try it..you know they want us to try more fuel efficient vechicles, great we do that, but guess what that means less fuel is being bought...which means less tax revenue etc...so then they are going to want to raise the fuel tax to make up the difference...in the end we still get screwed..:(
The highest I had ever seen was $4.60/gal (93 oct). And to be honest, I didn't think it was that insane. Regular was averaging $4.20/gal over the summer. Spending $80 to fill up your tank was nothing out of the ordinary. I even laughed at a few people when they went to the attendant with a ten dollar bill.

Hybrid technology currently makes very little sense, and the sales of the Prius shows the ignorance. If you want better mileage, get a Civic, don't drive above 55mph on the highway (drag reduces mileage), and quit mashing the gas pedal at traffic lights.

I suppose this is all hypocritical comin' from the guy with the ridiculously gas-guzzlin' V8. Man, even I make a Hummer look good. ;)

[digirebelva]

The highest I had ever seen was $4.60/gal (93 oct). And to be honest, I didn't think it was that insane. Regular was averaging $4.20/gal over the summer. Spending $80 to fill up your tank was nothing out of the ordinary. I even laughed at a few people when they went to the attendant with a ten dollar bill.
I suppose this is all hypocritical comin' from the guy with the ridiculously gas-guzzlin' V8. Man, even I make a Hummer look good. ;)

Yeah but just think of what you can do with the extra $30 + or so a week that
you are not now putting into your tank..after a few months I see a nice new "L" lens on someone's camera:D

[Calzinger]

Yeah but just think of what you can do with the extra $30 + or so a week that
you are not now putting into your tank..after a few months I see a nice new "L" lens on someone's camera:D
I'd be impressed if you saved over $30 a month with a hybrid. Their combustion engines are just as inefficient as those in a Civic or Corolla, and those engines are used when you're at speed. The electric engine is used minimally on a long daily commute, only used when you're traveling locally. And honestly, who drives an entire tank through a city at 20 mph? You save a little bit of money over a long period of time. If you ask me, I'll spend the extra $100 a year for luxury. It's like how some people don't mind spending the extra $200-$300 a year on higher octane fuel to reduce knocking and improve fuel mileage. Of course that only applies to high performance (high compression) engines. Fillin' up 93-oct in your Camry is a complete waste of money. Contrarily, fillin' high octane in your 7-series will actually increase mileage and performance.

[andrew748]

lol

if ever there was a thread designed to alienate the North American continent from Europe:D

£0.92.9p per litre over here :p

recent high was £1.35.9p per litre for petrol or gas as you people call it

Diesel or DERV is still at the £1.30 mark and not dropping any time soon :(

still it's not all doom and gloom,
a quick question for you though :)

are you recent home destroying "wild" fires an insurance job ? ;)

[BrokenRoad]

we're in rural east central il and our local station is at $1.79 diesel is $2.75
In Urbana it's $1.72 and diesel is $2.79. that is where Hubby filled up at last night.

[theague]

Cheapest I have seen in my area of Tacoma is 1.99 for regular which is all I get. Most other places are still 2.05 or higher.

[TheMissouriShooter]

$152.9 at COSTCO in St. Peters , MIssouri

[[CaliGirl]]

$1.99 tonight in Van Nuys, CA

[Ronald S. Jr.]

$152.9 at COSTCO in St. Peters , MIssouri


What...per barrel?! :p

[DigitalSpecialist]

Were at 164 in St.Louis, and 150 in Springfield MO.

[DozerLYP]

finally got to $1.98

[number six]

$1.99 this morning in Concord, CA - at a Chevron station. I wonder what the cutrate stations have...

-js

[Killjoy]

$1.89 for regular at Costco on Monument Blvd in Concord, CA.

[queenbee288]

$1.54 today in Nicholasvile, KY.

[joebenz]

costco was 1.84 for 87 yesterday! in cypress, ca

[SoaringUSAEagle]

$1.53 here now.

[number six]

Let's all go out and buy SUVs!

-js

[mattograph]

Oil jumped today, so I'm sure the prices will follow suit soon!

[Killjoy]

Let's all go out and buy SUVs!

-js

No thanks. :p

It's bad enough filling up my F-150 and my boat at the same time.
67 Gallons between the two.:rolleyes: I don't need an SUV to add to my aggravation.

[SoaringUSAEagle]

Oil jumped today, so I'm sure the prices will follow suit soon!

$4/barrel only equates to a few cents... and if it drops back down tomorrow, then it's even again. Face it, it closed at less than $55/barrel which is less than $1/ga.

[gary88]

Filled up for $1.96 a gallon today.

Though I burned a little more than a quarter of a tank driving 130 miles altogether so far today :confused:

[DigitalSoCal]

Filled up @ 1.95 today in Foothill Ranch

[blueM]

Last Sunday afternoon: $1.59 Costco - Suburban Detroit - 48302 - probably less now.

[mattograph]

$4/barrel only equates to a few cents... and if it drops back down tomorrow, then it's even again. Face it, it closed at less than $55/barrel which is less than $1/ga.

I learned a long time ago that "gas math" has little to do with reality!

