Premium fuel or Regular? GT Coyote V8

[millhouse]

It’s a performance car. Get the performance you paid for. I rather have confidence that the engine is running at its optimum vs banking the checks and balances put into the ECU to run in a less optimum capacity hold true through the life of my ownership in the car. At least that’s my take.

Would you pay an extra $500 per year, every year for only 10hp? That's what it costs me with my mileage. After 10 years of ownership, I'd have enough money saved to buy a replacement engine

Everyone is different, but for many it's just not worth it.

Sponsored

 

[Hack]

It’s a performance car. Get the performance you paid for. I rather have confidence that the engine is running at its optimum vs banking the checks and balances put into the ECU to run in a less optimum capacity hold true through the life of my ownership in the car. At least that’s my take.

When I had my 2015 GT I literally could not tell the difference in the performance between 87 and even 93 octane. Seemed dumb to me to waste money on something unnoticeable, so I stopped buying anything other than 87.

That's the point - the engine actually runs optimally with 87. Putting a different fuel in the car is just wasting money.

 

[Zelek]

Would you pay an extra $500 per year, every year for only 10hp? That's what it costs me with my mileage. After 10 years of ownership, I'd have enough money saved to buy a replacement engine

Everyone is different, but for many it's just not worth it.

I'd pay $500 a year extra because my tune calls for 93 octane unlike the stock tune. That's where the biggest difference comes in.

Stock tuned, this argument is really just a "To each their own" kind of scenario. If you go to sleep better at night putting 93 octane in it, do it. If $500 a year is a huge deal to you, then use 87 octane. I find that to be a moot point when you look at the cost of a Mustang GT Premium along with insurance.

 

[Rocketman]

I'd pay $500 a year extra because my tune calls for 93 octane unlike the stock tune. That's where the biggest difference comes in.

Stock tuned, this argument is really just a "To each their own" kind of scenario. If you go to sleep better at night putting 93 octane in it, do it. If $500 a year is a huge deal to you, then use 87 octane. I find that to be a moot point when you look at the cost of a Mustang GT Premium along with insurance.

Let's not pretend that we're all driving around Aston Martins. $500 is a payment for many on this board.

 

[Hack]

If $500 a year is a huge deal to you,.

I can come up with a lot of things I'd rather spend $500 on.

 

[Zelek]

So $41 a month is a burden? Oh boy...

 

[millhouse]

So $41 a month is a burden? Oh boy...

Nope, no one is saying that. I can find a lot of things to buy for $500 that would have been thrown away.

 

[Zelek]

This whole thread should really just be left as "To each their own".

 

[millhouse]

I can come up with a lot of things I'd rather spend $500 on.

This guy gets it.

Now, if I only put 5000 miles per year on the mustang I may feel differently.

 

[Kevin08]

I only put premium in my lawn mower.

 

[Ebm]

.

When I had my 2015 GT I literally could not tell the difference in the performance between 87 and even 93 octane. Seemed dumb to me to waste money on something unnoticeable, so I stopped buying anything other than 87.

That's the point - the engine actually runs optimally with 87. Putting a different fuel in the car is just wasting money.

Poor choice of words?

Optimal means best or most favorable. It runs best on 93, end of story.

 

[bootlegger]

Poor choice of words?

Optimal means best or most favorable. It runs best on 93, end of story.

Yeah, optimal is 93octane. It will run acceptably on 87 would be a better way to say it.

 

[Hack]

Poor choice of words?

Optimal means best or most favorable. It runs best on 93, end of story.

Are you sure? 93 octane straight gasoline? Or some ethanol blend? Would it run better on a different blend? How about natural gas? It burns a lot cleaner than gasoline does.

Yes you are right that optimal was the wrong word. But 93 definitely isn't optimal either.

 

[WildHorse]

I dont get it. If a extra 500 a year is to much.. by a Honda.
Then again these are prolly the same peeps that buy $1200 corsa axlebacks for the sound.

 

[z31maniac]

Let's not pretend that we're all driving around Aston Martins. $500 is a payment for many on this board.

I spent on $500 on vinyl records this weekend just because I was board.

Folks need to stop living at the bleeding edge of their means.

Sponsored