[Need4Camaro]

Originally Posted by ctrlz

Figure about 58% of your current fuel costs if you switch to v6. This is based on displacement only, but should account for no change in driving style and assumes same transmission type. it does not account for changes in fuel grade. I do not know how switching grades in the v6 affects power/economy. The math gets tricky there because you have to weigh the difference in fuel grade cost against the change in engine power.

where I am the difference between 87 and 93 is only about 40 cents/gal, compared to JT58 in southwest Florida where it is 80 cents!

I would not panic about gas prices edging up. This could be short term:
https://www.kiplinger.com/article/bu...-forecast.html

Difference in 87 and 93 in the V6 is negligible and definitely not worth the extra cost of 93. No fuel mileage increase, slightly better performance but only noticeable if you're flogging on it.

[Nsxmatt]

Originally Posted by Need4Camaro

Difference in 87 and 93 in the V6 is negligible and definitely not worth the extra cost of 93. No fuel mileage increase, slightly better performance but only noticeable if you're flogging on it.

You get this info from where?

[Need4Camaro]

Originally Posted by Nsxmatt

You get this info from where?

I dunno, maybe I actually owned one and drove it and tested between the two fuel grades?

Maybe I actually did this on 87 octane?



Throw money away at premium fuel in car thats tuned for 87 if you want but if your car is not tuned for it, you're throwing it away. The difference between 87 and 93 is practically negligible if your car is not tuned for 93 for daily driving purposes. I could only feel it and barely at that if I was really romping on it.

[Nsxmatt]

Originally Posted by Need4Camaro

I dunno, maybe I actually owned one and drove it and tested between the two fuel grades?

Throw money away at premium fuel in car thats tuned for 87 if you want but if your car is not tuned for it, you're throwing it away. The difference between 87 and 93 is practically negligible if your car is not tuned for 93 for daily driving purposes. I could only feel it and barely at that if I was really romping on it.

If you drive it on 87 and throw 93 in it, it won't do anything. It takes many drive cycles and in some cases even a battery reset for the ECU to compensate with a map with more timing for 93 octane. The V6 can run on 87 but it's power ratings are from 93 octane. If you look at the track times from people who run 93 all the time and those who run 87 or switch back and forth, you'll see there is a decent difference. I wouldn't say it's throwing away money, I think it's a matter of preference. I take mine to the track and mess around enough to want all the performance I can get and the extra 30-40 cents a gallon doesn't bother me.

[MosaicX1LE]

Originally Posted by Nsxmatt

The V6 can run on 87 but it's power ratings are from 93 octane.

The V6 is the only one that just says to use at least 87 octane. You're saying that the stock tune will increase timing over a few drive cycles if you use 93, but what leads you to believe that?

edit: ... hmm did a bit of reading and it seems you're not the only one saying that, or at least that there was a noticeable difference in the timing from data logs on the 5th gens. Maybe I'll run a few tanks and see, better fuel economy could just be less ethanol, but I'll try to calibrate my butt dyno also.

[Need4Camaro]

Originally Posted by Nsxmatt

If you drive it on 87 and throw 93 in it, it won't do anything. It takes many drive cycles and in some cases even a battery reset for the ECU to compensate with a map with more timing for 93 octane. The V6 can run on 87 but it's power ratings are from 93 octane. If you look at the track times from people who run 93 all the time and those who run 87 or switch back and forth, you'll see there is a decent difference. I wouldn't say it's throwing away money, I think it's a matter of preference. I take mine to the track and mess around enough to want all the performance I can get and the extra 30-40 cents a gallon doesn't bother me.

I've run premium for a combined total of 4 fillups without interruption as to test it. Its slightly more peppy but its nothing ground breaking or anything of the sort that it feels like an entirely different vehicle. On the street its a waste. On the track where you want everything and are spending considerable amounts of time at high RPM's, thats different...but thats not the topic... in average you spend at most 2% of the cars life on the track, the rest in traffic...where between 87 and 93 the numbers will not be different enough to justify the cost...

Regular here is ~ $2.55 -


Premium here is ~ $3.20 -


Its more than $0.30 - $0.40 and is that way throughout alot of the country, the $0.30 difference novelty between fuel grades died around the first decade of the current century and for a V6 someone is just dailying around...its a waste of money...for the track stuff then yes you want premium, but this thread has nothing to do with tracking, he is literally looking for the most economical way to drive a Camaro. On the street and daily traffic, Premium is not worth the extra cost unless your car is tuned for it. Noone who bought a car for commuting purposes driving on the street cares about 1 tenth of a second on the quarter mile versus spending $0.60 + per fillup...you won't even notice that on the street nor would you ever beable to fully utilize it.

If you want a car you want peak performance out on a track, just get an SS.

[SecondZ28]

Originally Posted by Need4Camaro

the $0.30 difference novelty between fuel grades died around the first decade of the current century

Sam's Club's premium is only $0.30 more than their regular.

