15 replies to this topic

[SoulmasterMP]

I just purchases a incredibly well maintained '96 580 Turbo Wagon with 83K on it. My old '85 240 with 240K on it was just getting to the nickle and dime stage.......So what's the skinny on the fuel/octane requirments of the 850 Turbo?

Do I really need to pony up for the premium gas? Will performance and or engine life suffer one way or the other?

Any other stuff I should know about this car-maintenance tips and or things to watch out for.

Any info is appreciated. Thanks VolvoHeads!

[Veneficus]

In my opinion its always good to use a higher grade of gas in your car. I run a normally aspriated 850 and always use 89. It just keeps your engine cleaner. So from that aspect, I'd go with 92 or 93 if you can get it.

Also, please fill out your signature and location so we can get to know you a bit better.

[S70 R]

you always should!!! i put 92 octine in all my cars!. its better for the motor, it will make it last longer and it helps keep the inside clean, plus gives you lil more power!

[T5BRICK]

i imagine that higher octane gas will give you a little better milage too. i could be wrong though.

i should probably start buying super. it's just hard to spend the extra $.20 per gallon that it costs.

Edited by felix88, 21 February 2005 - 11:34 PM.

[Bay13]

If your Volvo isn't chipped, and the exhaust is stock, and your really not that worryed about what the butt meter would do if you ran the cheap stuff, by all means run the cheap stuff and see how it does, if you get knocking etc, then move up a grade.

Oh ya forgot to mention, the cleaning thats advertized in the high test is also in the low test, they just don't say anything and that makes you think if you want the clean you have to buy high test, not so, federal law requires it to be in all the gas.

[maiku]

used to run 87 and my engine started to burn some oil after 5 years or so
now run 89 and engine runs good

[ToxicLemonade]

in my manual it tells me to run 91 octane or better. i just run 93 cuase my car is chipped/exhaust etc. i think it helps burn a little cleaner.

[donstruke]

in my manual it tells me to run 91 octane or better. i just run 93 cuase my car is chipped/exhaust etc. i think it helps burn a little cleaner.

This is not right on the original question in this thread but since you mentioned chips, Speedtuning and I'd think most other chips/modified ECUs want 93. I know some areas have 92 or lower available as the highest octane, but so far the East Coast has 93 everywhere. I think

[Gregg]

91 or higher is recommended in the manual. Generally when I buy gas, 93octane is only 10-15 cents more per gallon than 91octane. So even if you do a lot of driving, say 20k miles at 15cents more per gallon, and a conservative overall fuel economy of 20mpg, the added cost is $150 per year to run 93 octane vs 91octane.

This breaks down to just over $10 per month, and a little over $2.50 per week. I know I waste at least $2 per week on random stuff. Hell, it's one large iced coffee at D&D or one small coffee at the Bucks per week. I'll be damned if I'm willing to spend $2 on coffee each week but not the $2 extra for 93octane.

P.S. yeah, I'm an Econ major

Edited by gmischenko, 22 February 2005 - 03:58 AM.

[maiku]

i think IPD says that you can run 89 with their chip and the car will still be okay

[SoulmasterMP]

Thanks all for the input. I've been running 89 and it seems to run great. I think I'll take Bay 13's advice for the time being. I'm just a stock family wagon guy for now........What should my first upgrade be?

PS: Veneficus I'm updated now. Peace Out.

[donstruke]

Thanks all for the input. I've been running 89 and it seems to run great. I think I'll take Bay 13's advice for the time being. I'm just a stock family wagon guy for now........What should my first upgrade be?

PS: Veneficus I'm updated now. Peace Out.

If you're talking engine, do a catback first. If you're referring to overall improvement that you can feel, upgrade the shocks. Whatever, first make sure you have your car at Stage One, which is searchable here and very good info.

[mbsl98]

For octane, I've found almost no measureable MPG difference in around town, suburban driving using 89 octane (mid-grade). Since the car has an automatic spark retarding system,(or similar technology), I assume that the lighter loads on the engine don't require much detuning in that use so mileage and general performance are not much changed. It does not accelerate quite as fast on heavy throttle, but I generally don't drive that way around town. However, for highway use, I have done several 2k trips with careful measurements, half on 89 and half on 91, and the 91 clearly adds between 2-3 MPG on each of the tests. These were the same route, Boston to west of Rochester, NY and return. In these cases, the car is running 75, had a ski box on top for one trip, and five people anad dog for others, so it was working harder. For teh ski box trip, we got 28.5 on high test, and 25.8 on mid-grade, so it easily paid for the extra gas cost. Note that even on long trips, the mid-grade works well, just not quite as well as the high test. I never tried 87 on either of our turbo's.

[dancetheman]

Thanks all for the input. I've been running 89 and it seems to run great. I think I'll take Bay 13's advice for the time being. I'm just a stock family wagon guy for now........What should my first upgrade be?

PS: Veneficus I'm updated now. Peace Out.

sorry for jacking the thread
but i see you are in WA
come to the NW meet
this sunday at Bham
read our thread to find out the details and all
just don't read all 102 pages.

[96DTM850]

YOU LUCKY B@ST@RDS!!!

In Cali, I would only dream of having 93 octane. Only thing we has is 91, bare minimum for any turbo or high end cars (Lexus, Benz, BMW, etc.)

Always use the 91 with Chevron. I don't believe turbos like the 87 or 89 stuff. At least not with my Supra or Galant VR4. Besides, why would you want to risk detonation with cheap stuff??? At the end per tank its only like $2 difference. Never tried the cheap stuff with the 850 since I got it, don't think I want to try.

~Just my 2psi~

[James A Sousa]

I have always driven "experienced" cars.

I use high test in all my bricks because they seem to run better.

Sometimes when I read people reccomend low test, or claim that as long as you don't hear pinging, low test is OK, I wonder if these people ever took an old engine apart.

I think that carbon, occasional preignition damage, wear, and aged components cause an engine to perform below par.

When Consumer Reports, or some reporter on TV discusses manufacturer's reccomendations, I honestly think that those guidelines considera nice, new engine, well tuned, running on a nice day.

Edited by James A Sousa, 27 February 2005 - 12:32 AM.