Is Higher Octane Fuel Better? Better MPGs? More HP? Let’s find out!
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 8 ก.ค. 2023
- Let’s compare 87, 91 (with and without ethanol), and 93 octane for fuel efficiency and horsepower. We’ll see if the higher octane fuel delivers better performance and is worth the extra cost.
I buy all of the products tested. So, thanks for supporting the channel!
➡ Thank you for supporting the channel through memberships:
/ @projectfarm
➡ Thank you very much for supporting the channel through Patreon: / projectfarm
➡ An easy way to find past videos along with products tested: bit.ly/2FCrBpk A big thanks to Jim for putting this together.
➡ Merch: project-farm.com
➡ Click here if you'd like to subscribe: / @projectfarm
➡ As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
➡ Products Tested In This Video (in no particular order):
Fuel Cans: amzn.to/3POj7xz
Ethanol Tester: amzn.to/44k5r1K
Videography Equipment:
Sony DSC-RX10 III Cyber-shot Digital Still Camera: amzn.to/2YdXvPw
Canon 70D Camera: amzn.to/31b5Gy0
Azden Microphone: amzn.to/34d3DLE
Go Pro Bundle: amzn.to/3Ca0ZVN
This video is only for entertainment purposes. If you rely on the information portrayed in this video, you assume the responsibility for the results. Project Farm LLC - แนวปฏิบัติและการใช้ชีวิต
![ตรงที่เดิม - ฝน พรสุดา [ต้นฉบับ :เบส ขวางหวัน]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/c5YnbGEztI8/mqdefault.jpg)
Only makes a difference if the engine can advance the ignition timing to make use of it.
Great point!
Yes, like in an engine where premium is recommended, but not required, the knock sensor will keep the timing advanced, giving it more power.
Exactly
To a point. Old school carb you just loosened distributor and advanced it by ear or with light. As dad always said, go till it pings and back it off a hair.
exactly ! a Koenigsegg Jesko runs at 1280 HP at 95 octane but reach 1600 HP on Ethanol
You are TH-cam's gold standard for fair product reporting and always have been..no bullcrap,no windbag opinions,just very concise facts.👍👍👍
And no bull shit sponsors
After buying some origin mainee jeans and having them fail in less than 2 weeks i'm not so sure any more...
And wickedly entertaining.
@@MohammedAli-mb6oz How high are your standards for free video content??
Hes good to listen too.
This man is a world treasure and must be protected at all costs!! Thank you PF for all your hard work and dedication!!👍👍
Thanks and you are welcome!
My buddy who ran a motorcycle performance shop had the same conclusions using a dynamometer. He also mirrored Todd's advice: Unless your application requires it, or has signs of pre-ignition/detonation, just use the 87 octane. Well done as usual Todd!
Thanks!
Yes. Most air cooled motorcycles require min 91.
I have a 04 cbr liquid cooled, that asks for 87- no issues at 11000rpm.
My 15 r9t, oil cooled will knock if you run 87 at idle. Same of most air cooled harleys.
Regular 87 fuel gives better mileage and power in both 2001 Pathfinder 3.5 and 2022 Kona turbo 1.6 DCT.
@@ya472 just got a armada, going to try 87 grade
Let’s be honest. For the second test Todd just wanted a good reason to drive his go kart
It was indeed a lot of fun! It was very interesting to compare how the fuels performed
@@ProjectFarm Well, why not have fun while doing some tests!?
Well ok. But play safe and be home by dinner.
🤣😂🤣 He’s an awesome dude!
@@rogermiller2159 Dad?
Octane is really about preventing Spark knock/ping and pre-igntion. These things are controlled by compression ratio, variable valve timing and ignition timing. With that being said, a great evaluation would be with a modern vehicle that truly benefits from using premium and or mid-grade. Also consider that many two cycle equipment have an 89 octane requirement. 87 is typically perfect for most cars and mowers. Not surprising that it worked well. Changing the ignition timing is a good upgrade from the previous test.
Exactly. Increased hp comes from more timing in the tune which is only supported by higher octane. The fuel itself does not inherently yield more hp.
Agreed. Modern vehicles with turbos will generally run the same with 87 or 93 octane in terms of mpg. However, driving in hot climates, a higher octane will help prevent knocking. If you have a lead foot, running a higher octane fuel will also yield more horsepower in a modern turbocharged engine. If towing, a higher octane fuel is usually more ideal.
In other modern engines that are not turbocharged, best advice is to follow the manufacturer's suggestion. For instance, my Lexus has a 3.5L V6, naturally aspirated, and it is factory-tuned to run on 87 octane. For most people, it would make best $$$-sense in this case to run the cheaper 87 octane for typical driving. Spending 20% more for a higher octane would generally be wasting money.
Regardless of a small engine or more complex modern automotive engine, the fuel suggestion written in the manual by the engineers will almost always be the correct fuel to use.
I'm surprised by this video, haven't seen such low octane fuel before. We have 95 and 98 as the regular ones here in Sweden.
@@christoferstromberg6605 the formula used to calculate the Octane number are different between US and Europe. 87 in US is about the same as 92 in Europe and 91 in US is about 95 in Europe. 93 in US is about 98 in Europe.