[number six]

This morning in Concord: $1.93 at Chevron, $1.83 at the oddball stations, $2.18 at Shell. Hmmm. Nobody at the Shell pumps...

-js

[Killjoy]

Dang! And I thougth $1.99 at Chevron in Walnut Creek, CA this morning was good (on my way to work at 4:30).
However, $1.79 at Costco in Concord, CA

[hawkeye60]

I saw $1.92 yesterday. Of course that was after I paid more at another station.

[Tom W]

Premium was $1.91 in Chattanooga 2 days ago. I didn't look at regular (the car requires 91 octane), but I'm guessing that it's 30-40 cents cheaper.

[Tom W]

$4/barrel only equates to a few cents... and if it drops back down tomorrow, then it's even again. Face it, it closed at less than $55/barrel which is less than $1/ga.

The cost of the raw material (crude oil) is quite variable, but the cost of refining hasn't changed much, nor has the tax. So the correlation between crude price and pump price isn't 1:1.

Still, it's interesting that the price drop is much slower to respond than the increase was. Again.

[Boucher]

I saw 1.05 dollars a litre in Australia..

[bbqKing]

I paid $1.54 a gallon here a couple of days ago here

[altered_pixel]

Yeah I paid about 1.55 a gallon the other day. Sweet.

[mattograph]

I paid $1.55 today on my way to work. 5 minutes down the road, gas was going for $1.79 a gallon.

Crazy.

[NZDoug]

:rolleyes:How come you guys in the usa get it so cheap?

[thomascanty]

:rolleyes:How come you guys in the usa get it so cheap?

We're fickle folk... Six months ago we were all complaining about how expensive it was, when it was almost triple what we're paying now...

[carlXSI]

$2.12 at Chevron here in San Francisco, CA.

[DozerLYP]

$1.89 tonight here.

[digirebelva]

:rolleyes:How come you guys in the usa get it so cheap?

Because we dont tax the living piss out of it...:D;)

[Calzinger]

:rolleyes:How come you guys in the usa get it so cheap?
We Americans like our SUVs. ;) :D

I think I just vomited in my mouth... :rolleyes:

[thomascanty]

Because we dont tax the living piss out of it...:D;)

Yes we do. Just not as badly as they do across the pond... ;)

[hawkeye60]

I saw $1.84 yesterday.

[[CaliGirl]]

$1.95 last night in Reseda, Cali

[yonni]

:rolleyes:How come you guys in the usa get it so cheap?

Look at the big picture, Doug. We here in the states get consumer products at a lower price than other countries, but we are also subject to going bankrupt in the case of a serious medical calamity, and we have higher infant and maternal mortality rates and a lower life expectancy than virtually every other developed country in the world.

Oh, $1.95 near LAX.

[hawkeye60]

From today...of course I just gassed up my Nissan PU at 10 cents more per gallon before I saw this one.

[number six]

Sigh. I filled up both tanks in my pickup when gas was about $3.50. Now it's half that price and I still only have room for about 6 gallons. :(

I bet when there's finally enough room for a reasonable fillup it'll be back at $3.50. :confused:

I don't drive it much - my primary transportation is a motorcycle.

-js

[londonandlawson]

Last I filled up it was a 1.49(Jonesboro, AR)

[smcclelland]

$0.78/L here in Toronto.

[patlannon]

Buffalo,NY has the highest gas prices in the continental US. Today's avg. regular went for $2.319/gal. And nobody in government has a hint as to why this is.

[Killjoy]

Sigh. I filled up both tanks in my pickup when gas was about $3.50. Now it's half that price and I still only have room for about 6 gallons. :(

I bet when there's finally enough room for a reasonable fillup it'll be back at $3.50. :confused:

I don't drive it much - my primary transportation is a motorcycle.

-js

You think that's bad? I filled up my boat when it was over $4.00 a gallon.
By the time I use it again in the spring, gas will be back up over $4.00 a gallon again.

67 gallons between filling the truck and the boat.
http://killjoy.smugmug.com/photos/311646800_gCtu5-X2.jpg

I pulled into the gas station one day to fill both up, and there was a line behind me. I said to the car immediately behind me "Sorry."
The guy replied to me, "You have to fill those up? I feel sorry for you."

I have considered siphoning it out and using it in my cars, but it's less of a pain to just pay less at the pump.

$1.76 at Costco on Monument on Friday.

[[CaliGirl]]

$1.85 this morning in Van Nuys, CA

[Ronald S. Jr.]

$1.91 here today for regular. I have to get premium, though, so it was around $2.20, I think. I'm perfectly fine with anything under 5 bucks, myself.

[SoaringUSAEagle]

$1.45 now here..... It's beginning to bottom out I do believe.

[Calzinger]

$1.91 here today for regular. I have to get premium, though, so it was around $2.20, I think. I'm perfectly fine with anything under 5 bucks, myself.
And what do you have that needs premium?

[Ronald S. Jr.]

Cadillac. It makes funny noises on regular, and the driving experience is sub-par.

