MX-3.com

Why would I link it? You obviously don't own an MX-3 anymore so you must have a ton of free time, since there's nothing always demanding your attention breaking all the time, so the LEAST I could do is send you on a link hunt

Perfect, cause I could use the challenges and the time fillers! Makes me look useful around here...

Even if u do get better Milage u have to run premium which it usually costs 15% more so 15% less economy anyways

BornSticky wrote:Even if u do get better Milage u have to run premium which it usually costs 15% more so 15% less economy anyways

If your turbo your car and you're that worried about fuel economy, your in the wrong hobby.

Here in Quebec, looking about a 7% difference. But regardless, that's the cost to play. I've never owned a car that took regular. Rx8 takes premium fuel and even the truck takes 91 because she's boosted.

Simply put, this debate is one hell of an eye opener... Especially considering I have a lead foot...
Now considering I'm on a highway for half an hour to work at a speed of 65 (when I'm doing it) that when I'm doing the actual speed limit alone, I'm pushing 3+k RPMs... to think about the difference it would make regardless of the price of premium... That's an impressive argument I wouldn't have thought about.

You guys really are amazing

And this is definitely an argument I could understand!

Well depends. My ZE didn't like regular fuel, it burnt extremely quick, in the several years I had it, I could count the times I put in anything other than 91+ on one hand, I never bothered. I pretty much ran 94 religiously on her.

Theoritically there should be a performance difference between 87 and 91 because the ECU should run with retarded timing on less than 91 (many people nowadays say ZE's dont need high octane, so take this info as you wish), so the loss of timing would result in a loss of performance, and be less fuel efficient than running the "recommended" octane for the motor. It's not and shouldn't be as simple to say you're "losing 15% in economy because you're paying 15% more", but it probably wouldn't equal itself out

My truck costs me $90 to fill from drained with 91, and the difference I calculated if I did it with 87, would be just over $5. You guys can argue as you wish, but I'm not getting into a debate over less than $5. My ZE got way better mileage than my K8 did anyway (My best was around 350km on a tank, motor only had 109'000kms on her, 141 when I did the swap and had started to puff out some blue smoke indicating it was burning a bit of oil. My ZE was an easy 450, breaking 500 a few times) no matter how hard I drove her, redlining on a daily basis, so regardless of the cost back then, I still came out ahead, and it put a smile on my face every day, and that is itself it worth it. You tell me how much fun $5 gives you nowadays?

I don't get any fun for a fiver.

But what can you get fo' 10 dollar?



...Everything you want.

That song's ridiculous, I play it on Xbox live when kids start arguing with eachother, usually drowns them out pretty well.

As for fuel economy, 450 Km is about 280 miles? I'd die... I get over 400 miles/tank(average), which is over 640 Km/tank.

I felt spoiled driving that Civic I was borrowing, since I saw over 40 MPG city without trying. Sadly, it had an 8 gallon tank -.- Made that economy feel pretty weak, simply because even a small hill would drop the float and show empty.

when you're back into the mx-3, you're going to die. 400miles/tank won't happen.

I've gotten 300 to a tank... I also drove like a grandmother and I ended up running out of gas to achieve this feat...

My best is 580km all of which was highway driving at 90km/h with a gutted mx3 and no passengers.

450km to a tank is beating on her like a b1tch, I've gotten just over 500km, my (shitty aftermarket tanks) would bow out, giving me ~31L at the low fuel light. Devlin pretty much lived in his car, he said he could get 600km on his ZE.

680km's driving down to cali on regular with the k8