[Rock-It Man]

Originally Posted by lt4camaro

11.5 to 1 on the V6 isnt considered a high compression motor??

Nope, not in the age of four valves per cylinder and variable valve timing. That's why an 11.5 to 1 engine can run on 87 octane.

[Elite Engineering]

The v6 is the same 11.5:1 CR as the LT1. It also is a high revving DOHC engine that redlines higher than the LT1. Engineers designed it to be a high performance engine and to run 0n 93 octane. In fact any tuner can verify there are two Octane tables in the tune same as the LT1, and nearly identical in ignition timing advance.

The Marketing department made the choice to state 87 to appeal to the economy minded demographic that likes the styling but want an engine option for 87 octane. Just as GM stated Dexos1 (early version) that was a cheap blend, not a full synthetic and caused all the premature wear and damage on these to appeal as well when NO GDI engine should run a blend. They can't deal with the greatly increased raw fuel dilution, 8-12 times that of the old PI engines they replaced and just the past few years changed Dexos1 to a full synthetic, but the ESP formulation Dexos2 is what should be used in these as it combats LSPI so provides protection against piston breakage.

Tuners have been sharing dynos showing the gains running 93 for years with these, but the problem is those that do try it put in maybe a tank and as it takes good deal of driving before the ECU will default to the high octane tables and don't notice as it can take a few tank full's and they simply conclude "it felt no different".

wintertopdown and lt4camaro are both 100% correct. The engine in everyway is designed as a high performance engine even more so than the LT1. Compare the stock HP per liter with the LT1.

So the Engineers did an awesome job (Opel and more use these same engines) designing these, but GM playing games for marketing purposes have left power and longevity on the table to appeal to the target demographic. As all automakers do.

As the decades progressed from the days where the owners manual was your bible to care for the engine and get long life and few problems they have transitioned to a blend of accurate info and half truths to fit both legal departments, regulatory (CAFE fuel economy standards, emissions, etc. directives and marketing. Automakers have this down to a science.

These are not the low compression engines of old.

Cheers!

Tech@EliteEngineeringUSA.com
Sales@EliteEngineeringUSA.com

[digitalfutur]

So what kind of performance difference (0-60 / ¼ mile) are we talking about after extended use premium gas in the LGX? And is it enough to justify the 10-15% higher op-cost for premium?

[lt4camaro]

Originally Posted by Elite Engineering

The v6 is the same 11.5:1 CR as the LT1. It also is a high revving DOHC engine that redlines higher than the LT1. Engineers designed it to be a high performance engine and to run 0n 93 octane. In fact any tuner can verify there are two Octane tables in the tune same as the LT1, and nearly identical in ignition timing advance.

The Marketing department made the choice to state 87 to appeal to the economy minded demographic that likes the styling but want an engine option for 87 octane. Just as GM stated Dexos1 (early version) that was a cheap blend, not a full synthetic and caused all the premature wear and damage on these to appeal as well when NO GDI engine should run a blend. They can't deal with the greatly increased raw fuel dilution, 8-12 times that of the old PI engines they replaced and just the past few years changed Dexos1 to a full synthetic, but the ESP formulation Dexos2 is what should be used in these as it combats LSPI so provides protection against piston breakage.

Tuners have been sharing dynos showing the gains running 93 for years with these, but the problem is those that do try it put in maybe a tank and as it takes good deal of driving before the ECU will default to the high octane tables and don't notice as it can take a few tank full's and they simply conclude "it felt no different".

wintertopdown and lt4camaro are both 100% correct. The engine in everyway is designed as a high performance engine even more so than the LT1. Compare the stock HP per liter with the LT1.

So the Engineers did an awesome job (Opel and more use these same engines) designing these, but GM playing games for marketing purposes have left power and longevity on the table to appeal to the target demographic. As all automakers do.

As the decades progressed from the days where the owners manual was your bible to care for the engine and get long life and few problems they have transitioned to a blend of accurate info and half truths to fit both legal departments, regulatory (CAFE fuel economy standards, emissions, etc. directives and marketing. Automakers have this down to a science.

