87 Octane!
It would suck *** to have to daily drive an old beater, but it would save you the gas money and make you LS1 that much more fun to drive when you do drive it.
I think this is the best post so far. Saying $0.20 a gallon is nothing to worry about vs $150/year come across differently.
So, who wants to lose potentially dozens of horsepower, which thousands of dollars was spent to obtain, for $150/year savings?
Even if you drive a LOT, it would take so many miles to make that number something noteworthy. (BTW: I got $156
talking about an all motor car running 10s on 87 octane....tell your '03 Cobra
friends to think about THAT!
Never knocks, even when its over 100 degrees outside here....7.24 at 94+
in the 1/8th seems like decent performance for a 2.73 geared car to me.
I agree though that the yearly "savings" in gas is not worth mentioning. The
actual problem I had here, is we only have 91 octane pump gas, not 93. So,
I shot a little too low on compression and ended up with an accidental 87 octane combo...
Car made 399 HP locked on the dyno, and trap speed has increased 2 MPH since then via tuning, so I assume it makes 410+ now...Long story short - it is possible - but not really much point in doing it....
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
Heck, I never even got serious about weight reduction...A/C and 12 disc CD
changer were still in on the 11.42. I built the short block (stock, made from junk I bought from ebay and Valvegod ) 5 years ago, and the heads have been on for over 3 years. The head porter tells me he can give me another 20 HP now.....I never really have tried THAT hard yet, I'm sure a real pro tuner could pull another tenth out of it....
What I AM saying is, drop a motor like mine (preferably something designed SPECIFICALLY around the 87 octane goal, rather than it being a bit of an accident .....) in one of the 3000 lb lightweights , and it would go 10s easy....something to think about
Feel free to try and prove me wrong.

Point about the 3k pound lightweights is noted. Would be interesting....but in the end being able to save $0.20 a gallon isn't really reason enough to worry about it.
Point is, such a motor is possible, and could deliver excellent performance with the heads and proper cam design to support it. Ragtop is spot-on to mention dynamic cylinder pressure is the key.
It's easy to say just go get another car or it's not worth the savings. I was kinda hoping someone would have some insite that was a little more technial or a real life experience such as Plum Crazy Rob.
I highly doubt I would ever do a low compression set up. I just thought it would be interesting to discuss the potential to run low octane and maybe save some money. I just switched from 93 to 89 on this tank and I'm taking it easy. So we'll see how bad the mileage gets with the lower octane. I currently have 230 miles on this tank and have a little under half a tank left. So we'll see how the second half does...you know how quick it goes on the second half
Larry


who cares
