2010 Volkswagen GTI: Don't Shoot the Messenger

On the last page of the "premium required" list, it list:

2012 Toyota FT-86 2dr Coupe (2.5L 4cyl Turbo 6M)

Is this confirmation that the FT-86 will be a turbocharged 2.5L Flat 4? Since this information is directly from the manufacturers.

Great news if this is true.

it isnt 95 octane its 95 ron

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octane_rating

AKI: 91
RON: 95

AKI is the standard we use here in the states and I believe most Asian countries use the RON standard. Don't know about Europe. But the bottom line is those are similar fuel, just different rating.

I have to admit that the instruction inside the fuel filler flap is a bit confusing, it says unleaded fuel only with a big "premium" at the bottom without saying that it is "recommended". However, I don't think there is any doubt that this GTI DOES NOT REQUIRE premium fuel because if it does, it will read as following:

"PREMIUM UNLEADED FUEL ONLY"

The difference between what "octane" means to the US and what it means to other places in the world are important. We use (R+M)/2 to arrive at an octane number or anti-knock index. So "octane" in europe uses the Research Octane Number and here it is the average of RON and Motor Octane Number.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octane_rating

A Research Octane Number of 95, and a Motor Octane Number of 87 yields an anti-knock index of 91, which in California is called "premium."

"it isnt 95 octane its 95 ron"

oops, I just noticed that after you said that, so just 91 oct which is premium.

Carroll, while it does not say required, the engine calibration is for premium. Sure, it'll run on regular with significant performance degradation. The engine is relatively high compression for a turbo engine and that turbo is sized to spool up instantly. So in regular city driving, you'll be in boost whenever you're accelerating. The engine will pull timing to prevent grenading itself hurting performance. So while not absolutely required, its highly recommended. THe sonata on the other hand is actually calibrated to run on regular, there's a difference. So you might come out in a wash based on mileage and fuel cost, but sacrifice performance and potential longterm engine damage.

I'd still put premium in it, especially given the verbiage on the first picture.

I was under the impression that you are definitely getting less power when you use regular when premium is recommended.

Track test it on regular then compare.

Carroll, you are now part of the Rebel Alliance. This is your first post that poked the Hornet's Nest. ( since you read books!)

Oh god I was quoted in your article. I left a post minutes after the one you quoted pleading to have everyone ignore that paragraph because of my terrible ignorance.

I had converted the cents per mile to dollars per mile (16.7 cents/mile -> .167 dollars/mile) for convenience and then promptly forgotten that I had done so. The result was already in dollar form with no need for conversion, thus the real price difference was $1.92, not $0.0192.

Despite my error, I still stick by my guns that you should use what is recommended, whether or not it is technically required.

Question: will you put top-tier 87 or second-tier 91 gas in it ?

New cars have very good knock sensors. If running on regular the engine will retard timing if knock is detected, which should result in about 10-15 less hp.

If you crunch the numbers for how much it costs to pay an extra 20-30 cents per galloon more for premium it really isn't that much money...Say 15,000 miles per year, average 25 mpg, additional cost of premium is $0.30, then it is $180 per year to step up to premium fuel. If I am going to spend the money on any performance orientated vehicle I will gladly sign up for premium fuel.

I have the BPY/EA113 version of the 2.0T (MKV GTI and the MKVI Golf R uses a slightly beefed up version with a larger turbo) and I had to put regular in it a few times when we had no gas in my city. It works and doesn't spark knock, but it feels like you've castrated the poor car. I'm guessing the 200hp rating is on regular unleaded instead of premium. My car's compression ratio is 10.3:1 vs 9.5:1 in the EA888/TSI so the effect might be less pronounced on Edmunds' GTI.

interesting, in my manual (2009 GTI) they said running 87 octane was ok... now they change the verbage to this. the power difference is when you floor it... cruising around its still a torquey lil beast. however, i only tried it once to see the difference... i don't let gas prices take away from my fun.

Isn't 91 octane like an upper-mid-grade? 93 is proper premium.

