Talk About Network

Google


Register and Login
Nick
Password
Register create new account Sign up is FREE and you can post replies, new topics, bookmark posts and more!
Recover lost password


Autos - Cars > Nissan - Maxima > Re: Terrible mi...
Latest [ Topics | Posts ] Archive Post A New Topic Post a Reply
<< Topic < Post Post 23 of 28 Topic 4441 of 4491
Post > Topic >>

Re: Terrible mileage 99 GLE

by George <not.real@[EMAIL PROTECTED] > May 2, 2008 at 10:56 PM

First of all, Maximas never got good fuel economy. My lifetime average 
with my 2000 Maxima with 100,000 miles is 21 MPG with a 5 speed. This is 
*right on* the revised estimates from:

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/findacar.htm

The old combined mileage rating was 24 MPG for the 5 speed. It is good 
to see the EPA got a clue and is posting more realistic ratings. The 
automatic transmission 2000 Maxima had a combined rating of 23 MPG but 
was recently revised down to 20 MPG under the new testing criteria. If 
you beat that in city or mixed driving just count yourself lucky.

That government website also lists the Maxima as using regular gas, but 
I know that the actual EPA tests are conducted using the manufacturer 
specified fuel (91, in this case) so the listing is just a typo and 
shouldn't be ammo in the 87 vs 91 debate. I noticed this mistake in 
several cars' listings anyway.

Which leads us to my word on 87 vs 91, for what it's worth:

From the 2000 Nissan Maxima shop manual:

page GI-8:
"PRECAUTIONS FOR FUEL
Use premium unleaded gasoline with an octane rating of at least 91 AKI 
(Anti-Knock Index) number (research octane number 96). If premium 
unleaded gasoline is not available, regular unleaded gasoline with an 
octane rating of at least 87 AKI (research octane number 91) can be 
used. However, for maximum vehicle performance, the use of premium 
unleaded gasoline is recommended."

page EC-141 lists Low Octane fuel as a possible "Poor Fuel" trouble 
diagnosis.

page EC-34:
"The knock sensor retard system is designed only for emergencies. The 
basic ignition timing is programmed within the anti-knocking zone, if 
recommended fuel is used under dry conditions. The retard system does 
not operate under normal driving conditions. If engine knocking occurs, 
the knock sensor monitors the condition. The signal is transmitted to 
the ECM. The ECM retards the ignition timing to eliminate the knocking 
condition."

It is clear from the foregoing that use of 87 octane is not meant to be 
done in the long term.

The manual...
says *use premium unleaded*
says use regular when premium is *not availiable*
*does not say* to use regular when I feel premium is too expensive
*does not say* to use regular when I can't feel a difference with the 
premium
says low octane is in the same category as *poor fuel*
says the knock sensor retard system is designed for *emergencies*
says the knock sensor retard system is not meant to operate *under 
normal driving conditions*

If you pump 87 octane gas expecting the knock system to continuously 
retard the timing for you just know it is not meant to be used that way.

Another thing, the phrase "Maximum vehicle performance" does not just 
mean acceleration either. It means durability and economy as well. You 
affect all of these negatively by putting 87 octane in the tank. Sure 
you can *feel* a loss of power and you can *measure* fuel economy, but 
how do you know what impact pumping 87 has on durability? Well if the 
car is slower and gets poorer mileage you can expect a negative effect 
on durability as well.

I also don't care what your local Nissan tech has to say. I have access 
to the same training materials and information as he does. His opinion 
is no better informed than mine. The engineers are the final word, not 
your local Nissan or garage tech. Argue with the Nissan engineers all 
you want, I'm not going to. If you pump regular gas *in the long term*, 
you are potentially damaging your car for the sake of a few bucks. Not 
catastrophically but why do it at all if you don't have to? Besides, the 
guys who built the engine don't think it's such a hot idea either.

There are a lot of folks here and on many internet forums who argue 
about the value of pumping 91 octane in the Maxima. I am not saying I'm 
an expert but neither are they! Unfortunately every piece of advice is 
just a guess because your situation contains many factors, some you 
don't even know about like gas *quality* and *formulation* (not octane). 
Driving habits, altitude, ambient temperature, condensation in the gas, 
and seasonal changes to the formulation (in NY they add 10% alcohol part 
of the year) will greatly vary the fuel's knock sensitivity and change 
tank to tank.

There was a news special on NBC in NY about gas station pump money 
errors where the re****ter discovered that drivers were getting premium 
gas out of a regular pump when the station ran out of regular. This was 
even tested by an expert they brought in because they were looking for 
the reverse situation. If that was your car you might be spreading the 
gospel of 87 octane not causing a knock without realizing you really had 
91 in there the whole time. This happens more than you think because 
stations do run out of one type of gas and substitute another because 
the wrong truck showed up to fill the station's underground tanks. Of 
course, the reverse is possible.

