I can show records for multiple vehicles over the last 15 years or so
that show a consistent 10% drop in mileage for the 6 months or so we
are required to use the blended stuff here. That's a composite of
long highway miles and local puddle jumping. In the short term, the
same figures seem to hold true when I fill up with the blend in
Colorado to drive to Texas. I get a consistent 10% decrease no matter
which octane level I choose in my 88 4.0. Funy part is that going
south and east the prevailing winds are out of the NNW so I'm going
downhil with a tailwind on the way down while on the return I have a
headwind going uphill - and still get better mileage!

Corn likker is for drinking, not driving.

On Sat, 9 Jul 2005 14:53:16 UTC RoyJ <spamless@microsoft.net> wrote:

> In some states and/or some retailers will add the alcohol to the higher
> octance blends. I talked to a retailer, the alcohol blends have the same
> cost for higher octane. One local dicount place has 87, 89, and 91
> octane, 89 and 91 are the same price.
>
> Downside is that you get appreciably lower mileage. I just did a cross
> country trip, I get almost 2 miles per gallon better (about 7%) on
> straight gas over the locally mandated 10 alcohol.
>
> Tomes wrote:
> > Here in the states (NJ anyway) we get the averaged 87 for reg, 89 middle
> > grade and 92 or 93 (depending on brand) for premium or super [2 words for
> > the same level]. Would I see better mileage in my 2002 TJ with a 4.0 or is
> > it just an older Jeep thing?
> > Tomes
> >
> > "Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> > news:42CEED8B.B4C4BB65@sympatico.ca...
> >
> >>They are. Ours are some kind of average where 91 or 92 is high test, 89
> >>regular.
> >>
> >>For me the performance boost is large and the cost per mile is a bit
> >>better depending on how I am driving it. It costs 10% more almost and I
> >>see more than a 20% mileage boost so....
> >>
> >>Alcohol mixes are bad news for my engine and the government is mandating
> >>it. My owners manual even says not to any kind of alcohol mix except in
> >>an emergency as performance may degrade.
> >>
> >>Mike
> >>
> >>Dave Milne wrote:
> >>
> >>>I think your formulation and ours are different - we get 92 ron
> >
> > "Premium"
> >
> >>>and 98 ron "Super". I found that the 98 ron Super gave better mileage
> >
> > but
> >
> >>>worked out at the same cost per mile.
> >>>
> >>>Dave Milne, Scotland
> >>>'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
> >>>
> >>>"Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> >>>news:42CEE4A7.8E996578@sympatico.ca...
> >>>
> >>>>I always burn the high octane, it makes almost 100 miles per tank
> >
> > better
> >
> >>>>mileage with it.
> >>>>
> >>>>It has to be the additive or maybe the alcohol. My engine runs the
> >
> > same
> >
> >>>>shitty on petro canada gas with their super cleaner.
> >>>>
> >>>>Someone mentioned I might be running lean, so last carb kit, I went
> >>>>slightly richer on the high speed metering rods and tried the Shell
> >>>>gas. All that got me was a bog if I tromp it too fast.... At least I
> >>>>can get at that from the top to set it back.
> >>>>
> >>>>Mike
> >>>>
> >>>>"L.W.(ßill) ------ III" wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>Hi Mike,
> >>>>> Might put a pressure gauge on your fuel line and see what it is
> >
> > at
> >
> >>>>>full speed. I'm betting zero as it may now not be able to keep with
> >
> > the
> >
> >>>>>more gasoline your engine can burn with higher octane.
> >>>>> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> >>>>>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Mike Romain wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>I just tried a tank of that Shell 91 octane super crap on a trip
> >
> > and
> >
> >>>my
> >>>
> >>>>>>engine went insane!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>I don't know what is in it, but my manually set up 258 would 'not'
> >
> > run
> >
> >>>>>>over 65 mph except on a down hill, I even had to gear down on a
> >
> > couple
> >
> >>>>>>long uphill runs, which is unheard of for my rig, even 3rd gear
> >>>
> >>>wouldn't
> >>>
> >>>>>>pass 65 mph! (normally 3rd pulls fast up to at least 75 mph)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>I also lost about 30% for gas mileage. It made for a long trip
> >
> > home
> >
> >>>>>>too.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>I finally got it low enough and put in Esso gas and magically my
> >>>
> >>>engine
> >>>
> >>>>>>came back alive with it's normal tire chirp off a fast start and
> >
> > top
> >
> >>>end
> >>>
> >>>>>>power restored.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Mike
> >>>>>>86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> >>>>>>88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
> >
> >
> >


--
Will Honea

 

I can show records for multiple vehicles over the last 15 years or so
that show a consistent 10% drop in mileage for the 6 months or so we
are required to use the blended stuff here. That's a composite of
long highway miles and local puddle jumping. In the short term, the
same figures seem to hold true when I fill up with the blend in
Colorado to drive to Texas. I get a consistent 10% decrease no matter
which octane level I choose in my 88 4.0. Funy part is that going
south and east the prevailing winds are out of the NNW so I'm going
downhil with a tailwind on the way down while on the return I have a
headwind going uphill - and still get better mileage!

