08-21-2008, 01:12 AM
[quote Filliam H. Muffman]
You left off compression specs of the engines and if the manufacturers had specified that they should be run with Premium. I would also like to know if they were originally sold as cars designed to pass CA emission standards.
Just to make it clear, I first saw studies recommending not using Premium in engines not designed for it before most people were on the internet. This was prior to 1992. I stand by the recommendation. For most people with cars not designed to run on Premium, it should not significantly improve emissions as long as the car is running properly.
Microman most likely has a car with a 9.5:1 compression ratio based on the year and lack of EFI. The numbers on the emission test seem to indicate that it is running rich (assuming they are accurate). If his car failed due to high NOx but the HC and CO numbers were low, then I would recommend trying Premium as one quick option to try.
I currently have a car with a 10.0:1 compression ratio and the manufacturer recommends Premium. That is what I use almost exclusively. When gas prices went over $3.50, I tried two tanks of Unleaded. I found that I got very slightly lower mileage and seemed to lose a few HP at full throttle.
Are you for real? I don't care what you stand by or for. I'll stick to my REAL WORLD data.
Everything you posted is easily derived from the net. There are websites that have references on how to read smog results. So your proclamation that is running rich is not exactly earth shattering.
My one mistake was leaving my Nox statement, It was actually supporting another sentence which I deleted.
Your funny. You put regular in a car that recommends premium. Where you really surprised it made a difference and one for the worst? Your idea of real world testing?
I have been a lurker on this forum for awhile. I usually ignore the misinformation I read about cars. You can tell which ones are the posers. The ones that do either a google or wikipedia search and then feel they are now experts. Then post. ( Actually seen this on many different subjects.) See any resemblance? For you, should I add magazines from 1992?
There is one poster on this forum that I believe that actually posts from experience about cars. From what I gather he used to work in the trenches at a GM dealership. If he is not for real he has me fooled. I don't always agree with his opinions about cars but I respect his opinion. I noticed he was much smarter than me and didn't post to this thread.
I only posted because Microman test results were so close to passing. I felt he was on the right track with the premium. Premium isn't going to make a gross polluter pass but it can make the difference between pass/fail and wanted to discourage him from removing it.
I believe this horse is dead............But, I maybe wrong.
You left off compression specs of the engines and if the manufacturers had specified that they should be run with Premium. I would also like to know if they were originally sold as cars designed to pass CA emission standards.
Just to make it clear, I first saw studies recommending not using Premium in engines not designed for it before most people were on the internet. This was prior to 1992. I stand by the recommendation. For most people with cars not designed to run on Premium, it should not significantly improve emissions as long as the car is running properly.
Microman most likely has a car with a 9.5:1 compression ratio based on the year and lack of EFI. The numbers on the emission test seem to indicate that it is running rich (assuming they are accurate). If his car failed due to high NOx but the HC and CO numbers were low, then I would recommend trying Premium as one quick option to try.
I currently have a car with a 10.0:1 compression ratio and the manufacturer recommends Premium. That is what I use almost exclusively. When gas prices went over $3.50, I tried two tanks of Unleaded. I found that I got very slightly lower mileage and seemed to lose a few HP at full throttle.
Are you for real? I don't care what you stand by or for. I'll stick to my REAL WORLD data.
Everything you posted is easily derived from the net. There are websites that have references on how to read smog results. So your proclamation that is running rich is not exactly earth shattering.
My one mistake was leaving my Nox statement, It was actually supporting another sentence which I deleted.
Your funny. You put regular in a car that recommends premium. Where you really surprised it made a difference and one for the worst? Your idea of real world testing?
I have been a lurker on this forum for awhile. I usually ignore the misinformation I read about cars. You can tell which ones are the posers. The ones that do either a google or wikipedia search and then feel they are now experts. Then post. ( Actually seen this on many different subjects.) See any resemblance? For you, should I add magazines from 1992?
There is one poster on this forum that I believe that actually posts from experience about cars. From what I gather he used to work in the trenches at a GM dealership. If he is not for real he has me fooled. I don't always agree with his opinions about cars but I respect his opinion. I noticed he was much smarter than me and didn't post to this thread.
I only posted because Microman test results were so close to passing. I felt he was on the right track with the premium. Premium isn't going to make a gross polluter pass but it can make the difference between pass/fail and wanted to discourage him from removing it.
I believe this horse is dead............But, I maybe wrong.