To be honest guys practical or technical reasons aside, there is a risk reward analysis here that doesn't add up.
For that $5 dollar savings per fill-up, it doesn't make sense to potentially compromise anything when we drive a bonafide gas guzzler in the first place.
If i have to fill up with anything less than 93 I will and not be too worried, but that doesn't make it compelling enough for me to do intentionally hence why I run premium.
I would definitely not be concerned about 91 (some have no choice, as I didn't living in CA) or perhaps even 89, but there is not enough incentive to go any lower than that. Even if that $5 somehow is not negligible for you when you chose to buy this vehicle, I would concede to my ignorance and spend slightly more any day of the week than to make assumptions that could have long term implications that would compromise the reason i bought into the brand, reliability and longevity.
Like I said, if it can be shown that the LX is making more power than an LC running 93 AND tuned for it baked in and does not have some sort of knock detection or other way of adapting to lower fuel grades that would end this conversation entirely. I personally would love to know what the concrete differences are and what if any adjustments are present between the two. If it were not for the LC I wouldn't even dare not run premium.
If i did that with my previous vehicles, I would need to be towed to the shop and thats exactly what has happened to me before.
We just have a lot of evidence pointing against the LX recommendation and it would be easy to debunk this for someone with knowledge and testing tools. I personally have not explored this and lack the knowledge, tools and experience to validate it. Im certain the geniuses here could do so easily and put this to rest one way or another.
For that $5 dollar savings per fill-up, it doesn't make sense to potentially compromise anything when we drive a bonafide gas guzzler in the first place.
If i have to fill up with anything less than 93 I will and not be too worried, but that doesn't make it compelling enough for me to do intentionally hence why I run premium.
I would definitely not be concerned about 91 (some have no choice, as I didn't living in CA) or perhaps even 89, but there is not enough incentive to go any lower than that. Even if that $5 somehow is not negligible for you when you chose to buy this vehicle, I would concede to my ignorance and spend slightly more any day of the week than to make assumptions that could have long term implications that would compromise the reason i bought into the brand, reliability and longevity.
Like I said, if it can be shown that the LX is making more power than an LC running 93 AND tuned for it baked in and does not have some sort of knock detection or other way of adapting to lower fuel grades that would end this conversation entirely. I personally would love to know what the concrete differences are and what if any adjustments are present between the two. If it were not for the LC I wouldn't even dare not run premium.
If i did that with my previous vehicles, I would need to be towed to the shop and thats exactly what has happened to me before.
We just have a lot of evidence pointing against the LX recommendation and it would be easy to debunk this for someone with knowledge and testing tools. I personally have not explored this and lack the knowledge, tools and experience to validate it. Im certain the geniuses here could do so easily and put this to rest one way or another.