Corn likker is for drinking, not driving.

On Sat, 9 Jul 2005 14:53:16 UTC RoyJ <spamless@microsoft.net> wrote:

> In some states and/or some retailers will add the alcohol to the higher
> octance blends. I talked to a retailer, the alcohol blends have the same
> cost for higher octane. One local dicount place has 87, 89, and 91
> octane, 89 and 91 are the same price.
>
> Downside is that you get appreciably lower mileage. I just did a cross
> country trip, I get almost 2 miles per gallon better (about 7%) on
> straight gas over the locally mandated 10 alcohol.
>
> Tomes wrote:
> > Here in the states (NJ anyway) we get the averaged 87 for reg, 89 middle
> > grade and 92 or 93 (depending on brand) for premium or super [2 words for
> > the same level]. Would I see better mileage in my 2002 TJ with a 4.0 or is
> > it just an older Jeep thing?
> > Tomes
> >
> > "Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> > news:42CEED8B.B4C4BB65@sympatico.ca...
> >
> >>They are. Ours are some kind of average where 91 or 92 is high test, 89
> >>regular.
> >>
> >>For me the performance boost is large and the cost per mile is a bit
> >>better depending on how I am driving it. It costs 10% more almost and I
> >>see more than a 20% mileage boost so....
> >>
> >>Alcohol mixes are bad news for my engine and the government is mandating
> >>it. My owners manual even says not to any kind of alcohol mix except in
> >>an emergency as performance may degrade.
> >>
> >>Mike
> >>
> >>Dave Milne wrote:
> >>
> >>>I think your formulation and ours are different - we get 92 ron
> >
> > "Premium"
> >
> >>>and 98 ron "Super". I found that the 98 ron Super gave better mileage
> >
> > but
> >
> >>>worked out at the same cost per mile.
> >>>
> >>>Dave Milne, Scotland
> >>>'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
> >>>
> >>>"Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> >>>news:42CEE4A7.8E996578@sympatico.ca...
> >>>
> >>>>I always burn the high octane, it makes almost 100 miles per tank
> >
> > better
> >
> >>>>mileage with it.
> >>>>
> >>>>It has to be the additive or maybe the alcohol. My engine runs the
> >
> > same
> >
> >>>>shitty on petro canada gas with their super cleaner.
> >>>>
> >>>>Someone mentioned I might be running lean, so last carb kit, I went
> >>>>slightly richer on the high speed metering rods and tried the Shell
> >>>>gas. All that got me was a bog if I tromp it too fast.... At least I
> >>>>can get at that from the top to set it back.
> >>>>
> >>>>Mike
> >>>>
> >>>>"L.W.(ßill) ------ III" wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>Hi Mike,
> >>>>> Might put a pressure gauge on your fuel line and see what it is
> >
> > at
> >
> >>>>>full speed. I'm betting zero as it may now not be able to keep with
> >
> > the
> >
> >>>>>more gasoline your engine can burn with higher octane.
> >>>>> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> >>>>>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Mike Romain wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>I just tried a tank of that Shell 91 octane super crap on a trip
> >
> > and
> >
> >>>my
> >>>
> >>>>>>engine went insane!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>I don't know what is in it, but my manually set up 258 would 'not'
> >
> > run
> >
> >>>>>>over 65 mph except on a down hill, I even had to gear down on a
> >
> > couple
> >
> >>>>>>long uphill runs, which is unheard of for my rig, even 3rd gear
> >>>
> >>>wouldn't
> >>>
> >>>>>>pass 65 mph! (normally 3rd pulls fast up to at least 75 mph)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>I also lost about 30% for gas mileage. It made for a long trip
> >
> > home
> >
> >>>>>>too.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>I finally got it low enough and put in Esso gas and magically my
> >>>
> >>>engine
> >>>
> >>>>>>came back alive with it's normal tire chirp off a fast start and
> >
> > top
> >
> >>>end
> >>>
> >>>>>>power restored.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Mike
> >>>>>>86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> >>>>>>88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
> >
> >
> >


--
Will Honea

 

I can show records for multiple vehicles over the last 15 years or so
that show a consistent 10% drop in mileage for the 6 months or so we
are required to use the blended stuff here. That's a composite of
long highway miles and local puddle jumping. In the short term, the
same figures seem to hold true when I fill up with the blend in
Colorado to drive to Texas. I get a consistent 10% decrease no matter
which octane level I choose in my 88 4.0. Funy part is that going
south and east the prevailing winds are out of the NNW so I'm going
downhil with a tailwind on the way down while on the return I have a
headwind going uphill - and still get better mileage!