@@Fister_of_Muppets Towing has no effect on compression ratio, that is totally controlled by the difference between cylinder volume at TDC and BDC. Turbos will also have an effect on required octane rating as the pressure of the intake air is higher than atmospheric to begin with. If the engine is naturally aspirated the only thing that affects required octane rating is the compression ratio. Load has nothing to do with it. But elevation and temperature does.
When I was a young man,I used to use low octane fuel for my lawn and garden things,I always had a little trouble cranking things after winter.I switched to 93 octane,for my lawn and garden tools,never had another problem after winter storage.
Thanks for the feedback.
Nice
For gardening tools - only premium grade with the lowest ethanol content. Ethanol is not good for carbs and fuel lines.
I might try that. I usually use a little spritz of quick start for that situation.
Just remove the sparkplug, put a squirt of gas in the hole, replace the plug and it will start right up. I do this with all my lawn tools and snowblower at the beginning of each season. Never a problem starting after sitting during the offseason. Nearly always start on first try. Have never used premium gas in any of them, however, I do make sure I am using fresh gas or at least gas that has had Stabil added to it when it was fresh.
I agree with your findings with one notable exception.... In items like generators, pressure washers, etc that are small carbureted engines that are not ran often (or really any engine that is going to let fuel sit in it a long time), ethanol can be petty hard on those engines. Also some air cooled engines in some environments can run pretty hot, and then the higher octane can help prevent predetonation. I am a mechanic and I see what that does all the time. That said, things like my lawn tractor, regular passenger car, even my carbureted F150 truck gets regular 87 octane since they are used more often. A good rule of thumb beyond fuel stability would simply be keep in mind that octane is not a measurement of power or potential energy...its the resistance to knock. You mentioned turbos, but more or less any high compression engine should probably be using higher octane fuel.
Thanks for the feedback.
I have run 93 octane gas exclusively in every piece of equipment and automobiles I own. I believe there is a positive difference in performance over cheaper gas and octanes.
I used to own a performance shop and did a lot of ecm dyno tuning. Most cars have 2 tables for ignition timing. They are for low and hight octane. It works off of the knock sensors. It will normally start in the high octane table and if it experiences any knock. It moves to the low-octane table. So by putting in high octane. you end up with more timing for more power and fuel efficiency
Exactly, I have a 96 Vette tuned with JETS DST and even a GEN 2 is loaded down with layers of timing retard tables. 93 Octane allows me to increase timing substantial. Especially in WOT...
I agree with this. I had a Golf R that required 91 octane. If I put 87 octane in it, I got a slight reduction in power and worse gas mileage. If I put 93 octane in it, both were slightly better. It would detune itself to suit the quality of the gas.
Yeah can just share the same experience
Thanks for sharing.
Now days it’s pump gas and e85 maps. Octane anyway matters when trying to reach MBT and if a motor is knock limited.
I'd like to see a test on the various gutter guard products to see which ones really keep the gutters free of debris but do the best job of water drainage.
Thank you for the video idea!
Yes! That'd be interesting to see.
Yes please 🙏
I would too
Yes!
For those discussing winter storage of lawn and garden engines, always pull the spark plug and spray some fogging oil in the spark plug hole before reinserting a New and properly gapped correct spark plug. Add BOTH Stabil 360 & Star Tron Enzyme fuel additive into the gas tank and it will not matter if you use 87 or 91 octane, even if they both have 10% ethanol. Been doing this for years with perfect success 1st pull starts every time, even after sitting all winter (or spring, summer fall for the Snowblower).
i remember watching you back at 100k subscribers. me and my brother would always watch the vids. still here years later making straight forward informative content. much love
Thanks so much!
You're correct on turbocharged engines equipped with knock sensors. Premium fuel will make a very signficant difference on these engines which have been calibrated to run more spark advance and higher Manifold Absolute Pressures with leanest possible Fuel/Air ratios. When I was a Engine Development Engineer with a major OEM, we had to develop two calibrations for production - one for premium 93 and one for regular 87 (R+M)/2. We had a feature to protect the engine if the customer misfueled the vehicle and put regular in. The knock sensor output was monitored by the engine control system and all of the injector pulsewidth, spark advance and wastegate duty cycle maps would quickly revert to their predetermined values for the regular calibration. This was re-set after three discrete key cycles on/off. If the customer filled up with premium, the software algortihm would swtich to the premium calibration. The torque and horspower difference between the premium regular calibratins was huge when we did our power runs on the engine dynamomter and corrected to SAE J1349. Lastly, pure gasoline has more enthalpy than ethanol per unit volume. All things being equal, one should achieve better mileage on pure gasoline vs. gasoline+ethanol. Again, people should just read their owner's manual and follow the fuel recommendation there. Great video and thank you!
Thanks and you are welcome! Thanks for sharing.
My 2022 Subaru Impreza's owners manual recommends 87 octane. If I use that, it pings. If I use 91 octane, the pinging stops and the engine runs smoother and gets better mileage.
Anyone else noticed this?
