GMC Terrain, Equinox, and SRX Forum banner

61 - 80 of 98 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
You can use 87 octane. I use it all the time. I started off using 93 octane, but I got tired of paying for the difference. I can tell the difference in performance between 93 and 87 but for the type of driving I do most times it just doesn't matter. There's been no knocking whatsoever. I've got the 2018 Terrain Denali. If I were going to keep it long term, I might would only use 93, but the reality is, there's no way I'll have this thing past 2021, probably not past 2020. I get bored quickly, haha.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
190 Posts
I still think that mid grade, if available, makes for a good balance. In most situations a 89 octane fuel would allow the motor to achieve full potential on all but the most serious performance demands.

In my area...

Regular $2.52
Mid Grade $2.72
Premium $3.04

That 20 cent spread between regular and mid grade could be worth the money. I would have to agree that the spread between regular and premium or mid grade and premium is hard to justify.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,057 Posts
I’m showing my age now, but I remember when there was only a 5 cent difference between each grade of gas instead of the 25 cents it is now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JayTee2014 and tom3

·
Registered
Joined
·
306 Posts
I’m showing my age now, but I remember when there was only a 5 cent difference between each grade of gas instead of the 25 cents it is now.

I must be way older as I remember when there were only 2 grades, regular was around 95 octane at around 25 cents a gallon, 100 octane premium around 30 cents a gallon, way back in the days of tetra ethyl lead.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,057 Posts
Do you remember the gas wars between stations, free Sunday papers or free glasses with a fill up. Back then fill ups were 8 to 10 dollars.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
Do you remember the gas wars between stations, free Sunday papers or free glasses with a fill up. Back then fill ups were 8 to 10 dollars.
Lol! I pay about $6 dollars a 'tank' and in the summer I mostly get paid to fill up. Sold my Terrain a few years back when it started burning oil when only 1 year old. It's crazy to read people talking gas prices since moving to a Tesla. Reminds me of being the first with a smartphone, talking about Oleds, no home telephone, cutting cable, self driving cars, etc. Its also crazy to see so many people who don't understand what octane is...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
190 Posts
Yeah, I remember when it was just regular and ethyl. A common pubescent joke back then was tell someone who was hard up to go pump ethyl at the station. Sick kids jokes.

A lot of guys in my high school had part time jobs at gas stations pumping gas and such for customers. I lived on the farm, so I already had my work to do. But when I would stop by the stations and get a dime soda pop and chat with my schoolmates there, I can remember often watching customers pulling into a station and just asking for dollar or two of gas as opposed to filling up.

While there only a few cents difference between regular and premium back then, if we adjust for inflation to today's fuel prices, it equates to roughly the percentage price spread we see today in fuels. It seems more pronounced today, but back then, a few cents to a nickel more a gallon seemed just as drastic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wbw

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,057 Posts
Heck back then $5 would give us almost 20 gallons.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
469 Posts
Probably more to this than pulling some timing out when using lower octane fuel in this engine. These engineers do some tricks in these little engines to get more power and economy. One little thing: When the crankpin goes over TDC the piston wants to rock in the bore. Normally the wrist pin is offset to keep the piston side loaded to prevent this. Takes away some power so they will center the pin more in the piston to get a stronger 'push' with combustion. Have to have a really tight fit and special coatings on the skirts along with the more uniform burn with higher octane fuel to prevent the piston slap. Add this to a high compression ratio and put some added squeeze from that turbo and there is some serious stuff going on in that tiny four cylinder motor. I'd use the recommended fuel even though it hurts.



Anyone remember using "Blue Sunoco" in their old performance cars? I do, and I remember it hurt $ome.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
196 Posts
Anyone remember using "Blue Sunoco" in their old performance cars? I do, and I remember it hurt $ome.
I remember that Sunoco had that dial that you (or most likely the attendant) would adjust to give you one of about five or six grades of gas. I don't remember any other gas stations having that many grades of fuel. When I was little my dad used Sunoco so that what I used when I could.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
505 Posts
I remember that Sunoco had that dial that you (or most likely the attendant) would adjust to give you one of about five or six grades of gas. I don't remember any other gas stations having that many grades of fuel.
I remember Conoco had four pump settings in the 60/70's: Conotane, Regular, Super, and Premium.

.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
255 Posts
I will note that I do burn 89 in my V6 most of the times and will throw in 91 when going on long trips with a full load. A full load for me is 4 people, luggage stacked in the back, and a hitch mounted rack full of storage containers for supplies and overflow. I might notice a little better performance than 87, but the big thing I notice is the black soot at the twin chrome tailpipes. The higher the octane, the less soot I notice between wipe downs. The majority of my gas is BP so it is a Top Tier rated fuel. Just an observation as I figure if the tail pipe has less soot, there should be less build up inside the combustion chamber, past the exhaust valves, and through the exhaust system.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
What is important?