[JimAskew]

$1.45 now here..... It's beginning to bottom out I do believe.
Jeff,

I just noticed that your location is Cheyenne, WY! I was assigned to Francis Warren USAF base in Cheyenne from 1974 to 1978. Great place to live...if you are ok with tough winters that is :) The Cheyenne Frontier Days in July is the absolutely best rodeo in the USA!

[Tom W]

Cadillac. It makes funny noises on regular, and the driving experience is sub-par.

There's a few cars that require higher octane. My Honda Civic Si requires 91 octane. Of course, they sell 93 and 89 around here so I generally alternate between the two and keep the tank above 1/3. If I drop too low, I use 93 since I don't want to dilute the high-octane too much. No damage will occur, but there'll be performance issues and pre-ignition can occur with too low an octane rating.

[Flo]

88.5 a liter

[SoaringUSAEagle]

Jeff,

I just noticed that your location is Cheyenne, WY! I was assigned to Francis Warren USAF base in Cheyenne from 1974 to 1978. Great place to live...if you are ok with tough winters that is :) The Cheyenne Frontier Days in July is the absolutely best rodeo in the USA!

I work at FEWAFB as a civilian - base photographer :) Love the job! And I have lived here all my life except the last two years as I was in Denver getting my photography degree. CFD is always a big thing as it is THE ONLY thing we ever have hahaha.

Winters can be tough but the summers make it well worth it. And the lack of humidity :)

[gary88]

I filled up for $1.67 two days ago in the suburbs :cool:

[FlyingPhotog]

Wife filled up at Circle K in the PHX area @ $1.58/Gal...

[Calzinger]

Cadillac. It makes funny noises on regular, and the driving experience is sub-par.
There's a few cars that require higher octane. My Honda Civic Si requires 91 octane. Of course, they sell 93 and 89 around here so I generally alternate between the two and keep the tank above 1/3. If I drop too low, I use 93 since I don't want to dilute the high-octane too much. No damage will occur, but there'll be performance issues and pre-ignition can occur with too low an octane rating.
Higher compression ratios need higher octane fuel so the fuel doesn't ignite by compression but by the spark instead. Regular can burn at lower compression which is why you can get pinging or knocking where the cylinder ignites prematurely and throws off the timing.

Premium gasoline doesn't have more energy and isn't any cleaner as most people seem to think. It doesn't suddenly make your engine haul ass. All it does is burn slower so it doesn't detonate.

But I'd be really surprised if either of you would even notice the difference. Cars in the late 80s were fitted with knock sensors (even my '87 Firebird has one) that detect early ignition and retard the timing. Of course you lose a slight amount of power and fuel mileage since the piston doesn't fully compress, but the difference has been proven hardly noticeable, especially by the driver in the seat as opposed to a computer.

Just put whatever your car manual says. If it says to put regular grade, you're absolutely wasting money by filling anything beyond regular. If it says to put premium grade, you really should put premium for optimal performance and fuel mileage. In fact, you could be saving money by doing so. But putting anything less certainly won't kill you given today's technology. Computers do wonders.

By the way I'm surprised they upped the compression on the Civic Si, surprised that thing takes premium. It still has that sheepish torque figure. But I guess there's only so much you can do with a 4-cyl before adding a turbo.

[Ronald S. Jr.]

Higher compression ratios need higher octane fuel so the fuel doesn't ignite by compression but by the spark instead. Regular can burn at lower compression which is why you can get pinging or knocking where the cylinder ignites prematurely and throws off the timing.

Premium gasoline doesn't have more energy and isn't any cleaner as most people seem to think. It doesn't suddenly make your engine haul ass. All it does is burn slower so it doesn't detonate.

But I'd be really surprised if either of you would even notice the difference. Cars in the late 80s were fitted with knock sensors (even my '87 Firebird has one) that detect early ignition and retard the timing. Of course you lose a slight amount of power and fuel mileage since the piston doesn't fully compress, but the difference has been proven hardly noticeable, especially by the driver in the seat as opposed to a computer.

Just put whatever your car manual says. If it says to put regular grade, you're absolutely wasting money by filling anything beyond regular. If it says to put premium grade, you really should put premium for optimal performance and fuel mileage. In fact, you could be saving money by doing so. But putting anything less certainly won't kill you given today's technology. Computers do wonders.

By the way I'm surprised they upped the compression on the Civic Si, surprised that thing takes premium. It still has that sheepish torque figure. But I guess there's only so much you can do with a 4-cyl before adding a turbo.

The difference between 87 and 93 in my Caddy is very obvious, as far as performance goes. Very noticeable noises, a lack in performance, etc. I made the mistake of putting "the cheap stuff" in it two times. There won't be a third.

[Ronald S. Jr.]

Oh, and for the record...my manual says "premium unleaded".

[Calzinger]

The difference between 87 and 93 in my Caddy is very obvious, as far as performance goes. Very noticeable noises, a lack in performance, etc. I made the mistake of putting "the cheap stuff" in it two times. There won't be a third.
Oh, and for the record...my manual says "premium unleaded".
Then either your knock sensor is shot or your car is really old, hence no knock sensor. Like I said, computers have become so efficient with ignition that pinging or detonation, likely the noises you describe, are virtually eliminated. Your claim that you're noticing a substantial difference could mean something is wrong with the car.