Furthermore, the knock sensor in the Max (and all modern cars) 
intervenes to retard the timing *before* the knocks become audible, 
making a detonation diagnosis by ear dicey at best. The malfunction 
light does not even illuminate when the knock sensor operates (page 
EC-392).

Know these facts:

* The Nissan Maxima owners manual and shop manual say to use 91 octane 
fuel. Nissan engineers and *not* marketers wrote this. Marketers would 
very much like to conceal this fact since it does not help sell a car.
* You may not hear any knocking when running 87/89 octane fuel but that 
doesn't mean the computer is not invisibly retarding the timing and 
reducing performance (power/economy/durability)
* Retarded timing is *not the most efficient timing* or it would run 
that way all the time. Retarded timing will reduce fuel economy as well 
as increase combustion chamber temperatures.

Do what you will with this. I decided that the price increase for 
premium gas isn't enough to avoid it. As the price of all gas rises the 
difference in price shrinks. At least it does near me. My advice is to 
run 91 octane and ease up on the lead foot if you need to save gas. It 
also saves on wear and tear.

-- 
Oil is always 15 years from running out, the oceans are always 10 years
away
from rising 10 feet, and the internet always has only 3 years left before
it
runs out of capacity. Color me skeptical.
 




 28 Posts in Topic:
Terrible mileage 99 GLE
aspasia   2008-03-11 01:41:21 
Re: Terrible mileage 99 GLE
codifus <codifus@[EMAI  2008-03-11 14:32:41 
Re: Terrible mileage 99 GLE
aspasia   2008-03-11 17:17:10 
Re: Terrible mileage 99 GLE
codifus <codifus@[EMAI  2008-03-12 07:06:14 
Re: Terrible mileage 99 GLE
codifus <codifus@[EMAI  2008-03-12 07:08:55 
Re: Terrible mileage 99 GLE
codifus <codifus@[EMAI  2008-03-12 07:58:02 
Re: Terrible mileage 99 GLE
skanesh@[EMAIL PROTECTED]  2008-05-07 17:54:05 
Re: Terrible mileage 99 GLE
codifus <codifus@[EMAI  2008-05-09 09:12:35 
Re: Terrible mileage 99 GLE
aspasia   2008-03-13 17:54:52 
Re: Terrible mileage 99 GLE
Codifus <codifus@[EMAI  2008-03-13 21:55:07 
Re: Terrible mileage 99 GLE
David Geesaman <dgeesa  2008-03-13 22:09:36 
Re: Terrible mileage 99 GLE
Ralph Hertle <ralph.he  2008-03-17 17:29:09 
Re: Terrible mileage 99 GLE
David Geesaman <dgeesa  2008-03-17 17:58:44 
Re: Terrible mileage 99 GLE
Codifus <codifus@[EMAI  2008-03-17 18:58:00 
Re: Terrible mileage 99 GLE
Ralph Hertle <ralph.he  2008-03-18 12:28:36 
Re: Terrible mileage 99 GLE
David Geesaman <dgeesa  2008-03-18 17:36:59 
Re: Terrible mileage 99 GLE
Codifus <codifus@[EMAI  2008-03-18 20:03:13 
Re: Terrible mileage 99 GLE
David Geesaman <dgeesa  2008-03-18 20:45:07 
Re: Terrible mileage 99 GLE
Ralph Hertle <ralph.he  2008-03-21 17:01:09 
Re: Terrible mileage 99 GLE
Codifus <codifus@[EMAI  2008-03-22 23:29:24 
Re: Terrible mileage 99 GLE
Ralph Hertle <ralph.he  2008-03-23 05:42:29 
Re: Terrible mileage 99 GLE
Ralph Hertle <ralph.he  2008-03-23 05:46:45 
Re: Terrible mileage 99 GLE
George <not.real@[EMAI  2008-05-02 22:56:12 
Re: Terrible mileage 99 GLE
aspasia   2008-05-08 19:57:05 
Re: Terrible mileage 99 GLE
aspasia   2008-05-08 15:49:24 
Re: Terrible mileage 99 GLE
codifus <codifus@[EMAI  2008-05-09 09:11:22 
Re: Terrible mileage 99 GLE
aspasia   2008-05-09 12:36:41 
Re: Terrible mileage 99 GLE
aspasia   2008-05-09 12:33:13 

Post A Reply:
  Go here to Signup

AddThis Feed Button


About - Advertising - Contact - Frequently Asked Questions - Privacy Policy - Terms of Use - Signup

Contact
tan13V112 Sun Jul 6 21:32:52 CDT 2008.