Unleaded - Plus - or Premium - Which do you Use?
Username
Do you already have an account?
Forgot your password?
  • Log in or Sign up

    Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4 LastLast
    Results 1 to 35 of 126
    1. #1

      Unleaded - Plus - or Premium - Which do you Use?

      I've got a 2015.5 Volvo S60 T5 FWD.

      I use Premium...Just curious if others do, too or am I throwing away money?

    2. Remove Advertisements

      Advertisements
       

    3. #2
      Member Veefifty T5AWD's Avatar
      Join Date
      Feb 2009
      Location
      Lakes Region NH
      Posts
      5,698
      I have always run 93 in my cars. I feel for the extra $ I get better MPGs and engine protection. But that's just my $.02.
      Logan

      2015 S60 T6 AWD R-Design Polestar
      2008 S40 2.4i - hers
      2013 C30 Polestar Limited Edition #87/250 - (former) | 2005 V50 T5 AWD (former)

    4. #3
      Junior Member
      Join Date
      Dec 2014
      Location
      DFW Area
      Posts
      244
      I use premium, but have run regular a couple times. Since premium is the recommended (though not required) fuel, the power and torque ratings were obtained while running premium and I just don't want to give any of that power up! The car does feel a bit down on power when I've run regular, but that is subjective at this point. Fuel economy has been comparable whether running regular or premium.
      Current: 2014 Volvo S60 T5 Premier / Caspian Blue

    5. Remove Advertisements

      Advertisements
       

    6. #4
      Junior Member
      Join Date
      Jun 2012
      Location
      Pittsburgh, PA
      Posts
      788
      Quote Originally Posted by dmc79 View Post
      I use premium, but have run regular a couple times. Since premium is the recommended (though not required) fuel, the power and torque ratings were obtained while running premium and I just don't want to give any of that power up! The car does feel a bit down on power when I've run regular, but that is subjective at this point. Fuel economy has been comparable whether running regular or premium.
      +1
      That pretty much sums it all up. It's a matter of preference.
      If you want to be bored and confused please check out the existing thread which deals with the topic ad nauseam.
      No need to rehash this
      2012 S60 T5 Savile Gray/Beachwood

    7. #5
      Member Bmo Pete's Avatar
      Join Date
      Mar 2014
      Location
      N. Maryland
      Posts
      4,647
      nothing confusing: just use premium for Goodness sake.
      Rebel Blue, the new red! Intro & Updates Link
      Current: '15 V60 T6 3.0 AWD RD Plat | '15.5 XC60 T6 3.0 AWD Ocean Race Plat
      Prior: '15 S60 T6 3.0 RD Plat

    8. #6
      Member
      Join Date
      Aug 2015
      Location
      Hudson Valley, NY
      Posts
      2,190
      I've been running 91 non-ethanol in both the RD and my XC70 for the past year or so and the cars seem to like it pretty well. From my understanding that's not a choice that's available everywhere though.


      Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
      2004 XC70 2.5T AWD | 149K | Bad Swede 52mm Lift Kit | Sparco Terras BFG KO2s in 225/70r16 | IPD Strut Brace Conversion | IPD Skid Plate | IPD DEM Cover | AEM Dryflow Air Intake 2015 V60 R-Design | Sapphire Black Metallic | 44K | KPAX GT Performance Exhaust | IPD Rear Sway Bar | Powerflex Race Torque Mount Inserts

    9. #7
      Member matt1122's Avatar
      Join Date
      Feb 2012
      Location
      New Jersey
      Posts
      5,474
      I use 93 because 91 isn't available at the stations I use. It's 87, 89, or 93.

      Otherwise I'd use the recommended, which I believe is 91?

      I do have the older 3.0L with Polestar Tune, so it's a bit different. But I wouldn't pay more to go above recommended.
      Fairwell Tour: 2015 V60 T6 AWD R-Design | Electric Silver / Nubtex | Platinum eBLIS Tech HFS [Long-Term Review Thread]
      Daily Driver: 2017 V90 T6 AWD XC | Osmium Grey / Charcoal | Convenience B&W HUD 4C+Rear Air Suspension Polestar[Long-Term Review & Microblog Thread]
      Past: 1995 Volvo 854 T-5R | 2001 Volvo V70 XC 2.4T AWD | 2007 Volvo XC70 2.5T AWD

    10. #8
      Matt, did your Polestar Welcome Kit include the sticker recommending premium?
      Just curious. Mine did not and I think they pulled that from the kit at some point.
      Last edited by krn; 04-18-2017 at 05:37 PM.