What year/model is it? I assume it's fuel injection?

My '87 Firebird has a modest 9.3:1 compression ratio and still demands premium grade. It has an early knock sensor and an ancient computer, and to be honest, even still I'd be hard pressed to say if I notice a significant difference between 87-oct and 93-oct. Then again, it does have lower compression and fuel injection.

Hell, every engine is different. Different compression ratios, different displacements, different ECUs.

[Chet]

Was at $1.69 two days ago, went up to $1.75 in Milwaukee.

[number six]

Hell, every engine is different. Different compression ratios, different displacements, different ECUs.

And different combustion chamber shapes.

My Suzuki SV650 motorcycle has an 11:1 compression ratio and runs perfectly on 87 octane, as specified in the manual. It's carbureted - no knock sensor, no ECU. But a very efficient chamber.

-js

[tomd]

still $1.76 in Madison, WI

[Tom W]

By the way I'm surprised they upped the compression on the Civic Si, surprised that thing takes premium. It still has that sheepish torque figure. But I guess there's only so much you can do with a 4-cyl before adding a turbo.

Compression is 11:1 - it takes some work to get 197 HP out of 2 litres without a turbo or supercharger. The torque figure is rather typical of this size of engine. The Ford Focus has a 2 litre engine with similar torque (6 fewer lb-ft), but about 57 fewer horsepower (and about 1500 RPM lower redline).

The Si drives pretty typically at normal RPM's, but the engine really changes its character around 5800 RPM. It's like two different engines, and you really notice the kick in the pants when it hits the power curve. The gear spacing works very well - you hit redline (8000 RPM), shift, and you're back at the start of the power curve in 1st through 5th gear. 6th is pretty tall, but in this light car, it still pulls stronger than overdrive does on my V6 Escape.

Can you tell that I'm pretty proud of my Si? :)

[Tom W]

And different combustion chamber shapes.

My Suzuki SV650 motorcycle has an 11:1 compression ratio and runs perfectly on 87 octane, as specified in the manual. It's carbureted - no knock sensor, no ECU. But a very efficient chamber.

-js

Of course, you have to consider ignition timing as well. In general, the higher the octane, the more you can advance the timing, at least within a narrow band of a few degrees of crankshaft rotation. Back in the day, we toyed with such things because we were too poor to buy Holley carbs, Edelbrock manifolds and headers, and Crane camshafts. Ahhh, the good old days of vehicles that were easy to work on and easy to modify.

[Calzinger]

Compression is 11:1 - it takes some work to get 197 HP out of 2 litres without a turbo or supercharger. The torque figure is rather typical of this size of engine. The Ford Focus has a 2 litre engine with similar torque (6 fewer lb-ft), but about 57 fewer horsepower (and about 1500 RPM lower redline).

The Si drives pretty typically at normal RPM's, but the engine really changes its character around 5800 RPM. It's like two different engines, and you really notice the kick in the pants when it hits the power curve. The gear spacing works very well - you hit redline (8000 RPM), shift, and you're back at the start of the power curve in 1st through 5th gear. 6th is pretty tall, but in this light car, it still pulls stronger than overdrive does on my V6 Escape.

Can you tell that I'm pretty proud of my Si? :)
Haha, my car pushes in the completely opposite manner: high displacement, low revving, all torque no horsepower. It ain't too hard to pull its rated 300 lb-ft of torque out of its 5.0-liter V8, which kicks in at a nice, low 3000 RPM. Of course its power band runs at a much lower RPM, with its peak horsepower (220 RWHP, not brake, mind you) being achieved at 4400 RPM. I unfortunately have the 4-gear auto (3 + OD), sucks as all auto boxes do, always has to downshift whenever I want power.

Can you tell that I'm pretty proud of my Firebird? :D

It's like the Honda engineers just figured, "Hey, we need to make this faster. Let's just rev it higher!". I wonder what they could do if they followed MB's Kompressor route. I've never been a fan of natural aspiration. ;)

[Tom W]

Haha, my car pushes in the completely opposite manner: high displacement, low revving, all torque no horsepower. It ain't too hard to pull its rated 300 lb-ft of torque out of its 5.0-liter V8, which kicks in at a nice, low 3000 RPM. Of course its power band runs at a much lower RPM, with its peak horsepower (220 RWHP, not brake, mind you) being achieved at 4400 RPM. I unfortunately have the 4-gear auto (3 + OD), sucks as all auto boxes do, always has to downshift whenever I want power.

Can you tell that I'm pretty proud of my Firebird? :D

It's like the Honda engineers just figured, "Hey, we need to make this faster. Let's just rev it higher!". I wonder what they could do if they followed MB's Kompressor route. I've never been a fan of natural aspiration. ;)

Your Firebird sounds a lot like my 1990 Mustang 5.0 (which was really a 4.9 litre, 302 cubic inch engine)! :)

Great car, and you never needed to wind up that small-block V8 to get rolling. It redlined at 6000, but by 5500 (stock), it was time to shift anyway.