Corn likker is for drinking, not driving.

On Sat, 9 Jul 2005 14:53:16 UTC RoyJ <spamless@microsoft.net> wrote:

> In some states and/or some retailers will add the alcohol to the higher
> octance blends. I talked to a retailer, the alcohol blends have the same
> cost for higher octane. One local dicount place has 87, 89, and 91
> octane, 89 and 91 are the same price.
>
> Downside is that you get appreciably lower mileage. I just did a cross
> country trip, I get almost 2 miles per gallon better (about 7%) on
> straight gas over the locally mandated 10 alcohol.
>
> Tomes wrote:
> > Here in the states (NJ anyway) we get the averaged 87 for reg, 89 middle
> > grade and 92 or 93 (depending on brand) for premium or super [2 words for
> > the same level]. Would I see better mileage in my 2002 TJ with a 4.0 or is
> > it just an older Jeep thing?
> > Tomes
> >
> > "Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> > news:42CEED8B.B4C4BB65@sympatico.ca...
> >
> >>They are. Ours are some kind of average where 91 or 92 is high test, 89
> >>regular.
> >>
> >>For me the performance boost is large and the cost per mile is a bit
> >>better depending on how I am driving it. It costs 10% more almost and I
> >>see more than a 20% mileage boost so....
> >>
> >>Alcohol mixes are bad news for my engine and the government is mandating
> >>it. My owners manual even says not to any kind of alcohol mix except in
> >>an emergency as performance may degrade.
> >>
> >>Mike
> >>
> >>Dave Milne wrote:
> >>
> >>>I think your formulation and ours are different - we get 92 ron
> >
> > "Premium"
> >
> >>>and 98 ron "Super". I found that the 98 ron Super gave better mileage
> >
> > but
> >
> >>>worked out at the same cost per mile.
> >>>
> >>>Dave Milne, Scotland
> >>>'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
> >>>
> >>>"Mike Romain" <romainm@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> >>>news:42CEE4A7.8E996578@sympatico.ca...
> >>>
> >>>>I always burn the high octane, it makes almost 100 miles per tank
> >
> > better
> >
> >>>>mileage with it.
> >>>>
> >>>>It has to be the additive or maybe the alcohol. My engine runs the
> >
> > same
> >
> >>>>shitty on petro canada gas with their super cleaner.
> >>>>
> >>>>Someone mentioned I might be running lean, so last carb kit, I went
> >>>>slightly richer on the high speed metering rods and tried the Shell
> >>>>gas. All that got me was a bog if I tromp it too fast.... At least I
> >>>>can get at that from the top to set it back.
> >>>>
> >>>>Mike
> >>>>
> >>>>"L.W.(ßill) ------ III" wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>Hi Mike,
> >>>>> Might put a pressure gauge on your fuel line and see what it is
> >
> > at
> >
> >>>>>full speed. I'm betting zero as it may now not be able to keep with
> >
> > the
> >
> >>>>>more gasoline your engine can burn with higher octane.
> >>>>> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> >>>>>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Mike Romain wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>I just tried a tank of that Shell 91 octane super crap on a trip
> >
> > and
> >
> >>>my
> >>>
> >>>>>>engine went insane!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>I don't know what is in it, but my manually set up 258 would 'not'
> >
> > run
> >
> >>>>>>over 65 mph except on a down hill, I even had to gear down on a
> >
> > couple
> >
> >>>>>>long uphill runs, which is unheard of for my rig, even 3rd gear
> >>>
> >>>wouldn't
> >>>
> >>>>>>pass 65 mph! (normally 3rd pulls fast up to at least 75 mph)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>I also lost about 30% for gas mileage. It made for a long trip
> >
> > home
> >
> >>>>>>too.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>I finally got it low enough and put in Esso gas and magically my
> >>>
> >>>engine
> >>>
> >>>>>>came back alive with it's normal tire chirp off a fast start and
> >
> > top
> >
> >>>end
> >>>
> >>>>>>power restored.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Mike
> >>>>>>86/00 CJ7 Laredo, 33x9.5 BFG Muds, 'glass nose to tail in '00
> >>>>>>88 Cherokee 235 BFG AT's
> >
> >
> >


--
Will Honea

 

I'll drink to that!
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Will Honea wrote:
>
> I can show records for multiple vehicles over the last 15 years or so
> that show a consistent 10% drop in mileage for the 6 months or so we
> are required to use the blended stuff here. That's a composite of
> long highway miles and local puddle jumping. In the short term, the
> same figures seem to hold true when I fill up with the blend in
> Colorado to drive to Texas. I get a consistent 10% decrease no matter
> which octane level I choose in my 88 4.0. Funy part is that going
> south and east the prevailing winds are out of the NNW so I'm going
> downhil with a tailwind on the way down while on the return I have a
> headwind going uphill - and still get better mileage!
>
> Corn likker is for drinking, not driving.
> --
> Will Honea