    11. #9
      Member matt1122's Avatar
      Join Date
      Feb 2012
      Location
      New Jersey
      Posts
      5,474
      Mine was installed at port or factory as part of the R-Design treatment and the sticker is there.
      Fairwell Tour: 2015 V60 T6 AWD R-Design | Electric Silver / Nubtex | Platinum eBLIS Tech HFS [Long-Term Review Thread]
      Daily Driver: 2017 V90 T6 AWD XC | Osmium Grey / Charcoal | Convenience B&W HUD 4C+Rear Air Suspension Polestar[Long-Term Review & Microblog Thread]
      Past: 1995 Volvo 854 T-5R | 2001 Volvo V70 XC 2.4T AWD | 2007 Volvo XC70 2.5T AWD

    12. #10
      Member KCCM's Avatar
      Join Date
      Aug 2011
      Location
      Toronto, Canada
      Posts
      1,326
      With a P* tune on the RD 3.0, 93 or 94 octane will get you at least the quoted hp and torque - say no more


      Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
      KECA Kombi - Now '16 V60 T6 AWD R-Design - Just a K&N filter so far, but love the PoleStar tune.

    13. #11
      I just run 87.... roads in NJ suck and not too many places to open my T6.
      2011 S60 T6 & 2013 XC60 T6 P*

    14. #12
      Junior Member
      Join Date
      Apr 2016
      Location
      Adelaide, Australia
      Posts
      250
      Premium only, I've heard Direct Injection engines are very sensitive to knocking

      I think the little P* book recommends premium as well
      2015 V60 T5e - Sport Chassis - H&R Springs - IPD Rear Sway Bar - Polestar Optimization - Polestar Exhaust - Polestar Filter - Polestar Rear Diffuser

    15. #13
      93 only. I see about 1 MPG better mileage and little or no black soot at the exhaust tips.
      Den

    16. #14
      Junior Member
      Join Date
      Oct 2015
      Location
      Atlanta, GA
      Posts
      259
      Premium. Not paying for gas mileage (which I think has been proven to not be a thing) but for it's impact on engine tuning (performance + longevity).
      2016 Volvo V60 T5 Platinum
      Onyx Black/Beechwood/Sport Package

    17. #15
      Junior Member
      Join Date
      Aug 2016
      Location
      Michigan
      Posts
      8
      Premium only. Much more responsive with premium. No measurable difference in fuel economy for me.

    18. #16
      Almost exclusively 87 octane. I must be getting old but there are very few times anymore where I feel the need to really get on it hard. If I know I'm going to be on 2 lane highways where passing is a possibility, I'll opt for premium but otherwise, regular does fine and at .$80/gallon cheaper than premium, puts some cash in my pocket. I do make sure I use only top tier gas.
      2015 V60 T5 FWD, Platinum, Climate, BLIS
      2012 Camry XLE Hybrid
      1970 Camaro, original owner

    19. #17
      Junior Member
      Join Date
      Oct 2015
      Location
      Atlanta, GA
      Posts
      259
      Quote Originally Posted by mainsail View Post
      at .$80/gallon cheaper than premium, puts some cash in my pocket.
      That's quite a markup. It's only $0.40 in Atlanta.
      2016 Volvo V60 T5 Platinum
      Onyx Black/Beechwood/Sport Package

    20. #18
      Junior Member
      Join Date
      Jan 2016
      Location
      Naperville, IL
      Posts
      52
      87 regular unleaded most of the time. 93 premium when it gets really hot.


      Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
      2016 S60 Cross Country

    21. #19
      I seem to think my car runs better on premium..but that might just be subjective.