I remember being in 5th gear early one Sunday morning, lugging along at 60 MPH. The nearest vehicle I saw was about 2 miles up the road. I just kept it in 5th and put the hammer down. I climbed nicely to around 125 or so, but I had to let off and slow down because I was coming up on that car that had been way ahead of me pretty quickly.

BTW, this isn't a Revelation for the Honda engineers - they're known for their high-revving engines. It's their specialty. For a guy like me that's used to some low-end torque, it's a significant change. I sense that you're a torque fan as well. :)

[Calzinger]

Your Firebird sounds a lot like my 1990 Mustang 5.0 (which was really a 4.9 litre, 302 cubic inch engine)! :)

Great car, and you never needed to wind up that small-block V8 to get rolling. It redlined at 6000, but by 5500 (stock), it was time to shift anyway.

I remember being in 5th gear early one Sunday morning, lugging along at 60 MPH. The nearest vehicle I saw was about 2 miles up the road. I just kept it in 5th and put the hammer down. I climbed nicely to around 125 or so, but I had to let off and slow down because I was coming up on that car that had been way ahead of me pretty quickly.

BTW, this isn't a Revelation for the Honda engineers - they're known for their high-revving engines. It's their specialty. For a guy like me that's used to some low-end torque, it's a significant change. I sense that you're a torque fan as well. :)
My friend almost bought an '89 302 Mustang about a month ago, bailed on it cause the owner admitted that he had been running it low on coolant. He couldn't stop talking about how much it hauled ass. A 350 swap would've been sweet.

What happened to yours?

And yes, that mentality seems to drive through all Japanese automakers that higher revving, lower displacement engines are more efficient, contrary to the old American way of thinking that bigger is better. The smallest engine BMW sells in the states is their N52 3.0-liter I6, hardly small compared to the 1.5L in the Toyota Yaris. Then again, I've heard European automakers have an entirely different local market.

So yes, of course I'm a torque fan. :D
After all, what's better than no traction control, a few rain drops, and entirely too much torque? ;)

[Guapo]

So yes, of course I'm a torque fan. :D
After all, what's better than no traction control, a few rain drops, and entirely too much torque? ;)

Hearing the twin turbos spooling at full song as you lightly dance on the gas pedal to bring the back end around coming out of a double apex sweeper :D


http://www.guapozx.com/misc/x-13-Edit.jpg

[Tom W]

My friend almost bought an '89 302 Mustang about a month ago, bailed on it cause the owner admitted that he had been running it low on coolant. He couldn't stop talking about how much it hauled ass. A 350 swap would've been sweet.

What happened to yours?

Sold it. I lived in northern Ohio when I had it. Rust was starting to appear in a few spots (snow country - judicious use of road salt).

And yes, that mentality seems to drive through all Japanese automakers that higher revving, lower displacement engines are more efficient, contrary to the old American way of thinking that bigger is better. The smallest engine BMW sells in the states is their N52 3.0-liter I6, hardly small compared to the 1.5L in the Toyota Yaris. Then again, I've heard European automakers have an entirely different local market.

So yes, of course I'm a torque fan. :D
After all, what's better than no traction control, a few rain drops, and entirely too much torque? ;)

I'm a torque fan too, though I'm enjoying this diversion. Oh well, I really don't have that much torque in my Escape either. The Honda does have traction control, but I can turn it off with the press of a button on the dash. Oddly, turning off the traction control (called electronic stabilization control) causes an exclamation point ("!") to light up on the dashboard. I got the chance to test the traction control thing on some wet leaves a couple of weeks ago. With it off, it was easy to spin the front tires (limited slip), but when I turned it back on, the electronics drastically limited wheelspin. I could probably test it with brute acceleration, but I'm not inclined to burn up tires the way I did 18 years ago.

Did I mention that the first set of rear tires on that Mustang lasted less than 10,000 miles? :D

[Tom W]

Hearing the twin turbos spooling at full song as you lightly dance on the gas pedal to bring the back end around coming out of a double apex sweeper :D


That almost sounds sexy...

[Calzinger]

I'm a torque fan too, though I'm enjoying this diversion. Oh well, I really don't have that much torque in my Escape either. The Honda does have traction control, but I can turn it off with the press of a button on the dash. Oddly, turning off the traction control (called electronic stabilization control) causes an exclamation point ("!") to light up on the dashboard. I got the chance to test the traction control thing on some wet leaves a couple of weeks ago. With it off, it was easy to spin the front tires (limited slip), but when I turned it back on, the electronics drastically limited wheelspin. I could probably test it with brute acceleration, but I'm not inclined to burn up tires the way I did 18 years ago.

Did I mention that the first set of rear tires on that Mustang lasted less than 10,000 miles? :D
I'd leave the traction control on in your Civic. Is there much point to slipping with FWD? You'd just get more understeer I'd imagine.

It's positraction? Does it have a mechanical limited slip or just an electronic one driven by ABS?

My mom's BMW (535xi E60) does the same thing when she shuts off traction control (triangle with an '!' lights up on the dash). I haven't been able to do a standing burnout, which is surprising given the car's power. It's also not so surprising given its computer-controlled all-wheel drive system which adjusts torque between the front and rear wheels if you're cornering or accelerating linearly. It has BMW's N54 twin-turbo 3.0L I6, truly an amazing engine putting out 300 lb-ft from the huge range of 1500-5000 RPM and 300-bhp. Its hard to burn rubber in it because of all the electronics, even with TC and SC off.

