Not sure why your responding to a 3 year old post but…. 93 on everything including the lawn mower.

 

Still as relevant as it was 3 years ago. In my opinion pick whatever grade makes you feel like you're winning. It'll be fine whatever you choose and the added smugness is bonus.

 

110. Makes the engine sound like an airplane.

 

I use 91, tried 93 but it would wheelie too much.

 

Chicken. Put some wheelie bars on and let it eat.

 

On a stock tune, there is ZERO reason to use higher octane, unless you literally don't like having money. The octane rating of a fuel does nothing to make more power. It simply makes the fuel less likely to self-ignite under pressure/heat in the engine. There have been MANY studies on this. If you are driving a 5.7 with a stock tune, you do not need anything higher than 89... period. In order to make more power, you would need to advance the timing further than the factory tune does. That might cause detonation (knock) and at that point, you could potentially benefit from higher octane fuel. But without an aftermarket tune, you are just wasting money with anything more than 89.

 

Yes I have heard it before, but my Audi is boosted/tuned and requires 93, Mustang GT is modified and tuned for 93, my LX 5.0 has 486HP+ and you get the drill... so new DD gets 93.

I stockpile fuel for generators (I live in Miami), so I cycle through stored fuel every few months. Again, another reason why the lawn mower gets 93.

Also, 93 is $3.99 where 87 is $3.26, the difference on a routine fill up (i.e., 20-gallons) is around $14.00 difference which I can live with... DD gets filled up once every two weeks, so that's less than $30.00 a month to have the best grade of gas available for all my internal combustion engines.

There is a method to my madness. LOL

 

There is a method to my madness. LOL

93 certainly won't hurt anything. Practicality and convenience are certainly worth a few cents per gallon.

 

I use 89 and maybe once or twice a year I use 93 for the added cleaning properties it has.
My wife's jeep is 87 with a couple of times a year 93 for the same reason.

I miss the days of 93 only in my SRT10 even at $4.50+/gallon back in 2008

 

I only use 87 in all my vehicles with no issues.

 

I run 89 in my 2022 RT, as recommended. I run a tank of 93 thru it every 3 or so months.
I also only use name brand, Shell, Exxon or similar. Where we live in SC fuel quality is questionable at best, so I do my best to use the same location and name brand fuel as much as possible.

 

I always put mid grade in ours. But I'm REALLY picky about brand. It's either BP, Shell, or Exxon/Mobil only.

 

I once ran a tank full of 130 octane. A cop pulled me over, concerned about the conical blue flames coming out of the tail pipes and the red underbody glow from the exhaust system being at 2500°F. I told him to get lost and I floored it. I accelerated so quick that despite the speed limiter activating at 118mph, I was able to hit 153 by coasting alone. I would have gotten away but my tires and pistons melted.

So now I just stick with 87 octane.

 

😂

 

I run the cheapest 87 I can find in everything I own. Currently that’s Costco as it’s $.25/gal cheaper. Only time I’ve ever had a bad tank of fuel in the 23yrs I’ve been driving was from a heavily used chevron and it was 93 octane in my scat pack. Internet has made too much of a fuss over stations and top tier and octane.

 

Here in Europe "Euro-Super" with 95 octane ROZ (90 octane ROZ/MOZ in USA) is the lowest available, "Normal" with 91 Octane (87 in USA) was stopped some years ago.

There is "Super E5" with max. 5% bio-ethanol added and "Super E10" with up to 10% bio-fuel.
I always take the more expensive E5 (E10 is politically subventioned), for political reasons and because in the classic car scene it's said, that too much bio-ethanol can destroy the carburator and the gaskets of the fuel system.
The HEMI can bear E10, it's said, but I dont trust that.

Some people say, that with "Super plus" (98 Octane Europe, 93 Octane USA) the HEMI shall run better, but this is more a opinion or feeling.

We have also "Ultimate" (ARAL) or "V-Power" (Shell) with 100 or 102 Octane (95 and 97 in USA) -20 €-Cent per liter more, actually over 2€ per liter-, but this you only need for some high-end engines - which the HEMI clearly is not.
Sometimes, when I'm countries with cheap fuel as Luxemburg, I grant my car such stuff as a special goodie, but at least it's a rip-off by the fuel companies.

At our USA-trip in 2008 we had a Dodge Grand Caravan with the "eco fuel" 3.8 liter engine - a terrible clunker, lame, loud and it "runs like a bag of walnuts", as we say in German.
We thought, the eco-ethanol-fuel was the reason for the terrible running, so we filled only Premium 93, but it didn't get better. We creeped with max.70 MPH along the Appalachians, more was not possible, even with full throttle 🙈
So the "eco-fuel" was not the reason - the 3.8 liter was sh*t.
Indeed, the 3.6 liter "Pentastar" Grand Caravan we had four years later on our Florida-trip was noticeable better.

I must admit, that after this experience I said "Never ever MOPAR junk in my household", but well, since August 2020 I'm a totally happy and satisfied HEMI owner 🫣

 

I will say that my RT doesn't run poorly on a full tank of 87, rather, it seems to be a tad more responsive and the vehicle can maintain/hold a higher gear a bit longer.

I doubt that this extra efficiency, if any, makes financial sense when mid-grade fuel is $0.15 a LITRE more than regular fuel. Throttle tip in feels a bit sharper which is nice.