When I read this fuel door label, one line jumps out at me. "Min R+M/2 91". Disregarding the semantics of "recommended" versus "required", the minimum specification listed on the door is 91 AKI. Using less would be like torquing a bolt to less than spec. Would you do that? You could justifiably be voiding your warranty by using out-of-specification fuel.

Just to reflect, does anyone know why there even three grades of gasoline? What is the purpose? In my mind it'd be easier to standardize on one grade and design all engines around that. Should bring the cost marginally down due to economies of scale and making one product instead of three. Not no mention the various regional blends... Why not a single national gasoline standard?

"One reader pointed us to a photo of the label in fuel filler flap as evidence that premium is required. Here's the label in our GTI, and while I don't want to parse its meaning like some kind of amateur attorney, I will point out that it says "unleaded fuel only." Not "premium unleaded fuel only."

Why are we pretending that the fuel cap just reads "unleaded fuel only"?
It clearly says unleaded fuel only, premium, 91 octane.

+1000000 scottyscooter

Are we in the frickin' Twilight Zone???! It says RIGHT ON THE DOOR,

"PREMIUM MIN. 91"

What human looks at that door and says "Oh gee maybe premium isn't required let's read the manual"??

I actually checked to see if it was April Fools Day. Is not. Carol Lachnit, how about asking the Engineering Editor HOW TO READ.....

-Rod

"Isn't 91 octane like an upper-mid-grade? 93 is proper premium."

Last time I was in CA, they had 91 octane for premium. In Oregon it is 92. I just read a letter from the Department of Ag in WA State that described 90 as the maximum octane rating for "mid-grade"

"Just to reflect, does anyone know why there even three grades of gasoline? What is the purpose? In my mind it'd be easier to standardize on one grade and design all engines around that. Should bring the cost marginally down due to economies of scale and making one product instead of three. Not no mention the various regional blends... Why not a single national gasoline standard?"

If they had one grade of fuel I would assume it would have to be at the high octane levels, 90-91 octane. Or reduce the compression ratios and remove turbos. If economies of scale reduced the price of cars (development costs/manufacturing) and gas, I'm not sure it would be significant for consumers.

Are you serious? You think it's ok to put regular gas into a high compression turbocharged car, even though it clearly says 91 or 95 (premium) on the label? What do you think the word "Only" means?

To add to this, they even list minimum acceptable values (91 and 95 RON).

I think Mid-grade fuel is a huge money maker for the fuel companies. Anyone remember when there used to be regular leaded, unleaded, and premium? When they removed the leaded gas, they filled one of the slots with mid-grade.

In Oregon, we have 87, 89, and 92. No one needs 89 octane, but since they can charge a bit more for it, why not have it?

Some stations only have 87 and 92 (Costco), and that makes much more sense.

+ to scottyscooter

It says premium right under unleaded fuel only. Living in Northern CA, whenever I see premium unleaded, it is 91. I have a 2.0T Jetta which says the same thing as the GTI fuel door and I have noticed the difference in the performance when regular unleaded was used.

Also, owners manual are very generic and can be used for many different variations of a model. For example, the owners manual in my 2.0T Jetta also has information about the 2.5 and TDI Jettas. They put that info in there to cover all the models and leave it to the driver to know what they own. Looking at the label in the fuel door, it clearly has the word "PREMIUM"

yellowbal,

That makes a lot of sense! My question, though, is who actually buys midgrade? Everyone I know either purchases regular or premium.

I also thought that I'd point out that one of the stations I regularly fuel up at features four grades: 87, 89 (+10 cents), 91 (+15 cents), and 93 (+20 cents).

To add another data point to the differences by region, I saw a pump in Anchorage that had 87/88.5/90 AKI fuel for regular/mid-grade/premium. It was the first time I'd seen a fractional AKI on a pump, as well as the lowest rating for premium I'd ever seen.

