View Single Post
Old 08-11-2013, 04:19 AM   #25 (permalink)
Exceptional Member
YukonCornelius's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 166

Crapolier - '98 Chevrolet Cavalier base
90 day: 34.81 mpg (US)

05 CTS-V - '05 cadillac cts-v
90 day: 33.01 mpg (US)

95 Accord - '95 Honda Accord
90 day: 38.06 mpg (US)

11 CTS-V - '11 Cadillac CTS-V
Thanks: 27
Thanked 15 Times in 14 Posts
Originally Posted by AbeisAverage View Post
So you think the car can't even handle a few tanks on regular and midgrade I don't believe that for a second. I am not saying they switch to lower grades for good, I just want to see how much the fuel effects economy.

If they didn't want to do that, I would totally understand.
Throwing mid grade in the mix now?

As far as 87, I don't think, I know. Subaru doesn't have any provision in the tune to handle low octane. Nor should they on a turbo charged engine. Forced induction, timing tables meant for high test, and low octane equals detonation, and possibly a blown motor. Detonation damages everything from the top of the piston on down, ending at the bearings. It would make sense to you if you had a better understanding of engine management and tuning. Take it from someone who does, or better yet do a search.

Some performance vehicles can run either 87 or 91/93 based on a versatile factory tune that will switch but those are reactive systems and not ideal. The OP could pay for a Cobb Accessport and find a Subaru shop that would try to do a custom 87 octane tune. It would cost him over $1000. He would void his warranty, lose power, drive-ability, and probably MPG.

The STi is designed to run on 91. Going to 89 probably wouldn't induce part throttle detonation, but I'm not sure. Light detonation would not be heard while driving so you might have a problem you aren't aware of. 89 would in my opinion cause some detonation under wide open throttle. With the minimal cost savings for the gas it would be better not to risk it if you ever plan to push the pedal down.

My CTS-V is naturally aspirated and it can't function with 87 in the tank. Even with the knock sensors pulling timing the amount of detonation at part throttle is scary. I have a separate custom tune for 87 but I have to load it onto the ecu before filling up because the car can't be driven without detonating. I don't use it though, the car is somewhat lethargic in comparison to the normal tune and the mpg loss negated the fuel cost savings.

Don't know why it says 00, it's a 95
374,000 miles and tired.

Last edited by YukonCornelius; 08-11-2013 at 04:55 AM..
  Reply With Quote