 

I'll drink to that!
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Will Honea wrote:
>
> I can show records for multiple vehicles over the last 15 years or so
> that show a consistent 10% drop in mileage for the 6 months or so we
> are required to use the blended stuff here. That's a composite of
> long highway miles and local puddle jumping. In the short term, the
> same figures seem to hold true when I fill up with the blend in
> Colorado to drive to Texas. I get a consistent 10% decrease no matter
> which octane level I choose in my 88 4.0. Funy part is that going
> south and east the prevailing winds are out of the NNW so I'm going
> downhil with a tailwind on the way down while on the return I have a
> headwind going uphill - and still get better mileage!
>
> Corn likker is for drinking, not driving.
> --
> Will Honea

 

I'll drink to that!
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Will Honea wrote:
>
> I can show records for multiple vehicles over the last 15 years or so
> that show a consistent 10% drop in mileage for the 6 months or so we
> are required to use the blended stuff here. That's a composite of
> long highway miles and local puddle jumping. In the short term, the
> same figures seem to hold true when I fill up with the blend in
> Colorado to drive to Texas. I get a consistent 10% decrease no matter
> which octane level I choose in my 88 4.0. Funy part is that going
> south and east the prevailing winds are out of the NNW so I'm going
> downhil with a tailwind on the way down while on the return I have a
> headwind going uphill - and still get better mileage!
>
> Corn likker is for drinking, not driving.
> --
> Will Honea

 

I'll drink to that!
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Will Honea wrote:
>
> I can show records for multiple vehicles over the last 15 years or so
> that show a consistent 10% drop in mileage for the 6 months or so we
> are required to use the blended stuff here. That's a composite of
> long highway miles and local puddle jumping. In the short term, the
> same figures seem to hold true when I fill up with the blend in
> Colorado to drive to Texas. I get a consistent 10% decrease no matter
> which octane level I choose in my 88 4.0. Funy part is that going
> south and east the prevailing winds are out of the NNW so I'm going
> downhil with a tailwind on the way down while on the return I have a
> headwind going uphill - and still get better mileage!
>
> Corn likker is for drinking, not driving.
> --
> Will Honea

 

On 2005-07-09 42CE8018.22BE94DD@sympatico.ca said:
>Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.jeep+******,rec.autos.tech
>Mike Romain proclaimed:
[snip]

>Since Bush Gas, I haven't been able to run Texaco, Chevron, or Shell
>regular in a 95 4.0 without mild ping. Recently the local Valero
>station ran out of midgrade, and it seems that their regular will
>actually run without ping.
I recently noticed the nearby (40 miles away) Diamond Shamrock (soon
to be called Valero) pumps have sprouted gasohol stickers. Small-town
station, no known additive strictures. Seems to run OK, unlike
Albuquerque wintertime-mandated gasohol, which noticably slows my
Honda Civic.

Comment?


Tom Willmon
near Mountainair, (mid) New Mexico, USA

Net-Tamer V 1.12.0 - Registered

 

On 2005-07-09 42CE8018.22BE94DD@sympatico.ca said:
>Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.jeep+******,rec.autos.tech
>Mike Romain proclaimed:
[snip]

>Since Bush Gas, I haven't been able to run Texaco, Chevron, or Shell
>regular in a 95 4.0 without mild ping. Recently the local Valero
>station ran out of midgrade, and it seems that their regular will
>actually run without ping.
I recently noticed the nearby (40 miles away) Diamond Shamrock (soon
to be called Valero) pumps have sprouted gasohol stickers. Small-town
station, no known additive strictures. Seems to run OK, unlike
Albuquerque wintertime-mandated gasohol, which noticably slows my
Honda Civic.

Comment?


Tom Willmon
near Mountainair, (mid) New Mexico, USA

Net-Tamer V 1.12.0 - Registered

 

On 2005-07-09 42CE8018.22BE94DD@sympatico.ca said:
>Newsgroups: rec.autos.makers.jeep+******,rec.autos.tech
>Mike Romain proclaimed:
[snip]

>Since Bush Gas, I haven't been able to run Texaco, Chevron, or Shell
>regular in a 95 4.0 without mild ping. Recently the local Valero
>station ran out of midgrade, and it seems that their regular will
>actually run without ping.
I recently noticed the nearby (40 miles away) Diamond Shamrock (soon
to be called Valero) pumps have sprouted gasohol stickers. Small-town
station, no known additive strictures. Seems to run OK, unlike
Albuquerque wintertime-mandated gasohol, which noticably slows my
Honda Civic.

Comment?


Tom Willmon
near Mountainair, (mid) New Mexico, USA

Net-Tamer V 1.12.0 - Registered