[QUOTE=hyperv6;307596]As well you should... 'cuz it's easier to understand you that way. I was having trouble figuring out your crayon drawings.

 

LOL, this thread is crazy :)

Hey, I'll let you know if my SS has any "problems" since i use 87 all the time now.

Don't hold your breath though, 8900 miles...and counting, at 36mpg overall.

Havent heard the LNF knocking yet...

 

Of course you won't hear it. The computer hears it at the first signs and automatically corrects for it.

The computer is smart enough to correct many types of driver error!

 

A bit crazy, that is because there are a lot of emotions around the issue.

So, 8900 miles....no burned pistons? clogged injectors? busted valves? carbon deposits? decreased milage? Hmmm....nothing but saved $$$$$. I guess you summed up the answer to the OP quite well....

 

I don't think my computer is correcting a thing since 36mpg over 517 miles on a single tank of 87 with on 67% highway driving. Average speed 37mph. Sorry charlie ....you are chasing ghosts. When my computer finally decides to tell me to change the oil for the first time...... going on 9000 miles now, ill probably have a full engine meltdown by then. Maybe my lnf will be "knocked out" .....lol

 

Why is everyone so scared of 87, knock. At 36mpg, i could care less if gas goes to $6 a gallon, i'd still pay less to drive 500 miles than most of the memebrs in this forum.

 

Fixed that for you. The computer is ALWAYS correcting things, and your nescience to that fact is not evidence to the contrary.

Yes, you are definitely superior to us.

 

I'd be very interested to see what your results would be using 91 with the same techniques.

I think that would satisfy many, well at least me, since you keep such detailed stats while testing. If my experience with my 2.4 is any indication, you would get even better mpg.

I personally, have never said that running 87 would hurt the motor. I just think that for me, it ran a little better and gave me slightly better mpg. Enough to offset the cost difference. That is the only reason I ever question using 87. If the net cost is less than or equal to use 91 over 87, then why not use 91?

 

True, I think I might try it. Why not shoot for 37 or 38mpg ya'know.
Hmm. I guess I could fill up today and start a new thread....
What should I call it?

 

Why did you make a link to a site talking about knock sensors??
I don't remember asking.

Also

Great mileage does not make me superior. Duh, It just adds a little cash in my pocket, conserves a little, and pollutes a little less. Thats all positive. And that's all proven.

If any damage is going on in my engine, remains to be seen. If anything major is going down, should I see it in my mileage???
I won't insult you by posting a link to get my point across. You are obviously aware.