Can I put gas at Octane 87(regular) in my 97 SSEi? - Page 2 - GM Forum - Buick, Cadillac, Chev, Olds, GMC & Pontiac chat


1992-1999 Series I L27 (1992-1994 SE,SLE, SSE) & Series II L36 (1995-1999 SE, SSE, SLE) and common problems for the Series I and II L67 (all supercharged models 92-99) Including Olds 88's, Olds LSS's and Buick Lesabres Please use General Chat for non-mechanical issues, and Performance and Brainstorming for improvements.

Reply
 
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 09-03-2005, 11:58 PM   #11
Senior Member
Posts like a Camaro
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Grand Rapids,MI
Posts: 981
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Masterbm is on a distinguished road
Default

Well on the subject of gas would it help my car if ran more then 87 octane. My car say it recommend 87 so I have run 87
Masterbm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2005, 12:56 AM   #12
Junior Member
Posts like a Ricer Type-R
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
willwren is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrJay
Quote:
Originally Posted by willwren
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrJay
Will you always have a way to scare people
If his knock sensor fails, he CAN damage the engine. You are about the only dissenter on this issue. The argument rages, but at the same time, why take the chance?
Dissent? Not really. With that statement right there I totally agree, especially with the emphasis you provided. To me there'* a big difference between just saying "you can damage your engine" and stating that if one engine component fails you could damage another. The engine is built in such a way that 87 octane will NOT damage it. If engine components are failing, however, you do run a risk. But that'* the same with anything. If my MAF is failing I run a risk just driving it, same with the o2 sensor, egr, or any number of other parts. With that I wouldn't simply state "if you drive your car you can damage it" on an assumption of failing sensors...make sense?

One statement causes unnecessary fear while the other actually informs him of the risks involved.

Interesting to me there isn't the same fear of using a K&N filter, which many feel has a more direct effect on a sensor which could in turn cause engine failure.

I'm not trying to split hairs, but that'* the only reason I say anything on the subject anymore. I'll be quiet now
No engine failure has ever been attributed to a K&N filter. Question, Doc. What octane do YOU run?

Master, there would be no benefit for you or your car to run more than 87 octane unless at the track.
willwren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2005, 03:39 AM   #13
Senior Member
Certified GM nut
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Georgia
Posts: 2,095
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
DrJay is on a distinguished road
Default

97 or so ...Oh and BTW, our PCM'* can retard up to 20*...don't ask.

Really though, I could see if the K&N filter bit is true that it would be a bigger issue. Oil gets all over the MAF and reduces the readings. Now you're running lean. Mix it with a dirty injector and a heavy foot...could be in for some trouble. MAF = sensitive. Knock sensor = rather robust.

I would certainly be more afraid of that than running 87 octane.
DrJay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2005, 01:03 PM   #14
Senior Member
True Car Nut
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 3,993
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
JimmyFloyd is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rjolly87
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyFloyd
I am running mid grade 89 in my 93 SSEi, but that is the lowest I will go. About once a month I run premium in it just so it remembers what it is like.
does your fuel mileage suffer?
Not really. Maybe 1 MPG if that. Still getting 24-26 highway, which is what I was getting before.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Masterbm
Well on the subject of gas would it help my car if ran more then 87 octane. My car say it recommend 87 so I have run 87
Nope. You car is setup to run regular. I tried running premium in my 98 LTZ for 2 fills to see if it changed anything (when it was cheaper of course) and I did not see any real improvement over regular.


Regular is $.20 cheaper than premium. Which means you save $2.00-$3.00 a fill running regular depending on how much you need, so if the car takes regular, I would run it.
JimmyFloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2005, 01:22 PM   #15
Senior Member
Posts like a Turbo
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: South Jersey
Posts: 498
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
xX1SSEI1Xx is on a distinguished road
Default

i've been cheating myself with plus....that'* the lowest i'll go though, and i only trust using it now cuz i've slowed down. If i start to get hard on the pedal again, i'll switch to premium for optimum performance

i haven't noticed a diff in mpg'* with plus either tho
xX1SSEI1Xx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2005, 02:55 PM   #16
Member
Posts like a V-Tak
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 31
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
tverhein is on a distinguished road
Default

Dr Jay & Willwren:

Ok, I have listened to the posts here.