@@rustirab3465something is wrong. 87 octane for 2022 car? Manufacturing recommendation error. Subaru brand!! It is expected 😂😂
@@rustirab3465ah my gen 3 coyote makes silly sounds as well but ford claims its "normal" and im not talking about just the typewriter tick. Its amazing how higher octane such as e-85 smoothes it out but i dont give a F. Its getting 87 in my truck lol. If it blows ford is buying a new engine!
@@rustirab3465most modern cars will not be happy with 87. Especially because most are using direct injection and turbos.
It’s likely your manual is wrong and someone just carried over a typo from previous generations.
Does the gas door also say 87?
Octane shouldn't make anything faster or more powerful unless the engine is designed to adjust timing or has an anti knock sensor. So it'll be interesting to see your results.
This was my thought ... what's the point of this video?
Octane isn't about performance or "benefits." It's about using what your engine is designed for.
Heck, many a car these days designed for 93 can handle 87 just fine as the the ECU will retune the car based on perceived octane (usually thanks to the knock sensor).
Yes and no. If you get lower than the fuel you need and try to go over a mountain the engine will knock and the ECU will switch to limp mode - second gear at 1200 rpm. So it can be "less powerful"
An anti-nock sensor will allow a wider range of octane that an engine will run on, not run efficiently on. An engine with 9-1 compression will run on 91 but use more fuel. Octane requirements are a function of the compression of the engine. The higher the compression the higher the octane.
I would say valve timing, not ignition. The compression ratio needs to be higher to get the most out of the higher octane fuel.
@@court2379 you can compensate for higher octane with only ignition timing. It is far more complex to compensate for lower octane. But yes octane is a requirement of compression. This test is pointless.
Your thoroughness and attention to detail is admirable! Thank you
Thanks and you are welcome!
I did similar testing 30 years ago with f150 that had carb and distributor ignition. Higher octane fuel allowed more timing before detonating. The increase in mpg due to more power at lower throttle made up for difference in fuel cost at that time. However, due to manually advancing the timing, I’d have to readjust it before running lower fuels again
so you tuned your engine for 93 manually with timing adjustments. makes sense.
Early fuels were so varied the T Model Ford had manually adjustable spark advance.
I know you put a ton of work into these videos, and we all appreciate it.
Yes, thank you
Thanks so much!
Here here!
Same Here. 🇺🇸
I would like to agree to this sentiment. I feel bad for not being able to contribute / subscribe financially. I certainly generally do after it's abundantly clear that someone puts YOUR level of dedication into things.
I will be browsing your Info though just to make sure I've gotten this answer wrong somehow.
Your findings pretty much support what I learned in my 1974 HS Auto class. Higher octane fuel in a lower compression (carbureted) engine is not worth the extra cost. Thank you for this test.
My pleasure!
No offence to PF but this was a rare "not very good test", where he didn't really demonstrate what higher RON is actually for or how to best utilise it.
@@masondegaulle5731 i feel your comment irrelevant to this video, no need to say its not a very good test, because it is! its demonstrating fuel difference in a standard small engine .. your idea is a good one for a totally new video though.
@@andrewwatson2543 " a standard small engine" is why this test is irrelevant, a low-enough compression engine will run on any home-made hooch, only a high compression engine would show the benefits of high octane fuel (or the drawbacks of using a low octane fuel with knock& detonation)
By definition, Octane is a measure of detonation resistance in a fuel.
@@andrewwatson2543 That's _not_ what the title of the video states though, and I can already see a LOT of misinterpretation of these flawed results.
I'm a big fan of PF and I've been watching him from before he started these comparison videos, and I have to say unfortunately this is the first test that does more harm than good in that it wasn't conducted properly even for the engines used, never mind that higher RON fuels were never intended for such low compression engines. It also ignores that higher RON fuels typically have better cleaning additives and a better filtration process.
At the very least he could have run a test to find the timing advance pinging point for each fuel, and demonstrate what's happening there.
I’ve had a lot of issues with gas cans. I would love it if you would do a video on the best gas cans. Some are too slow. Some break easy. Some are too complicated. Some are just weird.
th-cam.com/video/_qE5COhBfAk/w-d-xo.html
When I put more than 35 degrees Celsius and gasoline 91 the engine does not sound engine knock but instead if I put 87 and the temperature is more than 25 it sounds engine knock. I usually do the same kilometers with both gasolines. I have a Toyota camry hybrid 2016 Atkinson cycle.
Oh jeez. This reminded me of the time my elderly neighbor asked me to use his gas can to throw a gallon in his VW Beetle. Much like his Beetle, wildly over-engineered for no reason! To use it, you turned a dial to set the flow, flipped a safety switch of sorts on the neck, insert the nozzle, and then pull up on the nozzle guard to allow flow. It took me 15 minutes to figure out a dang gas can 😂
I use Eagle metal gas cans. They are metal and don't have the ridiculous safety nozzle.
Epa laws
I truly appreciate your efforts and details you put on those videos. Thanks 😊👍
Glad you like them!
👍 Thumbs Up to Cousin Eddie for taking a bug to the eye and still sticking around to advance the testing science!
😉
Great point!
Todd is so mean to his family.