While it's a beauty of a car to drive with more than enough power, it just isn't as fun because of the computer. You don't get that "**** in your pants" feeling, you feel safe. That's not to say that they aren't fun to drive. BMWs might be some of the funnest, comfortable, most confident cars you can drive. You really have to drive one. It's just a different kind of feeling.

What I really want right now is a 135i.

[Tom W]

I'd leave the traction control on in your Civic. Is there much point to slipping with FWD? You'd just get more understeer I'd imagine.

Acceleration out of the hole. This engine requres high RPM to produce its power. Getting 4-5K RPM at launch is said to be the best for best 1/4 mile times. Otherwise, the traction control is probably desirable. It defaults to "on" at startup.

It's positraction? Does it have a mechanical limited slip or just an electronic one driven by ABS?

Helical gear-based mechanical limited slip. Nice feature, especially on FWD. It's easy to life the inside front wheel under acceleration out of a corner.

My mom's BMW (535xi E60) does the same thing when she shuts off traction control (triangle with an '!' lights up on the dash). I haven't been able to do a standing burnout, which is surprising given the car's power. It's also not so surprising given its computer-controlled all-wheel drive system which adjusts torque between the front and rear wheels if you're cornering or accelerating linearly. It has BMW's N54 twin-turbo 3.0L I6, truly an amazing engine putting out 300 lb-ft from the huge range of 1500-5000 RPM and 300-bhp. Its hard to burn rubber in it because of all the electronics, even with TC and SC off.

While it's a beauty of a car to drive with more than enough power, it just isn't as fun because of the computer. You don't get that "**** in your pants" feeling, you feel safe. That's not to say that they aren't fun to drive. BMWs might be some of the funnest, comfortable, most confident cars you can drive. You really have to drive one. It's just a different kind of feeling.

What I really want right now is a 135i.

I want a 200mm f/2 IS L. :)

Realistically, I haven't explored the traction/stability control all that much. I do note that the limited slip works regardless, but the stability control also takes over throttle as far as I can tell. I just haven't experimented enough with it.

I'd love to have a shot at driving that Bimmer of your Mom's. It would be a thrill, no doubt. I haven't put but 2 or 3 miles total on BMW cars in my lifetime.

[BrokenRoad]

1.53 as of today where we always fill up. In town it's 1.65

[number six]

Fun thread. How about no torque and huge horsepower?

That's what the Japanese motorcycle manufacturers have with their obscenely fast 600 cc bikes. Something like 110 hp at 14,500 rpm. And that's the beginner, kid bikes. Top speeds around 165 mph, I guess.

Insanity, of course, but...

-js

[Jeremy92]

About 1.93 is the lowest around here. Average is 2.03.

[Calzinger]

Acceleration out of the hole. This engine requres high RPM to produce its power. Getting 4-5K RPM at launch is said to be the best for best 1/4 mile times. Otherwise, the traction control is probably desirable. It defaults to "on" at startup.
I must admit, I can hardly consider myself a real gearhead. The whole torque vs horsepower debate still has me confused, and yet, I still talk out of my ass about both. I love my physics. After all, I'm a mechanical engineer major. I understand that torque is a force, the force you can feel, the push back in the seat. I understand that horsepower can only be calculated, not felt. I know how its calculated, but what exactly does it represent? I've heard the whole "torque for acceleration, horsepower for top speed" argument, and it seems entirely indirect. Does it have to do with the fact that the torque to the wheels is limited by the gearbox while power is only dependent on engine speed?

Helical gear-based mechanical limited slip. Nice feature, especially on FWD. It's easy to life the inside front wheel under acceleration out of a corner.
That's definitely a nice feature. With the advancement of computers, a lot of automakers have been putting an electronic limited slip differential which uses the ABS system to brake a slipping wheel. BMW is featuring it in everything but there M line where they still put mechanical limited slip differentials.

Realistically, I haven't explored the traction/stability control all that much. I do note that the limited slip works regardless, but the stability control also takes over throttle as far as I can tell. I just haven't experimented enough with it.
My Firebird has an open differential which I have to love on a car like that. My friend has a Grand Marquis which is positraction and RWD. There's a button to disengage TC, but the car obviously doesn't do great burnouts or oversteer too much because of the differential. It just spins one tire. I wonder if you can adjust the point at which the diff locks.

I'd love to have a shot at driving that Bimmer of your Mom's. It would be a thrill, no doubt. I haven't put but 2 or 3 miles total on BMW cars in my lifetime.
Like I said, it's just very very different. The BMW 135i has been compared to the new WRX STI a lot given the price point and similar performance. To be honest, the comparison is purely academic. While they're both fast, the BMW doesn't feel like it's going fast. You could be going 80 mph and think you're entering your driveway. Contrarily the STI makes you wet yourself when you're on the ragged edge where the BMW just turns quietly. I've only driven a 2008 328xi and 2008 535xi, never driven a STI, but that seems to be the consensus among most forums. It's one thing I think a lot of car junkies overlook: the quality of ride. You buy a BMW because you love the way you drive it, not the way it drives you. It does exactly what you tell it to.