These are not the low compression engines of old.

Cheers!

Tech@EliteEngineeringUSA.com
Sales@EliteEngineeringUSA.com

Bravo, so nicely said.

[lt4camaro]

Originally Posted by digitalfutur

So what kind of performance difference (0-60 / ¼ mile) are we talking about after extended use premium gas in the LGX? And is it enough to justify the 10-15% higher op-cost for premium?

Better MPG, better driveability, a little more HP and Torque is worth the $5.00 to $8.00 extra per tank full imo.

[redcoats1976]

Originally Posted by digitalfutur

So what kind of performance difference (0-60 / ¼ mile) are we talking about after extended use premium gas in the LGX? And is it enough to justify the 10-15% higher op-cost for premium?

and even more important,if youre just driving to the store and 60 mile highway trips at speeds under 80 mph,are you going to notice a real difference? i ran 93 all last summer,and now that gas is shooting up in price ive switched to 87 with no apparent difference.

[GXP08jrf]

Interestingly enough, GM and likely the other OEMs, continue to lobby that the lower octanes not be offered going forward and 91 octane be the new "baseline" grade, so that all future ICEs can take advantage of the benefits of higher compression. They view this as a huge enabler to meet or exceed emissions and FE requirements.

As for the OP's initial comment: The LGX is plenty adequate for my needs at lower ownership cost vs the V8s. On the street I'm generally unable to use the performance that the V8 provides. This is pretty much true for the LGX as well. I couldn't justify the cost premium for the V8 and then leave it untapped 99.9% of the time.

[HCI2000SS]

All I can say is never saw a difference in the 0-60 or 1/4 mile times from 87 to 93 on my V6. These were on the same stretch of roads with very similar conditions. I had done this many times over. There might be a 5-10 hp difference, so better ET or speed would be hard to really document. What I did notice was slightly better throttle response. Given gas prices now, and the average spread between 87 and 93, I'm ecstatic not to have to run premium

[cthulhucaller]

The 6's are very nice cars if you like a quick ride with nice styling. I've always had 8's, but have driven 6's across a few generations as rentals, or trying friends cars out. Every one of them was better than any soulless sedan or van or SUV. The 8's are more fun if you like to really stuff your foot into it, but if you are into rolling in style, why not a 6, or even a 4?

As someone mentioned, this is an enthusiast board, and enthusiasts always want more. From being a member of fishing and firearm enthusiast boards also, it's the same thing. It's all good. Own what you own, enjoy it, learn all you can about it, and how to squeeze the most fun out of it. The number of times I have seen someone with less gear absolutely stomp people with the best gear in fishing derbys, rifle matches, and autocross races is enough to let me know that you're not buying your way into any of those.

[redcoats1976]

a friend that drives mustang just totalled his GT.hes now buying a turbo 4 with 10 speed automatic for the gas mileage,and says its as quick as the 2007 GT was.

[Gen6cyl]

I absolutely agree with elite engineering.My lgx runs so much better on 93 and it can take 2-3 k miles of 93 to see full benefits. The lgx is the motor of choice for me.I would not have said that before strictly using 93 .

[digitalfutur]

So there's no verifiable data that proves performance improvements with extended use of premium in the LGX.

Which means it's just another marketing scam to get people who accept claims at face value to part with their money, PT Barnum-style.

[mRahmani]

I worked on the variable valve timing software for a number of engines including LGX. The base software is shared between LGX and LT1; just because there’s multiple octane tables in LGX software doesn’t mean that table is actually being used. It’s possible but I would need to ask one of the calibrators.

I can say that there would be no performance difference between premium and regular unless you got the engine hot enough to pull spark due to knock/SPI. If you’re tracking a V6 1LE, premium isn’t a bad idea, but I’m skeptical you would see any gains on the street.

[Wynotme]

I picked up my new Camaro 3LT V6. I love it! Smooth engine, nice power. Impressed by the ride and handling as well.