Congrats to Cousin Eddie for taking a bug to the eye like a champ but I’m not sure if Todd needs to give him a raise (Even with inflation) . He Often falls down on the job. LOL
Again, another amazing video. Thank you I won’t spend more money for gas on a carbureted engine that Really benefit from high-octane gas unless it may end up sitting in the carburetor for a couple years then I might use non-ethanol, but still with stabilizer.
@@user-pk2fg8im4u lol
The effort that goes into these tests is nothing short of impressive.
This man's a national treasure
Thanks so much!
Always been a huge fan of your tests. Subbed!
Thanks for taking the time for this test .
Would love to see this test with 1 year old fuel and some with stabilizer.
Yes. I find that the 93 lasts a bit longer.
Thanks for the suggestion.
Taryl fixes all did a VERY in depth comparison with all fuel additives. I suggest watching that one
With stabilizer and without stabilizer pls @projectfarm
@@ProjectFarmIn Europe its only 95 and 98, was 5 years ago 92
A bar and chain oil comparison would be very helpful.
Yes !
Great suggestion! I'll do it! Cheap vs expensive to include the big brands!
@@ProjectFarmplus old engine oil!
@@ProjectFarmcompared to sae 30
@@ProjectFarm
Also try used motor oil and vegetable oil.
I used used motor oil once and it seemed to work fine, but it was just one tank full.
Thanks for another great video 👍👍👍👍
Another great video on a practical topic. Thank you (& the viewer who suggested it).
Thanks and you are welcome!
Great video as always. After switching over to running AMSoil engine oil I'll never look back. Would love to see a video on gear oil for both differential and manual transmissions!
Thanks! Thanks for the suggestion.
Always a good day when PF drops a new video!
You're the best! Thank you!!
Every Sunday at 13:00EDT
I always use non-eth gas in small engines. It's not about the power but more for the stability of the fuel. Also ethanol fuel is very prone to pulling in moisture from the air which just makes it go bad all the quicker and cause corrosion issues in tanks and carb bowls.
Thanks for sharing.
yes, plan on having to clean fuel system before using any equipment if fuel with ethanol stored in equipment for longer periods of time...
@@ProjectFarm I do this as well. Used to go to a municipal airport to get MOGAS, but last year I found a dedicated pump at SOME Murphys gas stations in the larger area. Mower and snow thrower always start after a half year idle; with a single, drawing of the starter cord..... no hard tugging or multiple tries. I winterize the mower by FILLING the tank. ( And summer eyes the snow thrower also with a full tank )
Very true! Put a quart of 87 octane in a mason jar un covered, and by the end of the day it will have a half inch of water on the bottom! At least it does here in Texas where I live it's very humid in the summer!
It's also worth putting it in vehicles that were built before about 2000 (I don't remember the exact year), because their fuel systems weren't designed for ethanol. It can, and has, caused major leaks and fires.
Quickly became one of my favorite TH-cam channels. Been on a tear catching up to all the videos. Very informative. Keep it up. You're helping all of us
Thanks, will do!
I love how controlled your tests are. However I wonder how running multiple 87E octane fills versus no ethanol will fair with carburetor buildup. Especially in the small engines like that Honda generator
Thanks! Thanks for the suggestion.
Project Farm is the gold standard for these kinds of videos. The thoroughness is amazing. No chit chat, no BS, just the facts. Keep up the great work.
Thank you very much!
Old TV Dragnet,
Just the facts Ma’am just the facts.
the fact that you are putting out at least a video a week is incredible. i can only imagine how hard you work to provide this to us. best channel for watching before sleep!! haha.
Thanks for watching!
True that 👍
The amount of work he must put in is unimaginable. I have no idea how he keeps track of so many concurrent tests at the same time, he has 12 month long procedures in among 24hr corrosion tests. His diary must be insane.
@@beardedchimp He's a natural born project manager!
Love the detailed walk through of methodology. I'm not qualified to judge - but I'm sure after years of feed back, you cover all the angles you have caught flack for before. I have confidence I can trust the results of the testing. Great info!
Thanks!
I would not expect to see any performance differences in terms Octane. The true test would be a long term study of the affects of ethanol on the rubber parts of the carb. and any rubber seals. As mentioned earlier Octane won't really affect much on this type of engine. as always excellent job!!
Thanks!
Engine knock?
Video idea: dry pour concrete vs traditional wet pour. I don’t think anything has done 28 day cylinder break test comparison. Would also be good to make samples and cut them down the middle to show the difference in how they cure. Thank you sir and keep up the good work!
Thanks, will do! Thanks for the suggestion.
I have always wondered how they differ. And what happens if the water doesn't penetrate to the middle of the concrete to get it wet? Does it get sealed out by the concrete that did get wet?
Wouldn't be a bad idea to test a few different brands and Sakrete vs mixing your own.
Dry pour is largely a gimmick. Will it work somewhat? Yes. Is it as strong as wet pour? No, not even close.
@@ProjectFarm If you do the concrete idea that would be awesome. The only thing I would like to see is how strong a concrete sample is with vibration, acrylic polymer (keeps concrete moist, expedites curing process) and use ponding (keeping concrete submerged in water) for the full 28 days. I'm just curious how strong concrete can get when the sample is left curing without any possibility of drying and honeycombing.
