deleted serves no real value in this thread

 

Politics of gas quality? I have no idea what you are talking about. I am not dancing around anything… just stating facts. When I said sulfur wasn’t much of an issue, I meant from the standpoint of blending it. But guess what… contrary to your earlier statement, gasoline does contain sulfur. And I have never had a catalytic converter give me a problem. The proof is in the pudding, as they say. Obviously sulfur would cause issues at high levels.

 

deleted serves no real value in this thread

 

deleted serves no real value in this thread

 

I can say thats likely true in some cases - however IF the " average driver " is given all the data on not just performance but the potential for engine and emission damage that low octane fuel can could create .... - I would bet a good percentange would up from 87 to 89 at the very least - As well Mazda owners dont ususlly fall in the " average " catagory - most have some level of driving enthusiasiam over the person that buys a toyota honda nissan etc

 

I would reconsider that statement. There's some very quick Toyota's Honda's and Nissan's on the market. Went for a ride in a Hyundai (yes boring) I30N on the weekend on the track. Boy what a car.

 

Well not to be pugalistic , but if you read the Mazda Cx5 owners manual on fuel recommendations ( which i posted ) it states 87 octane or HIGHER - thus it does recommend regular , mid-grade and premium , the language is just not straightforward - Needs - I suppose is a critical word - will it run on 87 yes but not correctly on any less octane, it will also run on premium - yet the way it runs is verifiably different depending on the octane. Premium fuel delivers better gas mileage , more power , Raises the AKI- knock index . , adds detergents and in some premium fuel top tier brands added lubricants,
It could be written with the exact same meaning this way:

" Use the highest avaliable premium fuel for maximum power and never anything less than 87 octane , which can cause severe engine damage and emmisions problems ".

So it means the same thing - but if written this way certainly alters ones awarness . Yes thats the very essence of this thread ..what fuel does the CX5 " need " and possibly its different depending on the driver !

 

My wife is the primary driver of the CX5. Generally, she drives about 2 miles daily and that is not in one trip, but a mile out, wait an hour, then a mile back. That is significantly more of a problem for the engine than 87 octane in my opinion. We will take the car maybe twice a month to the grocery which gets it wound out on the expressway for a decent period of time and I tend to grab it about every third or fourth fill-up and put 91 in it and then drive it for an hour or so, but every third or fourth fill-up is about every two to three months. I always use 91 in the MX5 and will put 89 in the Jeep which is primarily used for trips now (and in the winter if the weather is bad). The MX5 gets put away late in the fall and stays on stands with a battery tender and fuel stabilizer until spring, so I do use the CX5 a bit more in the winter, but it's still not getting the kind of driving it needs. Even with this mistreatment, it's still a peppy little car that is nice to drive. It's 12 years old and has 56k miles on it. I'm long past the time where I needed new cars every four or five years.

 

The average US citizen simply isn't very bright.
We rank 21st globally for average IQ and it's pretty plain to see if one bothers to look around.
As for the average driver, the facts show (on any forum, including this one) the majority have never even opened their owner's manual, and it doesn't matter what brand they drive.
It is also painfully clear the average person doesn't give a hoot about data only opinions.
Now I'm going to go take a Tylenol, it's okay, I just look pregnant
It is what it is.

 

IQ - is a refection of conformity, not necessacarily a measurment of creative genius

Regardless of your judgment of others - I believe all people are interested in the fundamentals of thier automobiles - in this case fuel - Learning is constant and unlimited

Schrodingers cat superposition may be applicable in this case-