TheInfidel

I'm looking to buy a 2009 Altima with the 3.5L V6. Is it possible to run unleaded or super unleaded in this engine, or is it strictly premium? Thanks for any info.

(0)

theblizzard2009

without fueling an octane battle, i will tread lightly:

Manual says 93, and only states anything less will have "less performance".

If you can live with a "less performance" situation, 87 / 91 will not kill anything... more of a long term thing on engine performance/wear/blah blah blah.

We're probably going to see debates at an O-scope level, or butt dyno level.

87 won't ruin the car, but i'd stick with 93.

I've run 87 in my SE-R since new, and its still cooking at 102k miles....

Now personally the VQ is a nicer, well... whats the word... nicer than the QR anyways, nice things deserve better attention to detail.

(0)

JoseM97Altima

id do what the car makers say and stick with 93. but if you don't and develop any pinging or knocking, atleast you'll know why.

__________________

1997 Altima GXE
A/T 128k Miles

(0)

luxuryrules

Don't spend $30k on a car and try to save a few bucks on gas. Seriously.

In my attempt to tread lightly I made a few test runs with some spare dyno time I had with my Lincoln. It has 10.1 compression and the book calls for 91. The difference in RWHP between 87 and 93 was 17 horsepower. That's a lot from just switching fuel. In the same drivetrain, I got a solid 21mpg combined on 93, and over the course of five tanks of 87 I saw a decrease to about 19. Five tanks of premium later brought me back up to 21.

Now, set the horsepower difference aside and look at fuel economy. You'll notice that I could run 87 just fine, but I took at hit in fuel economy, which means that I would be burning cheaper fuel, but more of it. My savings at the pump were pretty much negated by the increased number of times I'd be required to fill up.

Short version, no, run premium. The engineers said that for a reason.

__________________
08 Altima 2.5 CVT

(0)