Another REAL advantage of no-ethanol fuel is for those of us not diligent enough to drain and clean carbs at the end of the season for mowers and snowblowers is that ethanol free fuel gums up less. Since switching to 91 ethanol free in my lawnmower for example I've never had carb problems while before with the same MTD lawnmower that I had to clean the carb every spring with 87 octane 10% ethanol fuel.
Thanks for sharing!
Great demonstration. I was using 89 octane, now using 87. Saves me money. Thanks!
You are welcome!
My favorite part is the upgraded flywheel key. And it is neat to see the results of the tests with different performance levels of the same motor. All in the name of science of course.
Thanks for the feedback.
I run the non-ethanol in my small lawn equipment to preserve the life of the carb and other parts that alcohol eats. Great work!
Same here. Some of my older equipment doesnt like ethanol. It doesnt run quite the same.
Same, my old lawn mower had to be rebuilt every year or two before I made the switch.
I can't find non ethanol at any gas stations so I'll just mix in seafoam with the gas, never have any carb issues.
@@timb7775…here in Texas, you can find non-ethanol at some Walmart ‘Murphy’s’ fuel stations… not all have it… in my town, only 2 of 5 Murphy’s have it.
And I ALWAYS buy this fuel for my small-engine machines…. Weed-eaters, trimmers, edgers, chainsaws, lawnmowers, small tractor. No fuel-tube rotting, less carb rusting…. Oh, and I ALWAYS run the carb dry when done for the day, either by emptying the tank, or shutting the fuel valve.
I remember using Ethanol back in 77/78 on my K5 Blazer and the Ethanol ate the silicone sealant that was used on my Edelbrock manifold. I found the pieces in my fuel filter. The truck would idle fine but once you started driving the silicone would be sucked into the fuel filter. After that I added another clear in line filter.
This guy is the best and I always appreciate the work he puts into his tests.
Thanks and you are welcome!
he talks too much ,I'm still confuse as to which is better to buy for the car .
@@drive-2786 In short: if your car runs on 87 E10 without asking for a higher grade, use that. If your car requires either 89 or 93, use either one. But if your car *can* run on on 87 but is _specifically designed_ to have more power with 93 (not all cars have this,) then you can choose any grade from 87 to 93.
*But* if you're storing the car for at least a month, or are using lawn equipment or other small engines, use Ethanol Free Fuel. Ethanol Free Fuel lasts longer, won't attract moisture, and won't leave sludge deposits in small engines.
@@101Volts ,thank you its a 2009 dodge caravan .3.3L
Me too!!!
That's a pretty amazing video and test lots of detail appreciate your hard work..
Thanks so much!
Your time and effort are appreciated on all the videos. How about a video on stored gas in say one gallon containers? Something like 2,4, and 6 months. I have always heard that gas loses octane the longer it’s in the container. Kudos and please keep up the great work!
Thanks, will do! Thanks for the suggestion.
That's exactly what I'm wondering. How does the shelf life compare? With and without a sealed can.
It would've been interesting to see how much you could advance the timing before you got knock on each of the fuels. Higher octane fuels are generally more suited for high output applications, so would've been cool to see that more
Thanks for the constructive feedback.
“Cousin Eddie wanted to be in the action”… 😂😂 Todd, you never fail to make the info entertaining! Can’t thank you enough for all you do for us!
Thanks and you are welcome!
@@ProjectFarm Did you tell him he was bug-eyed? 😆
Was Cousin Eddie wearing a kilt? What pronouns does he use?
The quality, design and thought behind these tests are absolutely insane!
Who would have thought of the residual fuel? Well, Todd, of course!
Thanks!
Love this guy's videos, takes a lot of time to perform these tests and I really appreciate it!!
Thank you!
Usually octane rating doesn't matter on low compression engines. On higher compression engines, the higher octane can make the engine run more efficient and more powerful. Car manufacturers are almost at the point where they need higher octane on these engines in order to reach the cafe fuel requirements set by the government. Great video!
Yep higher octane is needed to resist detonation in higher compression engines.
Thanks!
Most modern engines have knock sensors that will back off the timing if detonation is detected. This allows running them safely on low octane fuel without risk of engine damage but you do lose some performance. An engine not designed to take advantage of higher octane will not really benefit from it though.
Exactly.
It's interesting, the vast majority of turbocharged engines I believe take 91+ but my new 2.7L Canyon runs on 87 as specd by the engineers.
This guy test things I have always wondered about myself. And then you see his videos and are like " why the hell hasn't anyone tested this stuff or done a review " I love the content and applaud you for your dedication and consistency. These videos are not only entertaining but also educational. Keep it up and I will be subscribing. 👍
In terms of octane rating testing, IIRC 10 years ago some car TV series (could be Top Gear) from the UK made exactly this type of video. Even ran a car on dyno.
Thanks, will do! Thanks for watching and subscribing!
Agreed for a lot of stuff! But in this case, I think it hasn't been explicitly tested/reviewed, because this is pretty well-understood science, as far as experts go, and _very_ misunderstood by the general public. Once you have a real understanding of what the word 'octane' in this context actually means, what octane levels change about the behavior of fuel, and what engines need what octanes and why, this kind of goes from a test like "Which ratchet brand is best?" to "What flavor of soup is best?" Answer: "The flavor your engine asks for." because there is no 'best' in that case.