I don't see why we usually lag Europe with regard to fuel availability. Germany has 100 RON commonly available and had exclusively low-sulfur Diesel long before it was commonplace in the U.S.

Personally, in my '04 Jetta 1.8T I use the 89 as a compromise between the 87 regular and the 93 premium that is typical in Illinois (94 at Shell I think). Obviously it's less than 91, but I don't like that I have to pay an extra $0.20/gallon or more for an octane level higher than required.

Yet another example of California EPA reg's rising up to bite the rest of the country in the pocketbook. You think that it is an accident that minimum octane level for cars that require "Premium" is almost always 91 and not the 93 that is generally called "Premium" outside the People's Republik of California?

I think midgrade is there to rip off people who have cars that really take regular.

Modern cars generally have sophisticated octane management. All the way back in 1994 (possibly before), for example, GM had a low octane learn mode. If it saw repeated knock retard (which itself is based on a knock sensing and retard algorithm) in the same rpm and load range, it would "learn" that less spark advance was probably best on that area. This was called low octane learn mode.

The newer stuff has entire low and high octane spark advance tables and I believe it blends between them as necessary. At least for GM, running 87 in a car "designed" for premium isn't going to hurt a thing, even back in the 90s. But I can't speak for VW.

And this doesn't even go into the spark plug ionization current method of sensing knock which is WAY more sophisticated than the "microphone in block" method that describes conventional knock sensors.
http://delphi.com/manufacturers/auto/powertrain/gas/ignsys/ionized/

Um, like I said, the specification is there for a reason. If, for example, you need to spend a minimum of $10.00 to get a free car wash, don't expect to get a free wash after spending $9.00. If minimum wage is $7.25 an hour, your employer can't get away with paying $6.25. If your minimum lugnut torque is 90 ft lb, it's not ok to torque to 75. Similarly, if your minimum AKI is 91, using anything less is potentially warranty-voidable.

"If they had one grade of fuel I would assume it would have to be at the high octane levels, 90-91 octane. Or reduce the compression ratios and remove turbos. If economies of scale reduced the price of cars (development costs/manufacturing) and gas, I'm not sure it would be significant for consumers."

So... your explanation for the purpose of having three grades of gasoline... is what exactly? You're not convinced it would benefit anyone, so it's not even worth looking into?

"I think midgrade is there to rip off people who have cars that really take regular."

Chrysler seems to have a history of specifying 89 on some engines like the old 3.5L V6 and Hemi.

It will run just fine on regular...in fact, why don't you guys do a track test. It will put out a little less power, and your test could show just exactly the differences.

I can tell just a slight difference on my Lexus GS....only at full throttle though.

What a stupid post.

When gas was under $1 per gallon for regular, buying premium meant paying 30% more for fuel. That would rightfully raise a question.

Now regular gas is almost $4. Buying premium means paying 7.5% more. Are you poor? Do you live on $1/day? What kind of thinking goes into questioning what fuel to get if price difference is pretty much NOTHING and the car clearly says premium recommended? This is really beyond stupid.

I also find it interesting that in the Edmunds "premium-required" list referenced, closely related cars/engines have different requirements which also vary by model year. For example:

A3 2.0T: Premium required in 2008 and 2011, but not 2009 and 2010.
GTI 2.0T: Premium required in 2008 but not in subsequent years.
Jetta 2.0T: Required in 2008-9 but not in subsequent years.

So if the Jetta 2.0T (Sportwagen and GLI) required premium in '09, why not the GTI? And if the A3 required premium in 2011, then why not its VW siblings using the same engine?

Perhaps it's a case of, like Honda (no vehicles except the Si require premium) vs. Acura (almost all vehicles require premium), wanting to limit the exposure the "mass-market" vehicles have to requiring premium because the buyer of a "luxury" vehicle (if you can call an Acura that) is more tolerant of paying the price premium for premium fuel, even though the engines are more alike than different.

"Now regular gas is almost $4. Buying premium means paying 7.5% more. Are you poor? Do you live on $1/day? What kind of thinking goes into questioning what fuel to get if price difference is pretty much NOTHING and the car clearly says premium recommended? This is really beyond stupid."

