[Jamesortiz18]

I’ve read and seen quite a few people online say that power falls off at high rpm. This is true to an extent. When i bought the car i was using 87 gas. I did notice the power fall off. One of my friends that owns a turbo car told me to use 93 on turbo cars as it will improve mpg and power and also engine reliability. Drove it for about 100 miles on 93 before i did some hard pulls and holy crap what a difference. Car pulls a lot harder and the power is consistent all throughout the rev range. Was on the highway doing 60. Dropped to about 4th and put my foot down. Car accelerated like a bat out of ****. Before i knew it i was doing 100. So use 93 if you can.

 

[R1600Turbo]

The stock ECU does pull timing with 87, so that is probably the difference you are feeling. Then again our small turbo runs out of steam up top as well.

 

[Jamesortiz18]

Haven’t noticed, then again i shift at around 6k. Never take it all the way to redline.

 

[Stu_Padaso]

simple put, you're out of the power band. Additionally the turbo is uber small, so it runs out of it's performance range.

 

[moneynmotion]

So I have read a few articles on this and I have tried 87, 89, and now 93 due to different theories. Having said that I will say that I did not notice a HUGE difference in performance and MPG seems to be around the same. However I will say is when it comes to engine performance, acceleration feels smoother, and off the line I have better response. The car does not have a lot of off the line low RPM grunt but with 93 I did notice a difference. 87 and 89 did feel different and more sluggish. Is it enough of a difference to keep me using 93, I would say yes actually. I would say try it for yourself, 93 is expensive and not absolutely necessary all the time. For me and for now I will continue to use it unless it gets stupid expensive and then I may move down to 89.

 

[Ahrixu]

Power loss at high RPM? Turbo upgrade >

 

[Purplehazeffc]

I have used 95 (ron) which is the equivalent to the US 91 (mon) ever since I have had the car..

I prefer using the better quality fuel rather than looking at the octane rating..

Our lower grade here 91 (ron) equivalent to the US 87 (mon) has a high amount of sulphur..

 

[birdman]

I'm also in Aus and pretty religious about 95 RON, car does feel smoother on it, plus it's the best value becuase 98 RON is 10-15 c/L more again which is hard to justify in the long run. Part of why I do it also is that my two motorcycles require 95 RON minimum, so I fill the car every 2 weeks on the cheap day (yes theres a cheap fuel day every week in Aus its weird as ****) and fill a 20L fuel can for my bikes at the same time, what I gain in going to the servo a lot less often is worth it to me.

95 RON fill car + fuel can + cheap day + 4 c/L off = win imo.

As for power falling off at high RPM, I don't often need to run the needle past about 4500rpm really, but she feels like she pulls hard to 6.

 

[solo_gen]

So I have read a few articles on this and I have tried 87, 89, and now 93 due to different theories. Having said that I will say that I did not notice a HUGE difference in performance and MPG seems to be around the same. However I will say is when it comes to engine performance, acceleration feels smoother, and off the line I have better response. The car does not have a lot of off the line low RPM grunt but with 93 I did notice a difference. 87 and 89 did feel different and more sluggish. Is it enough of a difference to keep me using 93, I would say yes actually. I would say try it for yourself, 93 is expensive and not absolutely necessary all the time. For me and for now I will continue to use it unless it gets stupid expensive and then I may move down to 89.

I have no MPG improvement using 93 here in Texas. Seemed smoother, but no 0-60 improvement. Measure with Torque app.

 

[Voodoo Idol]

I have no MPG improvement using 93 here in Texas. Seemed smoother, but no 0-60 improvement. Measure with Torque app.

I'm also in TX. While true that you won't see a big improvement (maybe a 3 - 5%) and you're not going to see a 0 - 60 improvement, it's true that the ECU pulls timing for lower octane fuels.