I agree. Most video comparisons only show charts of HP and Torque. I want to see the difference in actual real life situations. "PF" did it best!
They are hands down the best and most trustworthy reviews I have found, better even than Consumer Reports, and usually pretty entertaining. I've watched lots of these videos for products I don't even have any interest in purchasing.
The octane rating of fuel is a compression timing. Its at what pressure the fuel will partially pre-ignite. Using premium in your corolla can cause damage. Only use regular gas unless your car says otherwise. As its only for ignition timing. Those 2004 Pontiac Grand Prix's required Premium.
- Detroit.
Another great video. Thank you! I don’t recall if you’ve done this already, but it would be interesting to test different size impact sockets on stuck bolts. My recollection is that an impact socket with a greater mass should be more effective with the same drive tool than an impact socket with less mass. Like many others, my interest is in buying the best tool at the lowest price with a preference for tools made in America. Thanks again!
I appreciate the heck out of the thorough way in which you evaluate products. I think it's very scientific, in that the experiments are consistent in methodology and repeatable. Plus I like the fact that you don't just give us conclusions, you "show us your work."
Thanks!
Said exactly what I was think. Man this guy is thorough!
I remember when this channel was ten times smaller in terms of subscribers. We love your hard work and your recognition is well deserved. Well done!
Thanks and you are welcome!
I am very thankful for all the work he has done on project farm. It has helped in some buying decisions.
He’s very thorough
Outstanding yet again! Had this question just today while driving my Chevy pickup truck. 87 octane was suspected to be on par now this proves it. Thank you.
Thanks and you are welcome!
Long time follower. Great work. I trust your work. I don't say that often. I have a test. I have used Extreme Fuel Treatment (also called Fuel Factor X) for over a year tracking my fuel economy. It makes numerous claims, I only tracked my fuel efficiency but would be interested in the other claims. I tracked my fuel mileage for a year to account for seasonal changes (Vermont) and to establish a baseline. I then used XTF for a year. Then stopped using it for a year to confirm results. Without sharing my results, I would be curious of your results.
Thanks! Thanks for the suggestion.
I was recently looking at baseball bats for my son. Seeing the huge variance in price it made me think of this channel. That would be a fun comparison to see what a high end bat actually does different than a cheap bat.
there's a bat bros channel where they went through all that for cheap to expensive bats.
What he said^
@@jasons7070 Oh. Well I'm OK with some independent lab results. A channel called "bat bros" was probably paid off.
@@jasons7070 Oh. Well I'm OK with some independent lab results. A channel called "bat bros" was probably paid off.
Are we talking metal bats. Yeah they make a difference. But you have to size it. Man I wish I still had my $200 metal bat from the 1990s. It might have been Eaton. It would only hit homeruns. I had one bat that I used for control to hit exactly where I wanted (like a golf club). Back in the 1990s we used to play golf to get our swing down. Don't go crazy on bats until about 15 and older. Some of the prices are based on the metal type and core (AND not on performance).
Ah...fun times. You're a good dad. My dad made me work for those bats.
You know it's a good day when Project Farm uploads
Thanks so much!
Great information...Thanks for taking the time to test these different gasoline levels!!
Thanks and you are welcome!
I love your videos, they are quick, to the point and no nonsense. Love it!
Thanks so much!
Would be interesting to know if the top tier fuels have more detergents or any other additives than regular fuel
Thats how they get the top tier rating.
@@taylorsrus9543 maybe I should of written what the difference in additive and detergent properties are. Wonder if it’s actually worth the price difference.
They do have more detergents. I also notice a slight bump in throttle response and fuel economy with top tier fuel.
@@lincolnjames8254 Lake Speed/Total Seal did a TH-cam on that.
Most high octane fuels are Premium fuels due to their additives. A check of the company's published MSDS will often show this.
The ammount of time and resources you pour into your videos is remarkable, thank you for all the effort and dedication you put into them for our entertainment and convenience, Ive been able to make smart purchases and save tons of money thanks to you, much props to you sir!
You can see the trees are bare so he filmed months ago. That’s dedication.
Thank you very much!
I truly enjoy your channel because of your thoroughness!
Thanks!
This crazy Test blew out my mind dude! Bravo 👏!
Thanks!
I feel like knowing the compression ratio for your equipment would be useful too.
Smartest comment on subject
Great point!
@@thecommonsenseconservative5576 I drive a Subaru that calls for 87. Due the 12:1 compression ratio stated in the specs, I run premium. Some would call me foolish, but the miles to empty showing on the dash display definitely goes up by about 20 miles.
@@anthonyjulson8840 seems right for that ratio
Very true. You can compress more without premature detonation using ethanol. At 10% the fuel economy is “less” noticeable (As you raise the ethanol the more noticeable).
I worked at a shop where we were pushing 15:1 compression with straight ethanol. It does make power, but at the cost of Guzzling fuel and very corrosive. Earl would tell all crews to pull spark plugs and injectors and blow the cylinders out……very few did. We would get engines with fuel setting in them…..cylinder walls would be corroded…..and pistons would be suffering the same.