87= soot in my 2.0 t also check engine light twice and a problem with the ecm throwing codes. Stupid me for taking for granted GM would not be so @#$##@# for designing a motor that must burn 93 most of the time. After now reading the manual, I understand its not my choice; if I don't want to tear up the car (evidently). I noticed soot on the chrome tail pipes with only 2000 miles from I think was using 89. I'll report back after a few tanks of 93, if I can scrape together a few extra dollars that I could have spent at the walmart grocery store.
I was hoping to read the forum and learn fact but instead not sure what it was?
I know one thing the V6 in the arcadia I rented while my nox was hopelessly being examined at the dealership (to no avail), had plenty of power and was great on gas. I think the bottom line is it takes less to build a small 4 even w/a turbo than than it must to construct a v6 that runs sometimes just on 4 to conserve. In other words. I feel the 2.0 T of mine is cheaper and will not last or endure as much over the years. It fly's when the turbo powers up... but the Bang for your buck is missing. That V6 was nice. I will not make this mistake again I promise!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
505 Posts
87= soot in my 2.0 t
I have two Equinoxes, one with a 2.0, the other a 3.6.

Both are direct injected which will leave soot in the exhaust tips.

It is true that the 2.0 is best fueled with 93 octane to get the best performance, economy and engine protection from potential LSPI damage.

It is true that the 3.6 is probably more expensive to produce, weighs more and gets worse fuel economy.

It is also true that the 3.6 is also less complex, uses regular grade fuel, and will potentially have a longer service life with fewer problems along the way.

My 2019, 2.0 is my daily driver; it gets good fuel economy and is very powerful and fun to drive.

My 2016, 3.6 I only use for trips and is overall a better, more solid, substantially constructed vehicle that I expect will provide years of trouble free service.

Unfortunately there isn't a V6 option in the Equinox anymore; but there is the new Blazer ---



.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,334 Posts
Unfortunately there isn't a V6 option in the Equinox anymore; but there is the new Blazer -
.

There also is the GMC Acadia, which is essentially like the Blazer but also has the 3rd row seat option which, if not used, increases cargo space dramatically.
I had over looked the Acadia until I found pricing that was at or close to $10K off MSRP. That meant we could get into a 2019 Acadia SLT-1, with a V6 at just under $31K with an added 2% for GM Loyalty incentive.
I was considering the Blazer in maybe a year or two, but when the Acadia deal came along. . . too good to pass up.
https://www.cars.com/research/compare/?acodes=USC90CHS091F0,USC90GMS241E0
http://gmauthority.com/blog/2018/12/how-2019-chevrolet-blazer-measures-up-to-gmc-acadia-cadillac-xt5/

We got the new Acadia for less than it cost for our 2015 Equinox LTZ.
In my opinion .. .. anyone who might be interested in having an Equinox very close to the size of the 2nd Gen ought to monitor deals on the GMC Acadia. Built in Springhill, TN. . . along with the Cadillac XT5. We are impressed with the quality, fit, finish and initial MPG we are getting that is even somewhat better than our 2015 Equinox V6.

http://gmauthority.com/blog/gm/gmc/acadia/

http://gmauthority.com/blog/gm/cadillac/xt5/2019-cadillac-xt5/

NOTE - - Where Blazer is made.
https://www.autonews.com/sales/chevy-blazer-gms-newest-political-football
 
  • Like
Reactions: garbec01

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,057 Posts
I’m surprised that GM hasn’t promoted the Acadia more. I see a lot of Blazer, XT5, XT4 commercials but very few for the Acadia. There was tons of negative comments on the Acadia forum about the new size when it was first introduced. As JayTee has found out for those that don’t like the new size or the Turbo., or Start/Stop in the new Equinox/Terrain the Acadia is a viable option.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JayTee2014

·
Registered
Joined
·
505 Posts
Yes, forgot to add that the Blazer's origin is Mexico. Both of my Equinoxs' are Canadian.

The Acadia is a wonderful choice right now; made in USA, incentives, a V6, no stop/start, naturally aspirated, 87 octane fuel, etc.etc.

.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Thanks for the info. Right now my stresses are about having my first car that I always thought i might avoid and realizing how most gas stations attract customers with low regular and slap premium users in the face. I think I just need to resolve some issues because my millage was substandard, the problems will reveal itself then I am sure I'll enjoy it more.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
190 Posts
It is true that the 2.0 is best fueled with 93 octane to get the best performance, economy and engine protection from potential LSPI damage.
And that is a consideration that many have no realization of. Low Speed Pre-Ignition is a very real problem with direct injection gasoline engines. Proper oil is a component of preventing it as is the right octane fuel. LSPI has the potential to do a lot of damage internally.

This is why I often wonder why the newer turbo gas engines are generally not flex fuel capable. E85 has an octane rating of around 100.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
201 Posts
While I respect the opinions and the points of view. I too have over the last 30 years of driving, had a Chrysler Laser 2.2 Turbo, Cadillac STS, Cadillac Deville, both with NorthStar engines, Pontiac Grandprix with 3.8SC, Two Chevy Trax, 13,15 and now the Terrain 2.0. Not one issue with using 87 octane with only the Grandprix really needing 91 for it to produce a little more power. Granted there are vehicles that must have high octane, any Cadillac 4.9 engine, and the 4.5 as they do not have the knock sensors to retard when required.

It also looks like GMC is bringing back the 'Jimmy' for the 2021/2022 MY. It appears that it will be based on the Traverse and Enclave bodies which would make sense as GMC does not have a vehicle in that size anymore, notwithstanding the downsized Acadia. Google it and see.
 
61 - 80 of 98 Posts
Top