Ongoing General Automotive Thread 2.0

[D as in David]

I saw a TR6 with the top down yesterday morning at Anderson and 14th St. and a TR7 - I kid you not - a few weeks ago parked at the nearby Safeway.

[BloodFetish]

Originally Posted by Dion

My brothers first car was a Pinto station wagon. Yellow color and the fake wood paneling. He liked it because he could store his hockey gear in the back

God, look at how those wheels fit into the wheel wells! Even in the 70's or 80's how do you design it like that?

My wife's first car was an '87 Tempo. Definitely not an exciting car, my lasting memory of it was when the horn decided it would activate itself in the middle of hte night during a cold snap, and the police pounding on our door after the neighbors called it in.

[woob]

I bought a K car off a buddy for $100 when I went to SAIT and for my first job in IT (99-2002 timeframe) It never failed me and was always a point of conversation that would generate lots of laughs. She was a beauty haha.

As for the Omni, I’d totally rock a Shelby GLH-S now. That would be a fun daily once you made a few modern improvements on it. One of the original hot hatches!

[InglewoodFan]

Originally Posted by D as in David

I saw a TR6 with the top down yesterday morning at Anderson and 14th St. and a TR7 - I kid you not - a few weeks ago parked at the nearby Safeway.

A TR6 is on my "someday" list. My dad had one when I was a kid but coincidentally sold it just before I turned 16.

I had the top down on my roadster yesterday, weather like this in October is a bonus. The car could just as easily be put away so I'm enjoying every extra day.

[dammage79]

My favorite of the old era sedans? That 2000's Lincoln LS.
If we are talking 80s and 90s poopboxes, old Maximas and Camrys were slick.

Most hated? Ford Escorts. Lame. I'd sooner be caught gleefully driving a neon before one of those. Or a Maverick II.

[Geraldsh]

I had a ford escort for a while, an embarrassment to drive but awesome gas mileage. Superstore gas got me 37 mpg and Esso gas gave a whopping 49 mpg.

[I-Hate-Hulse]

Originally Posted by Table 5

I absolutely get more excited about seeing great condition old regular cars than anything new or fancy, especially in our climate. A few months ago I saw a stunningly good condition teal Ford Tempo driving down my street and was blown away. That thing was rarer than any exotic whatevercar.

These last posts have completely validated the theory that the most fun and enjoyment cars you can have with a car is inversely proportionate to the amount of care and babying you have to provide to it.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Geraldsh

Superstore gas got me 37 mpg and Esso gas gave a whopping 49 mpg.

Wait is there really a difference in gas from providers?

If I buy plain old regular from Esso is it better then Superstore?

How does that work anyway?

[DoubleF]

Originally Posted by Sylvanfan

I'm the same way. Seeing a 30 year daily driver type or somewhat uncommon vehicle from those days that's in decent shape still gets my attention. I saw a Tempo a few weeks back and was like what...that's still running? I saw a Jeep Comanche pickup that still looked good one day. Hadn't seen one of those in like 30 years.

I knew a young guy who would never give up an opportunity to regale us on his adventures in a mint Buick LeSabre he purchased when he immigrated to Canada. All the white knuckle stories, the stories of how it handled like a boat, how the interior made him look like he was a drug runner etc.

All those things he described about the car were reasons for others to avoid it, but detailing them just made the smirk on his face get bigger.

Originally Posted by I-Hate-Hulse

These last posts have completely validated the theory that the most fun and enjoyment cars you can have with a car is inversely proportionate to the amount of care and babying you have to provide to it.

Agreed. The best cars are the cars you can afford to replace. You get to experience it as is with no holding back. Most people who get a car they baby don't seem to really enjoy the experience. I don't baby my cars, but I don't unnecessarily put strain/wear and tear on them either. I also prefer to drive in a manner that's fast but smooth (turns, braking etc.) vs others I've known that drive fast, but the passengers in the vehicle are constantly being slammed around the inside like the car is involved in a rollover.

I know a guy who owns luxury cars, race cars and "driving" cars. He's said the different cars are for different reasons. The driving cars (yes plural) such as the daily drivers and exotic are for fun. The luxury car is for comfort and relaxation. The race car is serious business (err... hobby). The racing rig is for practice and experimentation. I thought it was a great way of thinking. Something maybe I'd consider ascribing to, but more like 2-3 vehicles vs like 8+ vehicles he owns.

[DoubleF]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Wait is there really a difference in gas from providers?

If I buy plain old regular from Esso is it better then Superstore?

How does that work anyway?

Some of the additives they put in changes your fuel economy (basically ethanol blend differences, stuff that cleans so probably fuel injector cleaner and gas conditioner stuff etc.). I don't know if this is still the same as of today or as extreme as I noticed it used to be up to 5-10 years ago though.

