Originally Posted by GraphiteGhost
+fireamx, that article is dated last modified 1996? It references testing of cars like a 1978? Surely these statements can be taken with the premis the information is correct but is it prudent for the MB112? Also, the engine was designed for and originally used in the european fuel markets so I would think the octane ratings are skewered there some given the differences in fuel design and regulation?.
Interesting, after reading the article I came away thinking it "promoted" the use of high octane fuel in high compression engines. Even if they had engine management systems.
My Dad was in the car business for over 28 years. One thing I noticed as I got older, was that my Dad's "demo's" always seemed to run just a little bit better than everybody elses.
Sometime around my mid teens, I asked him why his car always ran so good, and got such great mileage?
His "trick" was to bump the timing up as far as it would go until it started to ping, then he'd back it off just a tad. He never used a timing light, just did it by ear. I don't even remember what grade of gas he used, but knowing my Dad, it was high test.
I always figured his method meant if you keep the timing advanced as high as the fuel would allow, you reaped the benefits of better fuel mileage, and top acceleration. Since higher octane allows even higher timing advances it's a win-win combination.
I never run anything but premium fuel in my car. because it's got over 10 to 1 compression ratio. The way I see it, it's a no brainer. But since it has its own engine management system, the higher the octane gas I put in it, the more the computer advances the timing, and the better my Crossfire performs.