Ethanol is hard on metals and not efficient (again, at 10% -less noticeable)…..you can get power through compression, though. That’s where the power is at (compression). (A true Thumper)😁
Depends on the motor. Then the additives can make a difference too, negligible or not.
Great point!
Only thing worthwhile adding to gas is a little Penzoil Marine to keep injectors and pump lubricated. All the miracles in a bottle are useless or way too expensive for what they are. If your engine is known to have carbon problems get it professionally cleaned.
If you’re wanting to try it I use a 1oz to 10gal ratio for every fill up and it’s plenty. You will hear a difference the injectors will quiet down.
Motors use electricity.
Engines use fuel.
@@jeffw6180 Yep. And tires are not the same as wheels! LOL 👍😂
For my riding mower I use 93 octane with Stabil 360 and a little Marvel Mystery Oil as directions say. Never had issues cranking after winter storage and exhaust smells minty fresh from the MMO. 😀 I meant to say I do the same with my 2 cycle equipment.
Thanks for sharing.
you are the wonderful guy. thank for the test alot
Thank you for letting people know that 93 is a waste of money UNLESS it requires it thanks for you’re videos.👍
carbs only
You are welcome!
@brian6029 can hurt performance in a fuel injected engine. My Goldwing is an excellent example, designed to run on 87 and fuel injected, I get over 43 MPG average both in town and on the interstate over thousands of miles. Tried 93 from time to time and never could beat that average in the same conditions, acceleration was no better, best the bike would do is a 0-60 in 4.13 seconds and that was on 87 octane, unless you have high compression and an engine that can control its dynamic timing you're essentially just wasting money
I’ve experienced much better fuel economy on my 2015 Fuel Injected Ram 1500 with the Hemi 5.7 by using 91 over 83. On a 5 hour drive using 83 I’d arrive at my destination on empty. On 91 I’d arrive with a quarter tank. Both with same starting point and driving habits. Mostly cruise control
@@mobkinq depends a lot on conditions, I've had humidity and air temp play a huge part in fuel mileage, on hot and humid days my F250 may only get 10 MPG pulling my boat, on cooler and dry days on the same road I can show as much as 14-15 at the same speeds, only time I've seen more octane help is on higher compression engines that need it. My rule of thumb has been if it isn't pinging or detonating it doesn't need more octane
I absolutely love the pure data of this channel. No bs yt fluff. No dragging on for 5 minutes just to make people watch (it doesn't work, we click away). I legit watch for the pure information provided. They area great. Well done my man.
Thanks and you are welcome!
I love how thorough you are. True scientist!!
Thanks!
Man did you do a lot of work for this video! Thank you!
You are welcome!
You should test fuel stabilizers in regards to resistance to phase separation.
Thanks for the suggestion.
Your dedication in creating these tests is amazing, and very much appreciated, testing pump gas to racing gas would be interesting, Thanks as always Todd, you are the best. 🇺🇸
Thank you very much!
@@ProjectFarmthank you
You need to do a video testing what pens are best at for pointing at things. I suspect you use the same pen in every video
Thank you project farm 👏👏👏👍👍
Thank you for your time sir
You are welcome!
Great video! You certainly put alot of time and effort into these. Thank you sir. I have subscribed.
Thanks and you are welcome! Thanks for watching and subscribing!
You should test these in a very high compression engine! That's where one needs higher octane.
Absolutely, however some people out there think putting premium in their Toyota Corolla gives them more power. That's kind of what he's targetting
Great point. Thank you
Or turbocharged/supercharged engines. If your engine management system can adapt to it, you'll definitely feel a boost in performance.
@@gamebrigada2 If your engine has a knock sensor, it actually can increase power compared to cheap 87 gas. ( I know what you're getting at but we have some low grade gas where I live)
@@gamebrigada2I believe you’re right. In that context, I might expect to see a performance difference in my truck, under towing load. 85 octane is the most common where I live - at elevation. So now I want to go test my truck using 85 vs the highest octanes, which I believe is 91 93 is not sold in the mountain states due to elevation.
Since elevation DOES matter in octanes, testing my truck power under load, at elevation, might prove interesting.
This dang channel!! Now I’ve got the bug to go test this stuff out. Thanks a lot, PF :/. Haha!
This guy is definitely the cool uncle that everyone is excited to see and ALWAYS has a cool story to tell.
Thanks!
By far the best equipment tester on TH-cam. Been watching for years. Very nice
Thanks so much!
Im sure I can"t say what has"nt allready been said. I"m a retired mech in the aviation field and have been labled the "MacGyver" of the shop. I can allways be found in my garage fixing and creating stuff. Bed frame rails are tempered angle iron and can be usaually be found free of charge to create and repair things with, I have a large pile. The product testing you do is invaluable to a do it yourselfer/ handyman. Keep up the good work...Dave
Thanks so much, will do!
Great test! good results too! I think the only advantage I have had with non ethanol fuels in a carbureted application is the lack of vapor lock. If you drive through the mountains in the summer time and you have a carb you might want non ethanol for that reason.
Thanks! Thanks for the feedback.