This is a great point. Yet intuition suggests the exact opposite: when gas is high, every penny counts. But I agree with you. Run premium now, more than ever, especially if it actually increase mileage a bit (if your car can benefit from it - not all can - and some that say absolutely nothing about premium can benefit, you just have to experiment or research).

Cadillac made a push to go to 87 on a bunch of vehicles, including the Northstar around 2002. Even the DI 3.0 V6 in the base CTS makes 270hp @ 7000rpm on 87 octane!

@travelingman79

Maybe the list is wrong.

I cannot believe that the 2.0T run on regular.

Hey, good discussion for such a stupid post!

-Rod

On my evo, the difference in power between 91 and 93 octanes was about 30 HP. I bet the golf will take a big hit in peak torque and HP. Id guess 20% in going from 91 to 87. Dyno test anyone?

"Now regular gas is almost $4. Buying premium means paying 7.5% more. Are you poor? Do you live on $1/day? What kind of thinking goes into questioning what fuel to get if price difference is pretty much NOTHING and the car clearly says premium recommended? This is really beyond stupid."

Exactly! The issue of whether a car requires premium fuel has NEVER been a concern when I am car shopping. Let's assume that the price difference between regular and premium is 25 cents. If you own a car that gets 25 mpg and you drive it 15,000 miles annually the price differential works out to the huge sum of -I hope you are sitting down- $150 per year
That's a whopping $12.50 per month.
Big deal...

I have a feeling that If the GTI were Carroll's own car she would put In the premium,then againg I could be wrong. I always go with the recommended gas In my own cars,If Im renting,maybe not.

@ travelingman79

Good point there! I noticed that the 2010 Nissan 370Z *requires* premium, but the 2009 Nissan 370Z doesn't (according to Edmund's Lists). So the question is, what happened between the two years? Power is the same - could engine management have changed?

Also, its only a few bucks more, maybe $3 per fillup, so I'm unconcerned.

Kevin

On the 370z, I'd guess emissions. To run lower grade would require less ignition timing advance. That would increase egts and nox.

I just also like to point out there according to gas company adverts that their premium gas has more detergent. Your GTI is direct injected no? Where gumming up those injectors can cause some problems so is saving a few cents (considering that edmunds pays for the fuel anyhow) really worth it?

Also note that the Audi cars on your list of premium required cars uses the same 2.0 engine. So just how accurate is your premium required list? What's different between those Audi 2.0 T and the VW 2.0T?

^^ And maybe Edmunds list is wrong........just sayin. Those year to year changes dont make sense.

-Rod

Top Tier = Who tests fuel to say it's top tier? What unbiased organization certifies a brand as top tier. Who owns the top tier fuel site?

I'm no VW/Audi expert, but I think we're dealing with several versions of what's commonly referred to as the 2.0T between 2005 and 2011. Check out the info at the Audi/VW APR chip site and you'll see different HP and Torque dyno #s for various STOCK engines over the years @ 91 vs. 93 octane. Basically, the mfr quoted power ratings are on 91, with about 6% more for 93 on 2010 2.0T TSI engines.

BTW, no affiliation with APR, not even a customer yet.

txgrk

All I know is that in hot weather, my S60 will retard the ignition under hard acceleration if I fill the car with 89 octane.

As for the price of fuel, I am originally from Europe, so right now even $4/gallon gas does not get me excited beyond a resigned shrug.

No engine REQUIRES any octane gasoline. If they said required, it would mean that engine would simply not run on 87 octane, no matter what. Of course that isn't true. What is true is that in a turbocharged engine with low octane gas, there is a risk of detonation which will destroy the engine. Is that worth saving 30cents/gal? The word PREMIUM is right there in huge capital letters for a reason. If you want to use regular gas buy a camry. The oil change interval is also a "recommendation" so are you suggesting that people just never change their oil, because it isn't "required?"

