Tacoma-Robert
Well-Known Member
I had been running 89 octane gasoline in my new 2013, 4 cyl, tacoma. Got about 18 mpg with mixed driving.
Decided to save some money and use 87 octane, instead of 89.
I then noticed that my mileage probably decreased about 1 mpg. It seemed to drop from 18mpg to 17mpg.
I say probably because I only ran a couple tanks of it. Can anyone confirm or contradict this finding?
If that's correct, then the 87 octane caused two problems. i) Cost me more money, instead of less. and ii) caused me inconvenience.
Here's why. With 89 octane I got about 324 miles before I felt like filling up with another 18 gallons (324 miles = 18 gallons x 18mpg). If it's $3.50 per gallon, then that's a cost of $63.00.
But with 87 octane I only got about 17 mpg. So that's only 306 miles (306 miles = 18 gallons x 17mpg). But 87 cost about a dime less than 89 ... so .... if 87 octane is $3.40 a gallon, then that's a cost of $61.20.
Thus, I saved $1.80 to buy 18 gallons of 87 instead of 18 gallons of 89.
And traveled 18 fewer miles (324 miles - 306 miles).
But, wait, to go the same distance, I'll need to buy more 87 octane to drive 18 extra miles to match the same distance as 89 octane. At 17 mpg for the 87, that means I'll need to buy an extra 1.1 gallons of 87 octane. (18 miles / 17 mpg). That's an extra $ 3.60. ($3.40 x 1.1 gallons).
So, 87 octane cost me a net total of $1.80 more ($3.60 - $1.80) since I had to buy more of it to travel the same distance, but it cost less per gallon.
More importantly, 89 octane is more convenient since I need to fill up less often. On the highway with higher mpg's this could really be significant!
Question 1: Is my math ok?
Question 2: Do you all see a difference in mileage between 87 and 89?
Question 3: Does it hurt the truck to run 93 octane? It's another 10 cents a gallon, but what the heck? Perhaps it's even less expensive and even more convenient?
Decided to save some money and use 87 octane, instead of 89.
I then noticed that my mileage probably decreased about 1 mpg. It seemed to drop from 18mpg to 17mpg.
I say probably because I only ran a couple tanks of it. Can anyone confirm or contradict this finding?
If that's correct, then the 87 octane caused two problems. i) Cost me more money, instead of less. and ii) caused me inconvenience.
Here's why. With 89 octane I got about 324 miles before I felt like filling up with another 18 gallons (324 miles = 18 gallons x 18mpg). If it's $3.50 per gallon, then that's a cost of $63.00.
But with 87 octane I only got about 17 mpg. So that's only 306 miles (306 miles = 18 gallons x 17mpg). But 87 cost about a dime less than 89 ... so .... if 87 octane is $3.40 a gallon, then that's a cost of $61.20.
Thus, I saved $1.80 to buy 18 gallons of 87 instead of 18 gallons of 89.
And traveled 18 fewer miles (324 miles - 306 miles).
But, wait, to go the same distance, I'll need to buy more 87 octane to drive 18 extra miles to match the same distance as 89 octane. At 17 mpg for the 87, that means I'll need to buy an extra 1.1 gallons of 87 octane. (18 miles / 17 mpg). That's an extra $ 3.60. ($3.40 x 1.1 gallons).
So, 87 octane cost me a net total of $1.80 more ($3.60 - $1.80) since I had to buy more of it to travel the same distance, but it cost less per gallon.
More importantly, 89 octane is more convenient since I need to fill up less often. On the highway with higher mpg's this could really be significant!
Question 1: Is my math ok?
Question 2: Do you all see a difference in mileage between 87 and 89?
Question 3: Does it hurt the truck to run 93 octane? It's another 10 cents a gallon, but what the heck? Perhaps it's even less expensive and even more convenient?