Honda Car Forum

In article <C3A10BD6.2C600%epmeyer50@msn.com>,
E Meyer <epmeyer50@msn.com> wrote:

> > I have a 2008 Accord Auto 4 cyl EX-L. The manual says to use regular 87
> > octane. The compression ratio in this car is high enough where premium would
> > be required in other car brands with the same compression ratio and almost
> > as high as other Hondas (such as the civic si) that do require premium. My
> > question is that "if" I used Premium even though it wasnt really required,
> > would i see an improvement in the performance being that its so close to
> > almost needing premium?
>
> Probably not. Honda will have set the ECU to keep it de-tuned for the
> regular gas. Its worth a test though. Run about 3 tankfulls of premium
> through it and see if anything changes.

That won't work. He'll "feel" that it's "better" right after spending
$4.00 more each for those tankfuls of gas.

What he needs to do is to have his wife go out and fill up the car, and
randomly select whether she puts in premium or not. She keeps a record,
on her person, then after three months he decides if he ever felt any
difference. If he did, he needs to correlate that with what was
actually in the tank.

He'll find out that higher octane in an Accord does nothing for him.
Makes the oil companies happy, though.

Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
<snip>

> No
> money was spent for it to do anything other than what it does.

i guess - pretty much by definition. a vast fortune was spent however
on getting it to do what it /does/ do.

In article <77-dnZLKgNYLJObanZ2dnUVZ_ufinZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:

> > No
> > money was spent for it to do anything other than what it does.
>
> i guess - pretty much by definition. a vast fortune was spent however
> on getting it to do what it /does/ do.

Yep.

But as we know, absolutely no more than necessary is spent on building
the car itself. Car companies slobber at the thought of saving half a
penny in manufacturing.

Despite its recent stumblings, Honda is at its heart an engineering
company. And they used that talent to bring the manufacturing cost of
an Accord down as far as possible.

There ain't not give in that car. Nowhere.

Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article <77-dnZLKgNYLJObanZ2dnUVZ_ufinZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
>>> No
>>> money was spent for it to do anything other than what it does.
>> i guess - pretty much by definition. a vast fortune was spent however
>> on getting it to do what it /does/ do.
>
> Yep.
>
> But as we know, absolutely no more than necessary is spent on building
> the car itself. Car companies slobber at the thought of saving half a
> penny in manufacturing.
>
> Despite its recent stumblings, Honda is at its heart an engineering
> company. And they used that talent to bring the manufacturing cost of
> an Accord down as far as possible.
>
> There ain't not give in that car. Nowhere.
>

driven a ford lately? there's a /ton/ of "give" in a honda.

In article <F5mdnejsVMXWIObanZ2dnUVZ_o3inZ2d@speakeasy.net> ,
jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:

> > There ain't not give in that car. Nowhere.
> >
>
> driven a ford lately? there's a /ton/ of "give" in a honda.

What kind of "give"?

Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article <F5mdnejsVMXWIObanZ2dnUVZ_o3inZ2d@speakeasy.net> ,
> jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
>>> There ain't not give in that car. Nowhere.
>>>
>> driven a ford lately? there's a /ton/ of "give" in a honda.
>
> What kind of "give"?
>

pretty much everything - cheaper glass, cheaper paint, cheaper metal,
cheaper design, worse tolerances, lower standards across the board.
ford's plastic brake pistons are among of my favorites.

"jim beam" wrote in message...
> you can't presume that higher compression ratio automatically requires
> higher octane, or yields better results using higher octane. in the bad
> old days, detroit never bothered to fully research the correlation between
> what had been empirically observed about compression ratio and octane.
> basically, they just doctored gas to fix what they knew was a problem.

I dunno... some of the combustion chamber design coming out of the U.S. was
pretty high-tech, especially the aftermarket race tech, although little of
that reached the consumer (Chrysler's hemispherical head came closest, but
didn't lend itself to passenger car use). Cam profile and timing have as
much to do with engine knock as compression ratio. Not knocking Honda
(that's all we own) - I think in some cases the Japanese took some American
tech and simply improved upon it. Chrysler had some great engines back in
the day (Slant Six, 340, 383, 426, etc.), just never had a high-quality body
to put them in.

One drawback of higher octane that no one has mentioned is harder starting.
The higher octane is less likely to 'fire' and will add a miniscule, though
likely insignificant, additional stress on the engine, starter and battery -
not a good thing when it is -20 degrees...

mrdancer wrote:
> "jim beam" wrote in message...
>> you can't presume that higher compression ratio automatically requires
>> higher octane, or yields better results using higher octane. in the
>> bad old days, detroit never bothered to fully research the correlation
>> between what had been empirically observed about compression ratio and
>> octane. basically, they just doctored gas to fix what they knew was a
>> problem.
>
> I dunno... some of the combustion chamber design coming out of the U.S.
> was pretty high-tech, especially the aftermarket race tech, although
> little of that reached the consumer (Chrysler's hemispherical head came
> closest, but didn't lend itself to passenger car use).

detroit might have flirted with it, but nobody was prepared to put in
the r&d dollars to get it into bed. the japanese got it in the 70's.


> Cam profile and
> timing have as much to do with engine knock as compression ratio.

that's not the same thing - cam timing affects what gets into the
cylinder, and thus what actually gets compressed. if the combustion
chamber design means that stuff doesn't burn right, you're monkeying
with symptoms, not cause. same goes for timing.

> Not
> knocking Honda (that's all we own) - I think in some cases the Japanese
> took some American tech and simply improved upon it.

that's all the japanese have ever done! the point is, they bother - we
don't! for us, once something is saleable, r&d stops. and if it
remains saleable, it stays stopped. that's why you can still buy 1950's
engines, transmission, suspension, etc. in detroit products today.

> Chrysler had some
> great engines back in the day (Slant Six, 340, 383, 426, etc.), just
> never had a high-quality body to put them in.
>
> One drawback of higher octane that no one has mentioned is harder
> starting. The higher octane is less likely to 'fire' and will add a
> miniscule, though likely insignificant, additional stress on the engine,
> starter and battery - not a good thing when it is -20 degrees...

not a problem with electronic ignition.

In article <6ImdndBr-p7zp-HanZ2dnUVZ_sqinZ2d@speakeasy.net>,
jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:

> > I dunno... some of the combustion chamber design coming out of the U.S.
> > was pretty high-tech, especially the aftermarket race tech, although
> > little of that reached the consumer (Chrysler's hemispherical head came
> > closest, but didn't lend itself to passenger car use).
>
> detroit might have flirted with it, but nobody was prepared to put in
> the r&d dollars to get it into bed. the japanese got it in the 70's.

CVCC. That 79 Civic I had was a great car.

In article <C3A10BD6.2C600%epmeyer50@msn.com>, epmeyer50@msn.com says...
>
>
>
> On 1/1/08 3:11 PM, in article o0yej.3758$M24.882@newsfe17.lga, "alfred"
> <tomboy83=@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > I have a 2008 Accord Auto 4 cyl EX-L. The manual says to use regular 87
> > octane. The compression ratio in this car is high enough where premium would
> > be required in other car brands with the same compression ratio and almost
> > as high as other Hondas (such as the civic si) that do require premium. My
> > question is that "if" I used Premium even though it wasnt really required,
> > would i see an improvement in the performance being that its so close to
> > almost needing premium?
>
> Probably not. Honda will have set the ECU to keep it de-tuned for the
> regular gas. Its worth a test though. Run about 3 tankfulls of premium
> through it and see if anything changes.

He'll get better mileage because his wallet will be that much lighter.

--Gene