    22. #20
      Junior Member
      Join Date
      Sep 2013
      Location
      Texas
      Posts
      341
      Quote Originally Posted by robd View Post
      87 regular unleaded most of the time. 93 premium when it gets really hot.
      We burned 87 octane in our Saab Aero 2.3L, turbo, 4-cylinders most of the time and mid-grade in hot summers. We have been burning 87 year-round in both our 5-cylinder T5 Volvos with great performance and no problems so far.
      2015,5 V60CC Savile Grey met, BLIS, heated front seats, convenience pkg, rubber mats
      2014 S60 T5 Premier Plus w/sport, xenons, eBLIS, heated front seats, SCT w/nav (hers)
      2004 Saab 9-5 Aero Wagon (sold)
      2003 Saab 9-5 Aero Sedan (sold)
      1996 Saab 900S (sold)

    23. #21
      Junior Member
      Join Date
      Oct 2016
      Location
      NYC
      Posts
      77
      turbo car - gotta have premium!

    24. #22
      Quote Originally Posted by KCCM View Post
      With a P* tune on the RD 3.0, 93 or 94 octane will get you at least the quoted hp and torque - say no more


      Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
      Why so coy, lol. Do you know more about the measurable relationship between octane and output with these cars? Please do share! My car did seem to run a little quicker and trap a little higher when I ran race gas at the track, but it was hard to say for sure as I was running my stock intercooler and temps were dropping at the same time, so I couldn't tell if the extra power was more about the slightly cooler air or the higher octane.
      2011 S60 T6 with Polestar tune
      13.1 at 101 mph

      Current mods: KW V3 coilovers, DO88 fmic, Ferrita downpipe, Powerflex "race" torque mount inserts, more to come...

    25. #23
      Member KCCM's Avatar
      Join Date
      Aug 2011
      Location
      Toronto, Canada
      Posts
      1,326
      Quote Originally Posted by Bunnspeed View Post
      Why so coy, lol. Do you know more about the measurable relationship between octane and output with these cars? Please do share! My car did seem to run a little quicker and trap a little higher when I ran race gas at the track, but it was hard to say for sure as I was running my stock intercooler and temps were dropping at the same time, so I couldn't tell if the extra power was more about the slightly cooler air or the higher octane.
      Did ask P* directly and they declined to answer.
      In forced induction engines, higher boost and/or higher compression (like the Drive-e 4s) requires either higher octane fuel or retarded timing to prevent 'knock' (pre-detonation). Since the '90s, Volvo has used relatively low-pressure turbos, medium compression, and sophisticated engine management to produce very drivable, fuel efficient I5 and I6 engines that worked fine on regular or mid-grade gas. The turbos are relatively small and spin up quickly to produce plenty of torque low in the RPM range, after which the waste gate bleeds off boost to produce a torque 'plateau' with relatively low peak hp. To increase hp in a 'sport' model like my previous V70R, Volvo would increase the size of the turbo (and add supercharging in the recent drive-e P*) and often decrease compression, then re-tune.
      The easy way to tune a regular Volvo turbo for more hp, such as the P* tunes used for the RDs, is to increase the maximum boost before the waste gate intervenes and then to re-map the fuel delivery and knock controls. Since the basic compression, turbo and induction/exhaust of the engine remain unchanged, the only way you can access the extra torque and power from the higher-rpm boost is if the engine management system doesn't have to retard the timing to prevent knock. So the higher the octane the better.
      This is very noticeable in my T6 6-cylinder RD, which gets about 90% of the improvement of the full P* version with 93/94 octane fuel. From the P* forum, I gather it's closer to 100% if you swap for the larger turbo.
      My guess is P* declined to answer because they tested the RD tune with mid-grade or 91 octane and the full P* version with 93+ to show a bigger 'bump' for the more expensive car. The other European trick to de-emphasize performance (for insurance or to make the 'sport' model look better) is to quote hp at a lower rpm, or even a range of rpm (i.e. while going up and then back down the torque curve).
      There, a long-winded answer testing the limits of my knowledge of the matter


      Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
      KECA Kombi - Now '16 V60 T6 AWD R-Design - Just a K&N filter so far, but love the PoleStar tune.

    26. #24
      This thread has been done a bunch of times. I did a blog post on this topic, here's the excerpt:
      Over the last 11 tanks of gasoline I've done a modest experiment. I ran my first 5 tanks of gas on 87 octane, then performed a "washout" tank of premium, and then ran my next 5 tanks on 91 or 93 octane (whichever was available).

