Nissan Altima Forum banner

1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
The owners manual of my 08 3.5 tells me to use 91 octane, premium fuel, but says 87 may also be used. Anyone have any reports of the MPG using either on the 3.5? :confused:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
449 Posts
It depends actually. Did the EPA test it with premium or not?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
well fueleconomy.gov has it listed with premium and says avg as 19 city 26 hwy. Also how is the fuel usually in quality order: regular, plus, then premium.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10 Posts
I saw this thread yesterday on here and wanted to post a reply to this. I bought a 2008 Altima 2.5SL last night and inquired about the 3.5L and the octane level of gas. I was initially considering the 3.5 because I WAS the owner of a WRX, which come stock with 227 HP.

According to one of their mechanics on site, and also confirmed by two other salesmen, it is not required that you utilized 91+ octane fuel in this engine despite the notifications of the manual. You MIGHT see a minimal performance decrease (which I still would doubt) and it will have no negative impact on your warranty or affect the engine. What they did say would cause problems is if you buy 4 tanks of regular and then buy a tank of 91+ octane regularly. Switching back and forth between the gasolines is where they have seen issues.

This is jut from the horses mouth. I'm not making any guarantees. I drove a car which required 91+ octane fuel but only because of the presence of a turbo. A straight 2.5/3.5/etc.etc. should not require anything higher then your regular octane fuel.

Got the car for $20,164 :D :D Looking forward to joining this community!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
449 Posts
Got the car for $20,164 :D :D Looking forward to joining this community!!
Got mine for $20,500. After TTL $22,361.
:)

Why does the Altima V6 even require PREMIUM?
The V6 Accord doesn't and produces only 2 less HP.
It doesn't make sense. To add to that,
the Accord weighs 200 pounds more and
get similar mileage with REGULAR, as
opposed to a car with 2 more HP and
200 pounds lighter. :confused:

That is kind of a disappointment to me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10 Posts
i actually brought this up when i purchased my car. i previously drove a 2002 Subaru WRX which comes with a turbo. those vehicles (and other cars which have turbo's) require 91+ octane fuel because of the way the turbo works. i inquired at the dealership and got answers from three different people. each said that despite what the manual claims, 91 octane fuel is not required. you MIGHT see a small performance decline but its unlikely. they also mentioned that flip flopping between 87 octane and 91+ octane fuel is what would actually cause more issues then anythning else.

Either they'll telling the truth, which i tend to believe them, or they see the requirement of 91+ octane fuel as something that would deter customers of the 3.5L which invoices a bit higher...?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
449 Posts
i actually brought this up when i purchased my car. i previously drove a 2002 Subaru WRX which comes with a turbo. those vehicles (and other cars which have turbo's) require 91+ octane fuel because of the way the turbo works. i inquired at the dealership and got answers from three different people. each said that despite what the manual claims, 91 octane fuel is not required. you MIGHT see a small performance decline but its unlikely. they also mentioned that flip flopping between 87 octane and 91+ octane fuel is what would actually cause more issues then anythning else.

Either they'll telling the truth, which i tend to believe them, or they see the requirement of 91+ octane fuel as something that would deter customers of the 3.5L which invoices a bit higher...?
Well if Nissan says to use it, than the engine knock sensor will have to constantly work. Eventually, it may break cause MAJOR engine problems.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top