fuel grade

That is what it sounds like and I believe it does. Of course when the timing is retarded to stop the knocking you loose power (which is why you bought a high performance car, right?) and you loose mileage. So you also don't save all that money you think you are saving.

Well, I've been driving a Buick Roadmaster (V-8, Corvette engine) for almost

12 years using 87 octane. No problems at all after 140,000 miles.

Well, considering the price difference between regular and premium (in the US, anyway - 15% or more) it probably still saves some money.

-- Mike Smith

My .95 VR6 has the miles per gallon computer on board. My work also has a fairly regular routine, with about 75% of the miles on interstate, and 25% in town to suburban.

I ran 1000 miles on premium, and100 miles on regular, similar outside temps, similar driving routine. Nothing significantly different. I found only about 1 MPG difference.

It may not hold true for you on your driving style and on the V6, but for me, it wasn't worth it.

Ron/Champ 6

1963 8E5 Champ (Champ 6) 1995 VW Passat (Vanilla..yuk) 1994 Volvo 850 (Tilley) 1973 Volvo 1800 ES (Hyacinth Bucket)

This is the type of response I was hoping to get. The efficiency can't justify the price difference in fuel grades.

Joseph, actually, I didn't want the V6. It is a side benefit for me. I am more energy concsious than performance conscious. I got this car because a neighbor offered to sell it to me and I trusted that he kept good care of it. I would have preferred the 1.8L turbo. But this saved me the trouble of shopping for a car and dealing with whatever problems come from buying a car from a stranger. I do enjoy the added power but I try to drive light-footedly to save fuel.

I got 23 mpg on my last fillup. If I tell my wife, she might be pissed, because we were talking about getting more fuel efficient cars. This Passat replaces a 2000 Subaru Legacy L wagon which gets about the same mileage but isn't as quick.

I will try premium for a couple of tankfuls out of curiosity. Chances are that I won't notice the performance difference, because I don't usually step on it.

Oh, this is a manual transmission, for whatever that's worth.

As another aside, I'd adore this car even if it didn't have a powerful engine.

Tom

This has been kicked around quite a bit on the Eurovan group where the newer EV's have a V6. Mine is a older I5 so I have no first hand experience It seems to work out differently for different people. So try several tanks of

91 and several tanks of 87 and see how it works for you. Just remember weather conditions and changes in driving patterns can make a big difference in MPG.

JoBo

go to mid grade and it will only cost about $2 per tank fill-up. Beer costs more than that per draft! I use mid for my 99 GLX Passat.

What you you suppose will happen with midgrade? Midgrade is 89, whereas the manual recommends 91.

Tom Reingold Noo Joizy

It's been a few weeks and a few tankfuls since I asked this question. To remind you, I just got a 2002 Passat GLX wagon with the V6 engine. I am in the US. I ran 87 octane (US calibration) until three tankfuls ago. I am on my third tank of 93 octane, which costs a good bit more. I notice no performance increase. My fuel efficiency seems to be correlated not to the grade of the gas but with my average speed. Mileage goes up with average speed because higher average speed means I'm spending more time on the highway. More time on the highway means less acceleration, which is the real fuel waster.

So I think I'll switch back to low grade gas. I gather I'm not going to do any damage.

Thanks, folks. I hope this is interesting to you.

Tom Reingold Noo Joizy