There is a huge difference between "recommended" and "required". Recommended basically is means that to achieve maximum performance and efficiency from the engine you have to use premium but lesser octanes will not hurt the engine. Required means that continued use of a lesser octane fuel WILL result in engine damage.

If you put 87 octane in a GTI Vtec wont kick in.

I put 91 into my GTI not because it's recommended so on a fuel filler flap label, not because it has a knock sensor, and even not because the engine's compression ratio is 9.6:1 but because I love my car.

@vvk
agreed 100%

Even if you do not lose on fuel efficiency and performance, premium is 30 cents more a gallon. Driving 12K/year on average you save about $240/year. Sure if sound like a lot of money, but it hardly enough to go to the movies with wife/girlfriend once a month. If you really need to save, buy nissan versa sedan and you save $15K at the start + couple of hundreds every year on insurance, registration, regular oil (actually they told me at nissan that i should not bother with oil changes: "the car will run just fine", sold me sales guy) and other things. Why bother with GTI?

A question:

Does anybody know if these octane boosters that you can buy at Autozone, PepBoys, etc work?

Most claim to raise the octane rating in a average tank to 100. So that would be worth considering for a track day, instead of getting racing fuel at $9.50/gal
Just wondering

Just filled with RON 98 here in Europe @ 8.47 USD per Gallon.
Price difference here is so small I don't even pay attention any more.
US Gas is dirt cheap!

Insideline Editors -
Many good topics have come up here:

1) Do octane boosters work?

2) Fill the GTI with a 2 tanks of 87, then run it; then fill the GTI with 2 tanks of 91 & run it (maybe then do an octane booster?)

3) Many cars seem to have the same engine (VW 2.0T and Audi's 2.0T; 370Z's 2009 & 2010 versions) yet change from "recommended" to "required" on your lists - perhaps there's an explanation behind this?

Might y'all find some time to do some real-world testing (not the stuff on the back of the octane bottle) so we, your loyal readers, might be enlightened? Thanks up front!

Thanks,
Kevin

Being an engineer, here's what I would do if I worked at InsideLine:

- cycle the GTI through a few tanks of 87;
- once all the remaining premium has left the system, track-test the car and send it for a dyno test (often done here);
- repeat the process with premium 91.

That would be a great paper with the fuel prices we have these days.

Couple years back, C/D had a long-term V-6 Altima that either recommended or required premium fuel. They reported a significant change in mpg (lower) when running the car on regular, despite this being an unboosted car.

The VW 2.0T is the TST whereas the Audi still labels it's engine FSI/TFSI. There is quite a bit of difference between the engines (google it, you'll see what i'm talking about) whereas the output specs appear to be the same. Much of the basic architecture is similar, but there are too many different components to consider the engines similar.

I've got the FSI 2.0T, apparently a very complicated design according to VW junkies. It's not the easiest engine to work on or the most practical to deal with. I've put medium and regular in there and haven't noticed too big of a difference between the performance of the car. The only thing that suffered has been gas mileage.

@jdubbs19
Good eye. There are actually 2 completely different generations 2.0T engines, each with different variations.

The original 2.0T is a Volkswagen design, codenamed EA111, and is primarily identified in VWs by the "FSI" on the engine cover (the exception being the current Golf R).

The 2010/2011 GTI use the EA888 "2.0T" engine, which is an Audi design that debuted in the current generation A4, is a clean-sheet redesign of the EA111, using a different block and heads. I suspect that long term reliability (reducing carbon caking on the valves, using a timing chain, etc...), economy, and cost reduction were the main reasons for the redesign.

The EA888 in Audis and the EA888 in VWs differs mainly in the intake architecture and the valvetrain. The Audis have heads that employ Variable Valve Timing, which explains the different HP/Tq ratings between the two versions. This may also help explain the changes in recommended/required ratings over the years.

Me? Premium everytime. Doesn't make sense to seek out regular gas.

I use diesel and i wish more fuel places would list their Cetane rating. That is all.