Most people claim it's placebo effect, but when I kinda loosely kept track, it's certainly ended up being one hell of a placebo effect if true. But most people also think that there's completely no difference between regular and premium in a vehicle. There's huge differences (15%+) in the L/100km for regular/premium in many modern vehicles for highway driving. I spend less $ per KM with premium (~7L/100KM) in my Odyssey than regular (~9L/100km). That's before noticing the performance difference when getting to speed. For older engines, even if the mileage didn't change, it certainly felt like the vehicle wasn't struggling as hard when attempting to pass someone.

Esso/Mobil/Superstore should all be the same stuff. At least they're connected in terms of rewards programs.

Husky used to be the worst stuff I could put into my vehicle. Second worst was Co-op regular. Co-op doesn't seem as bad as it used to be though. I remember putting regular into an engine designed for premium (poor student) and it'd knock and shake quite noticeably. The RPMs would flutter while stopped at a light or stop sign.

For premium, I seem to recall Costco got the lowest range. I'd be short about 60-100 km to reach Regina on a single tank. Mobil/Esso I'd be around +/- 20 km or so and Petro Canada I'd be around + 30-40 (but I don't want to risk being on the road with no fuel and angry kids/wife). I think Mobil's 94 is similar to Petro's 91. Petro's and Shell's 93 and I think I'd have around 60-80km range left.

Shell I used to remember felt the smoothest. I don't ever recall filling up with Shell and tracking the range though. I do recall putting regular into an engine designed for premium and it wouldn't knock, shake or RPM flutter as bad as the Co-op or Husky stuff.

I can't say I've tried much from any other station. Loyalty program made it a more compelling reason to stick with the big guys.

[I-Hate-Hulse]

Originally Posted by DoubleF

Some of the additives they put in changes your fuel economy (basically ethanol blend differences, stuff that cleans so probably fuel injector cleaner and gas conditioner stuff etc.). I don't know if this is still the same as of today or as extreme as I noticed it used to be up to 5-10 years ago though.

Most people claim it's placebo effect, but when I kinda loosely kept track, it's certainly ended up being one hell of a placebo effect if true. But most people also think that there's completely no difference between regular and premium in a vehicle. There's huge differences (15%+) in the L/100km for regular/premium in many modern vehicles for highway driving. I spend less $ per KM with premium (~7L/100KM) in my Odyssey than regular (~9L/100km).

Esso/Mobil/Superstore should all be the same stuff. At least they're connected in terms of rewards programs.

Husky used to be the worst stuff I could put into my vehicle. Second worst was Co-op regular. Co-op doesn't seem as bad as it used to be though. I remember putting regular into an engine designed for premium (poor student) and it'd knock and shake quite noticeably. The RPMs would flutter while stopped at a light or stop sign.

Ethanol content in gas absolutely reduces fuel economy:

https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/ethano...nt%20decreases).

In years past, certain retailers had higher levels of ethanol in their gas - usually the discount brands, so that lead to fuel economy differences.

However, government "clean fuel" regulations are now mandating ethanol content in fuels, so those differences are leveling out:

https://www.canada.ca/en/environment...ons/about.html

Certain blends of Premium from Retailers used to be ethanol free (Shell V-Power), so I could see how that lead to better fuel economy - even if the higher octane wasn't used. Unfortunately regulations have made this stuff a rare bird.

[kevman]

Originally Posted by I-Hate-Hulse

Ethanol content in gas absolutely reduces fuel economy:

https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/ethano...nt%20decreases).

In years past, certain retailers had higher levels of ethanol in their gas - usually the discount brands, so that lead to fuel economy differences.

However, government "clean fuel" regulations are now mandating ethanol content in fuels, so those differences are leveling out:

https://www.canada.ca/en/environment...ons/about.html

Certain blends of Premium from Retailers used to be ethanol free (Shell V-Power), so I could see how that lead to better fuel economy. Unfortunately regulations have made this a rare bird.

This. I used to avoid Mowhawk/Husky or this reason but now it's unavoidable so I largely ignore the "this fuel contains 10% ethanol" sticker. I had an old Dodge 318 that the owners manual explicitly stated to not use ethanol blended gasoline. And this was the 90's, so it wasn't referring to E85, it meant any blend content.

Depending where you go, your gas is largely regionally sourced so it's all coming from the same refinery. It's all marketing.

As for premium, if you have a vehicle designed for premium, and you run regular, it'll r3tard the timing if it senses knocking which will lead to a reduction in power/efficiency. However, if you have a vehicle designed for regular, and you run premium, you likely won't see any performance benefits so you're just throwing money away.