So if I continue to burn 87 in my SSEi, I run a risk of damaging components, which in turn could damage the engine if the components are not replaced. I am a pretty 'soft, steady, driver', driving 70 highway miles daily. So what is the probability I will damage components? Is it 25%, 50%, 75% some component will go bad? How quickly will a component go bad? Also, which component would likely to fail first?
tverhein is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2005, 02:59 PM   #17
Junior Member
Posts like a Ricer Type-R
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
willwren is on a distinguished road
Default

tverhein,

The best advice I can give you is that if you're not willing to run the 91 octane minimum that Pontiac reccomends for your car, you should look for another car. Or get another car as a daily driver that will run off of 87.
willwren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2005, 06:59 PM   #18
Senior Member
True Car Nut
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Bedroom, Ontario
Posts: 3,266
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Drifter420 is on a distinguished road
Default

Bill.. can you confirm this?

I"ve been hearing that when timing gets retarded over a period of time ( from lets say running 87 stead of 91+ ).. it causes inefficiency ( which you can tell by MPG ) but it will also leave some kind of residue which in the long run is bad?? Might be alright in winter to run a lower grade ( MPG during winter isn't much difference between 89 and 91 for me that'* noticable.. but when tempreture is above zero.. I see the difference in MPG.. 700Km on 91 with still well over 1/8th tank.. I calculate 650KM to E in mid grade 89 ( I don't go pass 1/8th unless I had run previous mid grade in there.. so it'* bout 600Km when it start chiming "ADD FUEL FOOL !!" )

Dr. yes.. I know bout the K&N filter issue also.. thats why I haven't changed.. I'm lookin for other alternatives.. but haven't put much time and effort into it.. might be a winter research for me

EDITED
Drifter420 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2005, 08:45 PM   #19
Senior Member
True Car Nut
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Lethbridge, Alberta, _______Canada._______ West Coast Bonneville Fest ___05,06,07 Survivor___
Posts: 8,134
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
SSEimatt93 is on a distinguished road
Default

Personally ive never put anything less than 91 in my Bonneville..hence its parked at the moment. I won't chance running anything less.
SSEimatt93 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2005, 09:40 PM   #20
Senior Member
True Car Nut
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 3,993
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
JimmyFloyd is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SSEimatt93
Personally ive never put anything less than 91 in my Bonneville..hence its parked at the moment. I won't chance running anything less.
I would run premium if I had a choice, or purchase another car, but at the current moment, I am unable to just park it. Don't let my sig fool you, I only have one car here at the moment. I would have to say that the risk is reduced a lot more im my case since i am running plus rather than regular, but looking at the risk, I am willing to take it at this point.

tverhein, i would atleast suggest plus if you do not want to run premium in your car. It won't have as significant effects on the car. I am surprised BillBoost has not posted here. He said he was reading the manual and it said you could run a lower octane, but would not have the performance as with Premium. Not sure which manual it was in though.
JimmyFloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Octane Points (Octane Boost) bandit General GM Chat 2 08-28-2007 11:21 PM
Do not put 85 octane in your SSEi. (KR comparisions) Hans General GM Chat 3 02-22-2007 11:09 AM
regular gas in ssei bonnycrazy 1992-1999 13 10-06-2005 02:24 PM
Do You Have to Use High Octane Gas in SSEi??? denny3292 1992-1999 6 09-13-2003 01:45 PM
SSEi Octane in gas?? BonneAlien General GM Chat 10 04-13-2003 04:42 PM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:06 PM.


We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.