Can you tell that I love BMWs? :D
Jeez I must sound like a salesman... ;)

Fun thread. How about no torque and huge horsepower?

That's what the Japanese motorcycle manufacturers have with their obscenely fast 600 cc bikes. Something like 110 hp at 14,500 rpm. And that's the beginner, kid bikes. Top speeds around 165 mph, I guess.

Insanity, of course, but...
Kinda like an F1 car in relative terms? 2.4-liter V8s putting out maybe a modest 220 lb-ft but revving up to 19,000 RPM, developing nearly 800 hp. 0-100-0 mph in less than 7 seconds? Hell, I'm watchin'.

[Ronald S. Jr.]

Then either your knock sensor is shot or your car is really old, hence no knock sensor. Like I said, computers have become so efficient with ignition that pinging or detonation, likely the noises you describe, are virtually eliminated. Your claim that you're noticing a substantial difference could mean something is wrong with the car.

What year/model is it? I assume it's fuel injection?

My '87 Firebird has a modest 9.3:1 compression ratio and still demands premium grade. It has an early knock sensor and an ancient computer, and to be honest, even still I'd be hard pressed to say if I notice a significant difference between 87-oct and 93-oct. Then again, it does have lower compression and fuel injection.

Hell, every engine is different. Different compression ratios, different displacements, different ECUs.


My caddy is an '05. I wouldn't call that old.

[Calzinger]

My caddy is an '05. I wouldn't call that old.
Then there could be something wrong with it. I also asked what model it was. An Escalade and a CTS-V are obviously going to respond differently to different grades.

But either way, I doubt that would make the difference you describe. Like I've said plenty of times already, knock sensors detect pinging and retard the timing so that you DON'T get detonation. And it's not like these things are new dude, they've been around for a couple of decades.

Your knock sensor could be shot. Might be worth looking into, might not. You could just keep filling premium of course. Just bear in mind that your car shouldn't be sh!tting itself on regular grade. Electronics are pretty sweet.

[Tom W]

I must admit, I can hardly consider myself a real gearhead. The whole torque vs horsepower debate still has me confused, and yet, I still talk out of my ass about both. I love my physics. After all, I'm a mechanical engineer major. I understand that torque is a force, the force you can feel, the push back in the seat. I understand that horsepower can only be calculated, not felt. I know how its calculated, but what exactly does it represent? I've heard the whole "torque for acceleration, horsepower for top speed" argument, and it seems entirely indirect. Does it have to do with the fact that the torque to the wheels is limited by the gearbox while power is only dependent on engine speed?

Kinda like an F1 car in relative terms? 2.4-liter V8s putting out maybe a modest 220 lb-ft but revving up to 19,000 RPM, developing nearly 800 hp. 0-100-0 mph in less than 7 seconds? Hell, I'm watchin'.

Yes, the horsepower/torque/rpm is interesting. The general formula, not accounting for losses, is Horsepower = (torque * RPM) / 5252, so an engine that produces 138 lb-ft of torque at 7500 RPM has approximately 197 horsepower. Another engine that produces 138 lb-ft of torque at 15,000 RPM would have approximately 394 horsepower based on that formula. This is engine horsepower. Power "at the rear wheels" is a more complex subject that takes into account all the additional losses and gearing effects. I don't know how that can be calculated - it can be measured on a dyno, and guestimated based on engine output.

I guess another way of looking at it is from the basic view that power = work / time. And work = force * distance. And speed = distance / time. So power = (force * distance)/time. Since torque = force, and RPM = distance/time, power can be represented in terms of torque times RPM. The constant 5252 is there to define the unit horsepower. If we were measuring kilowatt, the constant would be different.


That's definitely a nice feature. With the advancement of computers, a lot of automakers have been putting an electronic limited slip differential which uses the ABS system to brake a slipping wheel. BMW is featuring it in everything but there M line where they still put mechanical limited slip differentials.


My Firebird has an open differential which I have to love on a car like that. My friend has a Grand Marquis which is positraction and RWD. There's a button to disengage TC, but the car obviously doesn't do great burnouts or oversteer too much because of the differential. It just spins one tire. I wonder if you can adjust the point at which the diff locks.

I really like having the limited slip. I wish my Escape had it as well (especially when I lived up in snow country). My Mustang had it, and I had a gnarly Auburn limited slip unit installed in my old Explorer for off-road use. It was very tight compared to most factory units. The GM Positraction is a little different animal than an ordinary limited slip.

The Honda does use the ABS along with throttle control to enhance stability when the stability control is turned on. I haven't explored its limits much yet.

[Calzinger]

Yes, the horsepower/torque/rpm is interesting. The general formula, not accounting for losses, is Horsepower = (torque * RPM) / 5252, so an engine that produces 138 lb-ft of torque at 7500 RPM has approximately 197 horsepower. Another engine that produces 138 lb-ft of torque at 15,000 RPM would have approximately 394 horsepower based on that formula. This is engine horsepower. Power "at the rear wheels" is a more complex subject that takes into account all the additional losses and gearing effects. I don't know how that can be calculated - it can be measured on a dyno, and guestimated based on engine output.

