General Motors wants to make premium fuel the new standard, and it’s the second time vice president of global propulsion systems Dan Nicholson has spoken out for the change.
The executive addressed the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM), and Forbes reported on Monday that Nicholson believes now is the time to make the switch. Why? It comes as automakers diversify powertrains and experiment with more battery-electric cars and other fuels, such as fuel cells.
The switch would make a fuel with a 95 RON (research octane) and pump octane (PON) of 91 the standard. Translation: 91 pump gasoline would replace 87 gasoline as standard in North America at gas stations.
With a switch, automakers could tune engines for higher compression and extract more work from the fuel itself to increase efficiency. Nicholson said minor changes in engines could net a 3 percent increase in efficiency alone.
The major question is how the consumer would react to such a change. Although GM predicts no major upfront cost increases for engines tuned to run 91 octane as standard, a gallon of premium fuel cost $0.52 more on average across the United States as of last week. The cost to fuel up could outweigh the slight efficiency benefits.
However, the AFPM said refineries would ultimately shift their focus to produce the premium fuel, which would bring down its cost per gallon. We could see 91 octane cost about the same as 87 octane, but only if refineries matched the production mix to a new fuel standard.
Comments
The truth is not just better MPG.
Higher compression and boost can give cleaner burning engines for better emissions and the by product can be even more power.
The smaller the engine but higher the compression or boost will result in more efficiently and the same level of power in many cases.
All automakers would like this but they want the government to force it as if they do it themselves the buyers may not buy that brand of vehicle to avoid the initial added cost at the pump.
well said
cleaner burn for less crap in the engine as well
Well not less crap if it is a Tier One fuel. They use the same cleaners in all levels of octane.
Once upon-a-time as a young lad, I came across a website called “Find 93”, and was really confused on why people needed a map website to locate 93 Octane…. Still do this day I often forget that when I leave good ole’ Michigan, 91 Octane pump gas is often the highest you can get! Whenever I go out west, I cringe putting even 85 octane in a lawnmower (ok, that’s a bit sarcastic). I’m selfishly thankful that every station I’ve ever seen in the Motor City’ has 87 octane as a minimum, and 93 octane available for my high power shenanigans, and sometimes if you’re lucky (often Sunoco) 94 octane…
We have 94 and Cam 2 at our Sunoco.
Driving down to NC and back, I had to deal with that, as we had taken my Cobalt, which is supercharged and tuned to run on 93 (it is an LT). We were quite low on fuel, and I had to leave one station and go find another because all it had was 91, and the other station, thankfully, had 93.
I always found this interesting as well. I wonder what GM would say if you owned a ’17 Buick Regal that crapped the bed due to you living in a non 93 location. Per the owner manual below
“For the 2.0L L4 turbo engine, premium unleaded gasoline meeting ASTM specification D4814 with a posted octane rating of 93 is highly recommended for best performance and fuel economy. Unleaded gasoline with an octane rated as low as 87 can be used. Using unleaded gasoline rated below 93 octane,however, will lead to reduced acceleration and fuel economy. If knocking occurs, use a gasoline rated at 93 octane as soon as possible, otherwise, the engine could be damaged. If heavy knocking is heard when using gasoline with a 93 octane rating, the engine needs service.”
FWIW, my ’14 Regal GS states 91 where this states 93…???…same engine, advertised as same hp/tq…real head scratch.
One of the main reasons we did not buy a Mercedes Benz; the XT5 does not require premium fuel.
Really you would spend the money on a Benz but you will not cough up the extra couple bucks for the better gas?
I have older cars I’m never giving up. The only way I get on board with this is if they make free upgrades to all older vehicles that net the same 3 percent improvement as well as increased performance, or the same performance beyond any debate. Otherwise they can set it as a requirement for newer vehicles…..but don’t force it onto everyone.
Yeah as if the oil companies would ever lower 91 octane fuel to where 87 is now. Not going to happen and most people would be up in arms having to pay up to 60 cents more per gallon for a theoretical 3% improvement. How about instead GM switched over most of their lineup over to the more efficient 9 speed transmission and ditch the old 6 speed and they will have their 3% bump in efficiency. The Cruze, Malibu 1.5T, Impala, Envision, base Equinox and the Acadia all still use the old 6 speed.
I agree. Oil companies would see this as an excuse to increase their profits and wouldn’t lower prices. Creating false demand and colluding with the criminals on Wall Street to keep Oil prices high.
Take out the fuel injector gumming up ethanol. Quit subsidizing the corn industry.
I already run 91 to 94 octane in my 2019 gm with a 5.3, the proof is in the tailpipe, no black soot. My power and fuel economy are noticeably better from junk 87 octane especially when towing and towing in the mountains.
Bought a new Gmc canyon denali 3.6 ltr mtr 8 speed w 2 spd transfercase i only run 91 or 94 octane Chevron gas here in vancouver canada
Its about $7.55 gallon or $1.88 ltr cad
Gonna see if running better quality fuel extends the life of this truck. Film at 11