General Motors, Ford and Fiat-Chrysler Automobiles descended on Capitol Hill to lobby for standardized 95 octane to replace today’s 87 octane. GM’s vice president of global propulsion systems, Dan Nicholson, led the argument for increasing the Research Octane Number (RON) and said consumers and automakers would all benefit, Automotive News reported on Tuesday.
It’s not the first time GM and Nicholson have argued for standard high-octane fuel. Nicholson first floated the idea last year, and last month, the executive pitched benefits to the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM) in an address. Nicholson said the time to make the switch is now as automakers experiment with ways to squeeze every ounce of efficiency from the internal-combustion engine.
Moving to 95 RON would eliminate 87 octane as regular, 88-90 for mid-grade and 91-94 for premium. Nicholson’s main argument is that the fuel efficiency benefits outweigh the extra cost per gallon of 95 octane. He said a 3 percent increase in fuel economy would come at a cost of less than 3 percent increase in the cost of gasoline.
“If it is done in the right framework, it could have a lot of value for customers at a low rate if we pick the right octane level. If you go too high, it’ll get expensive. But if you pick the right one, it’ll actually work for customers,” he told the House Energy and Commerce Committee’s environment subcommittee. He said to throw out what consumers think of when looking at prices for premium gasoline today.
Another argument on the cost side is that refineries would shift output to 95 octane and ultimately lower the price with greater supply.
In the end, higher octane fuel would allow automakers to raise engine compression ratios to increase horsepower, torque and efficiency all at once.
Comments
Yes! I’m in. Do it.
95 RON in Europe and most of the world equals to 91 PON (Pump Octane Number) in the States. It’s a mid grade fuel. I’ve never ran any of my cars on anything lower than 91.
Back in a day, mid grade was only 10c more than regular, and premium was another 10c on top of mid grade. I ran all my cars on premium because the mileage was better. I calculated that I only had to do 20 more miles on the tank on my 09 Silverado to come out even. I regularly did 40-45 more miles on one tank of premium. It was worth running on premium. Not today! Today, mid is 40c more than regular and premium is another 40c more on top of mid. 80c difference between best and worst. Not worth it anymore. Running mid grade gas will come out about even.
As more cars required premium, premium gas started becoming more expensive. There is no way it costs 60c a gallon more to make premium these days. It’s a scam!
Sounds good.
I thought they were asking for 95 PON.Why would they ask for 95 RON. That is available nationwide RFN.
Like Europe – OMG!!!
Then adopt European Euro 6 standards – OMFG!!!
Then there’s no need for Homolo-fuckin-gation anymore. OMFG!!!
ONE STANDARD WELTWEIT – GERMAN STANDARD. NICHTS MEHR NÖTIG.
if they would take out the ethanol we could see 5% to 10% increase in MPG at no cost to the car owner
that sounds good BUT theres a bit of BS there!! currently its a .30 cent jump in my Pa area so thats .60 a gal for premium over 87 + many states are even worse!! just remove the corn piss aka ethanol that our tax $$$ support + mpg’s will increase + gas will not cause the many issues we now have. with todays lawn mower engines “trying” to move heavier loads octane boost will allow them to make more power, that is IF IF they can stay together!!!
Their 3% increase in gas price going from 87 to 95 is complete crap. Out here on the Canadian Prairies regular is at $1.189 per litre ($5.35 per Canadian gal) right now and premium is at $134.9 and as high as 1.409 right now. That’s between 13 and 18% higher cost to get to 91 octane. What would 95 octane cost? The 3% better mileage comes no where close to offsetting the cost of gas.
As stated above, get rid of the ethanol and you’d increase mileage by more. Plus we put more pollutants into the atmosphere making ethanol than what we save by having it in our gas. Brother in law worked at an ethanol plant and he saw industry numbers to prove it. Ethanol was a way for the governments to make sure they had a market for corn and other ethanol crops. But it’s hard on engines, deadly on 2-strokes snowmobiles, and actually hurts the environment more than it helps.
They are asking for 91 octane, not 95 octane to be the new 87.
91 octane = 95 RON.
I doubt the corn farmer’s will let ethanol go away, even though it should.
with today’s corn being mostly GMO allowing it to SWIM in monsanto’s poison, making it not a good food source if your smart they gotta do something with it. shipping it all overseas would be the best thing for american health!!
how about making organic corn for people instead.
If we standardized octane the price for manufacturing and transportation for it .Should go way down. I do like my 93 RON Though.
$$$$ runs everything today!!! lobbying AKA bribery of political lawmakers gets things passed one way or the other!!! even things + foods not good for us sells in USA when other countries ban them, meanwhile Americans get FATTER + SICKER + the drug makers get fatter $$$$ wallets!!!