We drive a vehicle with a Nissan VQ40 the "requires" premium however a previous Nissan vehicle with the same VQ40 didn't. The only difference I can find between the two engines that are 2 model years apart, is our current vehicle is an "LE" model and our previous wasn't. No changes to the cams, timing, performance specs, etc. The "luxury" vehicle requires premium gas and base model doesn't. We run regular gas in it and have seen no signs of knocking or performance drawbacks whatsoever.

We're also at a relative high elevation which helps. Not Colorado/Utah high where regular gas is 85 octane, but high enough than many "premium" vehicles can get away with regular or mid-grade gas without knocking or performance drawbacks.

Edit: can't talk about r3tarded timing apparently

[DoubleF]

Originally Posted by kevman

This. I used to avoid Mowhawk/Husky or this reason but now it's unavoidable so I largely ignore the "this fuel contains 10% ethanol" sticker. I had an old Dodge 318 that the owners manual explicitly stated to not use ethanol blended gasoline. And this was the 90's, so it wasn't referring to E85, it meant any blend content.

Depending where you go, your gas is largely regionally sourced so it's all coming from the same refinery. It's all marketing.

As for premium, if you have a vehicle designed for premium, and you run regular, it'll r3tard the timing if it senses knocking which will lead to a reduction in power/efficiency. However, if you have a vehicle designed for regular, and you run premium, you likely won't see any performance benefits so you're just throwing money away.

We drive a vehicle with a Nissan VQ40 the "requires" premium however a previous Nissan vehicle with the same VQ40 didn't. The only difference I can find between the two engines that are 2 model years apart, is our current vehicle is an "LE" model and our previous wasn't. No changes to the cams, timing, performance specs, etc. The "luxury" vehicle requires premium gas and base model doesn't. We run regular gas in it and have seen no signs of knocking or performance drawbacks whatsoever.

We're also at a relative high elevation which helps. Not Colorado/Utah high where regular gas is 85 octane, but high enough than many "premium" vehicles can get away with regular or mid-grade gas without knocking or performance drawbacks.

Edit: can't talk about r3tarded timing apparently

Yeah. I seem to recall that the differences leveled out recently. I-Hate-Hulse's links about it seems to coincide with my understanding and anecdotal memory on what happens with what fuel.

I noticed something similar in my in-law's newer Nissan. Manual says regular only. MIL thinks it'll car will blow up if premium is put into it. FIL and I know at worst it's just pouring money down the drain. FIL kinda wanted to know if there was a noticeable difference though. I had to borrow their vehicle for something and since the fuel level was low, I topped it up with premium for them. Told FIL, not MIL. He thinks there wasn't much change in the city, but on highways, although he didn't feel any performance changes, he did notice his remaining range was about 30-40km more than usual vs the range remaining being relatively consistent in last dozen times he's made the drive (usually uses cruise control and the range is pretty consistent). The difference was only around 4-8% better so he felt it didn't seem like enough of a difference to consider premium in a vehicle that says to fuel up regular. It makes sense not to use premium, but I don't know if it's truly accurate that there is completely no difference.

Contrast to years ago. My buddy's parents bought a premium SUV (RX300 or 330?) I'm pretty sure he said the manual said to fuel premium, but parents were cheap and fueled regular. The parents were always complaining about how the vehicle was sluggish and a little rough. Basically said issues were that the vehicle wasn't "premium enough". One day buddy is driving, realizes fuel light is on so I suggest putting in $20 of premium as an experiment. All the complaints about the vehicle vanished. His parents admitted as such. But no, it was a coincidence and a fluke, not because premium fuel was used. Buddy never stopped using premium from that day on because the drive was more enjoyable. His parents kept getting mad at him for throwing money away.

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by DoubleF

I spend less $ per KM with premium (~7L/100KM) in my Odyssey than regular (~9L/100km). That's before noticing the performance difference when getting to speed.

There's something weird with your engine, or it's defied physics.

Premium gas has less specific energy, so it gives worse fuel economy and worse performance in an engine designed for regular gas.

The reason premium is used in performance cars is because they are high compression, and the octane is added to resist detonation.

[TorqueDog]

If the Odyssey is a 2018+, that engine is running an 11.5:1 compression ratio -- and the previous gen was still 10.5:1 -- which is high enough in both cases to benefit from higher octane fuel.

The ECU is basically pulling all sorts of strings to allow the engine to run right on the knife-edge of knock, which is why it's able to run regular fuel and likely why he sees better performance *and economy* on higher octane gasoline.