I guess another way of looking at it is from the basic view that power = work / time. And work = force * distance. And speed = distance / time. So power = (force * distance)/time. Since torque = force, and RPM = distance/time, power can be represented in terms of torque times RPM. The constant 5252 is there to define the unit horsepower. If we were measuring kilowatt, the constant would be different.
Naw, I understand all that math, I just have a trouble grasping how horsepower translates into more speed. Hear me out here.

As stated, torque is a force, something that can be measured and felt. It's the physical push. Power refers to how much work the engine is accomplishing over a period of time or distance (RPM). So in a way, the horsepower rating just defines how fast the car can go, not necessarily how quickly it will get there. That's where torque comes in.

The best example I can figure is between a big tow truck and a coupe. Let's say the truck put out a flat 500 lb-ft of torque but only redlined at 1400 RPM. It would reach that 1400 RPM in a heartbeat, though that only converts to 133 hp at the redline. I'd imagine that wouldn't translate to a very fast speed. Now let's say the coupe only developed a flat 135 lb-ft of torque but revved up to an astouding 11,000 RPM. It would develop 280 hp at the redline and could easily attain a higher ultimate speed than the truck since the engine can turn faster, hence the higher power rating.

I'm not entirely sure if that's all logical, so please correct me if you see something wrong. But based on that logic, a higher horsepower figure will yield you a higher top speed while a higher torque rating will get you to your top speed quicker. Power is directly related to RPM, and RPM is directly related to speed (excluding gear ratios). Higher RPM = higher speed = more power obviously.

Now where I get really lost is how gear ratios play into all this. I know transmission output torque is very significant when it comes to shift points. How that all plays into the equation, I have no idea.

I really like having the limited slip. I wish my Escape had it as well (especially when I lived up in snow country). My Mustang had it, and I had a gnarly Auburn limited slip unit installed in my old Explorer for off-road use. It was very tight compared to most factory units. The GM Positraction is a little different animal than an ordinary limited slip.
How does GM's Positraction differ from a standard limited slip?

I'd figure LSDs aren't too great if you like powersliding or doing burnouts. That's why I wonder if you can adjust the locking point on them.

[FlyingPhotog]

Thread Creep...

[Tom W]

Thread Creep...

Gas is so cheap that we're talking about something else!

I guess it's time to get back to topic. I saw $1.59 yesterday, and they're supposedly hovering around $1.55 to 1.65 according to gasbuddy.com .

[Tbirder]

here in New Zealand it's the lowets it's been for a couple of years, NZD$1.44 a litre which, with the exchange rate at 53cents US, makes it USD$2.92 a gallon - if my math is correct.

In July it was NZD$2.19 a litre

[Tom W]

...

Now where I get really lost is how gear ratios play into all this. I know transmission output torque is very significant when it comes to shift points. How that all plays into the equation, I have no idea.

It's the gearing - my Honda revs much higher than my Escape, and the gearing was chosen to match that fact. While my Escape turns around 2200 RPM at 70 MPH in overdrive, the Honda spins at a much higher RPM at the same speed in 6th gear. The advantage is that gearing multiplies torque. If you have 100 lb-ft of torque and a 2:1 reduction gear, the engine will turn twice for every turn of the wheels, and torque will be multiplied by the same ratio. Of course, you need to match gearing to the capabilities of the engine. Higher-RPM engines can take advantage of numerically higher gear ratios that multiply their torque output. Lower RPM engines require numerically lower gears so that they can stay within their operating range at normal driving speeds.

How does GM's Positraction differ from a standard limited slip?

I'd figure LSDs aren't too great if you like powersliding or doing burnouts. That's why I wonder if you can adjust the locking point on them.

I was mistaken about positraction. I had been thinking about a locking type of differential (popular with off-roaders). Positraction is GM's brand name for its limited slip differential. Most limited slips are simply clutch/spring devices that allow both wheels to turn independently as needed to turn, but with some friction. The friction forces the engine's torque to be split to some degree between the two wheels at either end of the axle.

PS - we'd better stop talking about all this gear, since we really are hijacking the thread a bit. :)

[Li_Photo]

$1.69 here on Base in San Diego! Hope it stays like this!

[[CaliGirl]]

$1.77 in Van Nuys, CA today

[Ronald S. Jr.]

Then there could be something wrong with it. I also asked what model it was. An Escalade and a CTS-V are obviously going to respond differently to different grades.

But either way, I doubt that would make the difference you describe. Like I've said plenty of times already, knock sensors detect pinging and retard the timing so that you DON'T get detonation. And it's not like these things are new dude, they've been around for a couple of decades.

Your knock sensor could be shot. Might be worth looking into, might not. You could just keep filling premium of course. Just bear in mind that your car shouldn't be sh!tting itself on regular grade. Electronics are pretty sweet.

Just your average run of the mill DTS.

[Karl Johnston]

1.13 for regular/litre

1.23 for premium/litre

[Calzinger]

Just your average run of the mill DTS.
Fix it.