      Regular octane average over 5 tanks = 24.1 mpg
      Premium octane average over 5 tanks = 23.2 mpg

      Weather during this test was extremely similar, with most days around or below 32 F and some random warm days thrown in. This was all on winter fuel which is normally 10% ethanol. I kept track of the city/highway balance for each tank and this was similar across both groups as well.

      So there isn't really a difference in fuel economy. What about driving feel? There does seem to be a very subtle difference in smoothness and "eagerness" of the engine when using premium. However, this isn't blinded or controlled in any manner so I can't be confident that this is a real difference.

      Although the extra couple of bucks per tank isn't a huge deal, I'm sticking with 87 octane for now. The small difference in driving feel just doesn't seem worth the extra money with no improvement in fuel economy.

    27. #25
      Junior Member
      Join Date
      Apr 2014
      Location
      North NJ
      Posts
      161
      Premium. It runs better and frankly it's a near-luxury car, if you want regular gas, buy a Ford.
      Current:
      2015.5 S60 T5 AWD Platinum (Bright Silver Metallic/ Off-Black) w. Climate pkg and BLIS, 2014 Buick Enclave AWD Prem.
      Past:
      2015 S60 T5 FWD Platinum,2012 Buick Enclave AWD, etc.

    28. #26
      Junior Member
      Join Date
      Jun 2012
      Location
      Pittsburgh, PA
      Posts
      788
      Quote Originally Posted by mzcool View Post
      Premium. It runs better and frankly it's a near-luxury car, if you want regular gas, buy a Ford.
      There you have it. All of you using 87 sell your Volvo right now and go buy a Ford. Don't bother us with your cheapness.
      2012 S60 T5 Savile Gray/Beachwood

    29. #27
      Junior Member
      Join Date
      Jul 2014
      Location
      Harrisburg, PA
      Posts
      84
      91 Ethanol Free. Been using that **** on both the S60/40. Never seen a check engine light to date. Luck perhaps but who knows.

    30. #28
      Member matt1122's Avatar
      Join Date
      Feb 2012
      Location
      New Jersey
      Posts
      5,474
      Maybe the cars are just built well? I haven't seen a Check Engine light on my Volvo cars in about 12 years.
      Fairwell Tour: 2015 V60 T6 AWD R-Design | Electric Silver / Nubtex | Platinum eBLIS Tech HFS [Long-Term Review Thread]
      Daily Driver: 2017 V90 T6 AWD XC | Osmium Grey / Charcoal | Convenience B&W HUD 4C+Rear Air Suspension Polestar[Long-Term Review & Microblog Thread]
      Past: 1995 Volvo 854 T-5R | 2001 Volvo V70 XC 2.4T AWD | 2007 Volvo XC70 2.5T AWD

    31. #29
      Junior Member
      Join Date
      Sep 2013
      Location
      Texas
      Posts
      341
      I don't care to purchase a car that requires premium fuel, that's why I am troubled by the new T6 turbo/supercharged engines requiring premium fuel. I can afford it, I'm just cheap and don't really require the performance. If I can zip onto the expressway and pass a slowpoke on a straightaway with regular gas I am happy.
      2015,5 V60CC Savile Grey met, BLIS, heated front seats, convenience pkg, rubber mats
      2014 S60 T5 Premier Plus w/sport, xenons, eBLIS, heated front seats, SCT w/nav (hers)
      2004 Saab 9-5 Aero Wagon (sold)
      2003 Saab 9-5 Aero Sedan (sold)
      1996 Saab 900S (sold)

    32. #30
      Member matt1122's Avatar
      Join Date
      Feb 2012
      Location
      New Jersey
      Posts
      5,474
      These cars don't feel very zippy with regular fuel, IMHO.
      Fairwell Tour: 2015 V60 T6 AWD R-Design | Electric Silver / Nubtex | Platinum eBLIS Tech HFS [Long-Term Review Thread]
      Daily Driver: 2017 V90 T6 AWD XC | Osmium Grey / Charcoal | Convenience B&W HUD 4C+Rear Air Suspension Polestar[Long-Term Review & Microblog Thread]
      Past: 1995 Volvo 854 T-5R | 2001 Volvo V70 XC 2.4T AWD | 2007 Volvo XC70 2.5T AWD

    33. #31
      Quote Originally Posted by AeroDan View Post
      I don't care to purchase a car that requires premium fuel, that's why I am troubled by the new T6 turbo/supercharged engines requiring premium fuel. I can afford it, I'm just cheap and don't really require the performance. If I can zip onto the expressway and pass a slowpoke on a straightaway with regular gas I am happy.
      Totally agree. I much prefer using 87 if there's not a big difference. Why spend the extra money if the benefit is subtle to nonexistent?