[Thelma - 2017 RS]

I was using 87 in my v6 for quite awhile. I switched to 91/93 about a month ago and I see a significant increase in mileage. I have a decent drive that I take on a regular basis...60ish miles on 4 lane highway and I get roughly 35 at 70 with the premium fuel and 25-27 with 87. This is over many trips, I have 23k miles 11 months in. I should also note that I personally feel there more power being put to the wheels, they break free from a stop more often. I will admit though I have no way to actually quantify that last part and it is purely my seat of the pants reaction.

[IAI80]

Originally Posted by Thelma - 2017 RS

I was using 87 in my v6 for quite awhile. I switched to 91/93 about a month ago and I see a significant increase in mileage. I have a decent drive that I take on a regular basis...60ish miles on 4 lane highway and I get roughly 35 at 70 with the premium fuel and 25-27 with 87. This is over many trips, I have 23k miles 11 months in. I should also note that I personally feel there more power being put to the wheels, they break free from a stop more often. I will admit though I have no way to actually quantify that last part and it is purely my seat of the pants reaction.

I’ve only used 87. 25-27 doing 70 on the interstate is what I would expect with a headwind. Seems low otherwise.

[Nsxmatt]

Originally Posted by Need4Camaro

If you want a car you want peak performance out on a track, just get an SS.

I don’t want to be in the same financial situation as you and if something happens to my car I can’t afford to trade it in. So I went with the V6 which was $15,000 cheaper. But I still want the maximum performance out of it so I’ll continue to put 93 in it.

[mdhopt36]

Sounds like anyone with a CAMARO that buys it and recommends 87, drives it like a wuss.
Might as well get a used POS for that purpose.

[ecko04]

You have an 11 SS which, I assume, is paid off or close to paid off. If that’s correct then your major expense is gas.

You are considering buying a 16 V6 for $18K @ $300/month + higher insurance premiums for the newer vehicle + gas. How does this make sense?

Is something wrong with your 11? If the idea is to cut monthly expenses very rarely will buying a new car do it for you. Even a beater, if you’re going to carry full insurance, will cost something in addition to fuel.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Need4Camaro]

Originally Posted by SecondZ28

Sam's Club's premium is only $0.30 more than their regular.

Well that is great if you happen to live near one...but you cannot base the $0.30 difference of Sam Club or Costco against a national average of fuel stations which 99.5% of drivers fuel up at ...which is much higher than $0.30. A very minute minority have feasible access to those stations (and by feasible meaning, they can actually stop there during their commute versus going out of their way to get there.)

Originally Posted by Thelma - 2017 RS

I was using 87 in my v6 for quite awhile. I switched to 91/93 about a month ago and I see a significant increase in mileage. I have a decent drive that I take on a regular basis...60ish miles on 4 lane highway and I get roughly 35 at 70 with the premium fuel and 25-27 with 87. This is over many trips, I have 23k miles 11 months in. I should also note that I personally feel there more power being put to the wheels, they break free from a stop more often. I will admit though I have no way to actually quantify that last part and it is purely my seat of the pants reaction.

Are you running a A8 or M6? If its an M6 your numbers will be much lower regardless of what fuel grade you use. Active Fuel Management really helps the V6 to achieve remarkable numbers. I've gotten over 42 MPG in mine with only 87 at speeds ranging between 75 and 90 MPH and Im not exaggerating when I say this. I put premium in, no change in fuel mileage.

Basically, with 87 I averaged the same numbers you are posting with 91 / 93 trim.

Originally Posted by Nsxmatt

I don’t want to be in the same financial situation as you and if something happens to my car I can’t afford to trade it in. So I went with the V6 which was $15,000 cheaper. But I still want the maximum performance out of it so I’ll continue to put 93 in it.

The financial difference between an SS and V6 of similar trims is about $7k MSRP. With rebates and deals... a 1SS could be had fairly close to the MSRP price of a 1LT.

Not trying to start a V6 vs V8 war but I am speaking mentality wise... I didn't buy my V6 to compete with it. I recognized it as a quick and very fun and sporty car and it handled amazingly well, but it wasn't something I had the need or passion to track. It will compete pretty well... In terms of premium fuel, yes - you definitely want that on the track where you're running for competitve numbers, but on the street...where you can't wind it out for more than a couple of seconds...where the difference in cost between the two grades can be $0.60 or higher or in a 19 gallon tank --
19*2.55 = $48.45
19*3.20 = $60.80
-- is over $10 per fillup - its a waste of money. At most, 1 MPG improvement, acceleration improvement is hardly noticeable and its not like you or anyone is competing for numbers between two stop lights.

Originally Posted by mdhopt36

Sounds like anyone with a CAMARO that buys it and recommends 87, drives it like a wuss.
Might as well get a used POS for that purpose.

That or I just don't throw money where it's not needed. On 87 my 1LT was quite capable of keeping up with my 99 Z28 LS1, and destroying our G37 which required premium...If I can do all that on 87, and also get over 30 MPG on the street no highway miles, why am I going to pay more for fuel when I don't have to?

[Thelma - 2017 RS]

Need4Camaro, I can't get anywhere near that mileage... Had you done anything like CAI or exhaust? Clearly you are shooting straight as I can see the image I just wish I could get there.