[DoubleF]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

If the Odyssey is a 2018+, that engine is running an 11.5:1 compression ratio -- and the previous gen was still 10.5:1 -- which is high enough in both cases to benefit from higher octane fuel.

The ECU is basically pulling all sorts of strings to allow the engine to run right on the knife-edge of knock, which is why it's able to run regular fuel and likely why he sees better performance *and economy* on higher octane gasoline.

Yeah, it's a 2019. I don't know the science behind it, so if you're saying it's the ECU playing tricks to pull it off, I believe you.

Advertised as a vehicle that could use "regular or premium", I kinda assumed when I bought it that it would be like the '04 I used to drive and I wasn't a noticeable difference. I was surprised as hell to find out it was nearly 20% difference on a Kelowna trip when I fueled up at a gas station that ran out of regular. From that point on, I realized it was cheaper to fuel premium than regular on road trips for the Odyssey.

I've casually tested it a few other times using cruise control going to Canmore/Banff or Calgary/Regina to see if it's a placebo effect/way I drive and regular hovers around ~9L/100KM after a few hundred KM and cannot go lower and premium hovers around ~7L/100KM after a few hundred KM. The city is far harder to gauge, but I think it's typically around 8-12%.

On a full tank of premium, I probably could make it all the way to Regina from Calgary on a full tank. Maybe I'd probably roll into town on fumes with like 5-10 km range left, so I've never tried. Regular tank, I'd be out before Moosejaw for sure. Full tank from Medicine Hat reg I think 1/3rd tank left and premium is just under half?

I'm not going to MythBusters this #### down to insane detail like they did with the AC vs windows open test to find the real number though.

My dad has a 2018 MDX. It doesn't have as extreme differences in regular vs premium to the Odyssey. Seems like <10% difference on highway.

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by DoubleF

Advertised as a vehicle that could use "regular or premium"

Ah, ok, this makes total sense then. It's a vehicle designed for premium that can make due on regular (as almost all of them can).

This is a marketing trick for an engine designed for premium that doesn't want to scare off people who won't buy vehicles that need premium.

[TorqueDog]

Yeah, that's exactly it. Modern ECUs have all kinds of tricks they can use to make one engine effectively into two, depending on which fuel you're running. Way more advanced than the days of the temperature dropping ten degrees and needing to adjust your carburetor for best possible performance.

[Geraldsh]

Originally Posted by DoubleF

Some of the additives they put in changes your fuel economy (basically ethanol blend differences, stuff that cleans so probably fuel injector cleaner and gas conditioner stuff etc.). I don't know if this is still the same as of today or as extreme as I noticed it used to be up to 5-10 years ago though.

Most people claim it's placebo effect, but when I kinda loosely kept track, it's certainly ended up being one hell of a placebo effect if true. But most people also think that there's completely no difference between regular and premium in a vehicle. There's huge differences (15%+) in the L/100km for regular/premium in many modern vehicles for highway driving. I spend less $ per KM with premium (~7L/100KM) in my Odyssey than regular (~9L/100km). That's before noticing the performance difference when getting to speed. For older engines, even if the mileage didn't change, it certainly felt like the vehicle wasn't struggling as hard when attempting to pass someone.

Esso/Mobil/Superstore should all be the same stuff. At least they're connected in terms of rewards programs.

Husky used to be the worst stuff I could put into my vehicle. Second worst was Co-op regular. Co-op doesn't seem as bad as it used to be though. I remember putting regular into an engine designed for premium (poor student) and it'd knock and shake quite noticeably. The RPMs would flutter while stopped at a light or stop sign.

For premium, I seem to recall Costco got the lowest range. I'd be short about 60-100 km to reach Regina on a single tank. Mobil/Esso I'd be around +/- 20 km or so and Petro Canada I'd be around + 30-40 (but I don't want to risk being on the road with no fuel and angry kids/wife). I think Mobil's 94 is similar to Petro's 91. Petro's and Shell's 93 and I think I'd have around 60-80km range left.

Shell I used to remember felt the smoothest. I don't ever recall filling up with Shell and tracking the range though. I do recall putting regular into an engine designed for premium and it wouldn't knock, shake or RPM flutter as bad as the Co-op or Husky stuff.

I can't say I've tried much from any other station. Loyalty program made it a more compelling reason to stick with the big guys.

My fuel results were recorded in Lloydminster before superstore gas was run by Mobil. It lacked some additives Esso claimed made their gas better, for a few cents more per litre.

[Nufy]

Whats the average time line for payout after an accident.

Some kid took out three vehicles in my neighborhood last night including my truck. (And his dads which he was driving)

Given the age / mileage I am expecting it to be a total loss.

Will be towed to the adjuster on Tuesday.


I am curious as to the process / timeline.

Thanks.