Could you test some coolers? They are so expensive these days I would really like to know which one would be best. What about possibly modifying a cheaper one to make it comparable to a higher end one? Anyway I love the way you test your products and do multiple tests so the results aren't just your own opinion.
Tons of videos already made
They have dedicated channels on TH-cam just for cooler testing,
My limited experience of roto molded coolers yeti tundra 45 and rtic 65. They are very close in comparison on ice retention.
But for the price of these coolers, if you have the ability to keep them powered, look into the 12v coolers. As most of them can also be powered from an ac outlet.
Thanks! Thanks for the suggestion.
This channel and your methods and detailed analysis of everything is quite extraordinary ;)
Thanks!
Thank you so much, already learned something useful on the first day of 2024! 🤣🤣 happy new year to you all!
You are welcome! Glad to hear! Happy New Year!
The real difference between the different octane levels is how well they resist knock. This is most important when running a higher compression engine or when using boost, and neither of the engines you were using fit those qualifications.
The only difference
Thanks for sharing!
Seriously, this is a masterclass in the application of the scientific method. I often fantasize about what our world might look like if this standard was applied so thoroughly everywhere.
Thanks for the feedback.
I’ve seen lots of testing of fuels on a dyno, so it was fun to see it being done in a farm setting. Generally speaking, higher octanes won’t give better fuel economy, but engines will run slightly cooler and gain a few hp. If you want anything really noticeable, tuning with the new fuel is recommended, especially if you’re using fuel with ethanol.
Thanks for sharing.
it should make a difference if the engine has a knock sensor and the programming to automatically advance timing and search for the right spot where its most effective but doesn't detonate.
if its a simple system, like most carbureted ones would be, and some fuel injected systems, i shouldn't make a difference unless you manually tune it though other then the small changes in energy content.
and if it works as it should it should give you a bit better fuel economy with higher octane, (up to a point where you need to retune the engine if you want it to be more effective) but it might not be easily noticeable, and also give a bit more power at the same time
on engine that is designed for different octane fuel, you definitely will see a difference. Of course if engine is designed for 87 it woul not get much benefits for higher octane.
Three things to consider:
1. Higher octane gasoline has a higher flash point and is less likely to result in pre-ignition (fuel igniting in a hot cylinder prior to spark) which can cause damage to engines over time.
2. Higher octane gasoline burns slower than lower octane providing power benefits in long-stroke engines due to the burn continuing across more of the power stroke. This can act as a drawback on engines with short strokes.
3. The major petroleum companies put additives such as detergents and anti-corrosives in their premium gasoline to keep your fuel system clean. Mid-grade fuel is a mix of premium and regular (the mid-grade pump sucks from both the premium and regular tanks at the gas station simultaneously).
Consumer Reports has nothing on you but a bunch of expensive test equipment and a huge staff. Love your videos and your ingenuity in how to test things. Keep up the good work. I wish you well with your channel. Be safe!
Thanks!
Glad to see your uploads again. I love how thorough and consistent the testing is in these
Thanks!
97 Benz c230 NA, stock with 279k miles. Tests performed at 3 tanks with each grade change.
93 octane - 30mpg average
89 octane - 27mpg average
87 octane - 24mpg average
All tests from full tank, same highway.
ECU read ping and adjusted timing advance to keep ping to a minimum, which reduces efficiency.
Thanks to PF for these informative videos.
You are welcome!
Great job on your tests... Nicely done... =)
Thank you very much!
Todd puts more effort into his tests than I put into my entire life...
👍🏼👊🏼🦖🍺
Not sure if that's something you should be proud of.
@@antonisautos8704 oh, I’m not proud of it, but it’s true🤣🤣
Thanks for watching!
I appreciate your how thorough you are with your testing!
Thank you!
Todd thank you for another fantastic video. Honest and detailed reviews are your trademark !
Thanks!
Since I'm retired and no longer commute, I exclusively purchase Shell V-Power or Sunoco 93.
My vehicle is a 2017 F150 with the 2.7 Ecoboost. There was\is quite a difference in the performance.
I read that using 93 increases the BHP from 325 to 345! Of course, I put 93 Shell or Sunoco in my Harley!
(EFI 96CI). Same for my Mower and Chainsaw!
Thanks for the feedback.
Your videos are the one thing I look forward to on Sundays! 👍🏼
Thank you very much!
Same! My Sunday luncheon companion most weekends! 😎✌️
I'd love to see a test showing the advantage compression ratios have on the performance of engines by using 3 identical engines with with varying compression ratios achieved by decking the cylinder head in order to achieve different ratios of higher compression.
Thanks for the suggestion.
Nice video! I always wondered if people really need higher octane gas in their cars. Although the test is not exactly the same as a true scientific test held in a controlled environment, the testing is more than sufficient enough to provide very good supporting evidence to test the hypothesis > "Is higher octane better?"
The tests are well thought out and easy enough for anyone with a basic mechanical and science background to understand!
Excellent job on the videos and tests!
Thank you! Thanks for the suggestion.
I really like that you pointed out a separate hose for certain fuels, or purging the line...very important! Great job!
Thanks!
Try to fuel up after a Corvette or BMW ... chances are they used the high test.