    34. #32
      Member
      Join Date
      Aug 2015
      Location
      Hudson Valley, NY
      Posts
      2,190
      Quote Originally Posted by bomgd3 View Post
      Totally agree. I much prefer using 87 if there's not a big difference. Why spend the extra money if the benefit is subtle to nonexistent?
      For the subtle benefit; DUH


      Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
      2004 XC70 2.5T AWD | 149K | Bad Swede 52mm Lift Kit | Sparco Terras BFG KO2s in 225/70r16 | IPD Strut Brace Conversion | IPD Skid Plate | IPD DEM Cover | AEM Dryflow Air Intake 2015 V60 R-Design | Sapphire Black Metallic | 44K | KPAX GT Performance Exhaust | IPD Rear Sway Bar | Powerflex Race Torque Mount Inserts

    35. #33
      Member matt1122's Avatar
      Join Date
      Feb 2012
      Location
      New Jersey
      Posts
      5,474
      For what it's worth, it was subtle on all of my 5-cylinder Volvo cars.

      But iIt was not subtle on my 3.0T T6 and if it's subtle on the 2.0ST T6, reviews are lying about how much power is there.
      Fairwell Tour: 2015 V60 T6 AWD R-Design | Electric Silver / Nubtex | Platinum eBLIS Tech HFS [Long-Term Review Thread]
      Daily Driver: 2017 V90 T6 AWD XC | Osmium Grey / Charcoal | Convenience B&W HUD 4C+Rear Air Suspension Polestar[Long-Term Review & Microblog Thread]
      Past: 1995 Volvo 854 T-5R | 2001 Volvo V70 XC 2.4T AWD | 2007 Volvo XC70 2.5T AWD

    36. #34
      Quote Originally Posted by bomgd3 View Post
      This thread has been done a bunch of times. I did a blog post on this topic, here's the excerpt:
      That's great that it's been discussed before but those discussions are relatively useless if they are entirely subjective with regard to measurable performance or even butt-dyno performance. Some people have very vague butt-dynos and others' are much more dialed-in precision measurement tools, lol. We can close the book on this subject if and only if someone does dyno measurements and/ or quarter mile measurements with different octanes under identical conditions, otherwise it's just speculation and uninformed opinion, not fact. Many of us aren't all that concerned with fuel economy and are willing to spend a few dollars per tank more to have better throttle response and perhaps shave a tenth off our quarter mile times in the process. Some of us track our cars and drive them very hard, very often. Some of us aren't satisfied with "peppy" passing of dawdling minivans at part throttle and would rather pull down S4s at triple digit speeds

      I guess for some, merely adequate performance is worth saving a few dollars per tank, or at the time of purchase (the ole T5 versus T6 argument), while others here place a greater emphasis on performance than on cost per mile. Neither set of priorities is universally right or wrong, but you can't use your own priorities to decide when a topic is or isn't worth discussing further by people who care about such things.
      Last edited by Bunnspeed; 04-21-2017 at 01:23 PM.
      2011 S60 T6 with Polestar tune
      13.1 at 101 mph

      Current mods: KW V3 coilovers, DO88 fmic, Ferrita downpipe, Powerflex "race" torque mount inserts, more to come...

    37. #35
      And here's the mother ship on the topic.

      From the '13 (5 & 6 cylinder) owner's book:
      Volvo recommends premium fuel for best performance, but using 87 octane or above will not affect engine reliability.

      Demanding driving
      In demanding driving conditions, such as operating the vehicle in hot weather, towing a trailer, or driving for extended periods at higher altitudes than normal, it may be advisable to switch to higher octane fuel (91 or higher) or to change gasoline brands to fully utilize your engine's capacity, and for the smoothest possible operation.
      I always use premium myself.
      Last edited by vroomr; 04-21-2017 at 11:32 PM.

    38. Remove Advertisements

      Advertisements
       

    Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4 LastLast