What type of gas do you fill up with?

Originally Posted by mrich1353

I have one local station with NO ETHANOL 91; if I can't there. by 2nd choice is Shell 93 Octane (has ethanol in my area). Noticed a huge difference in performance with the non-ethanol on my 2010 535I, not quite as much on on the 2011 535I.

Ethanol is a HUGE performance killer. You're lucky to find ethanol-free fuel.

Btw - a useful link on Wikipedia to octane ratings is included below. In the US I've only ever seen AKI - Anti Knock Index - (R+M/2) ratings for octane on gas station pumps. These are the ones to look for in your manual when figuring out what your car can handle.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octane_rating

Originally Posted by kckc1016

Just curious to know if any of you guys put below 93 grade in your 5's. I got a 535 and ive put nothing but 93 in them but seems like some have put 87. Any drawbacks to putting regular in?

Probabl not much, maybe some reduced gas mileage and slightly less performance when pushing the car.
It's kinda funny that some people will buy a Bimmer and then try to save money on gas. Even if you drove a lot like 20k miles I think you would save about 170 bucks a year. Or 35% of the cost of 1 RFT tire.

Out in Central Oregon I've been using Non Ethanol 91 in a 2004 645 CI Have had great results.

yeah i was thinking EVERYONE fills up with 91-93, had no idea 93 wasnt offered across the US.

Only 95 ... 98 when I was in Dubai for a while

91

I cant tell the differerence between 87 and 93.

The fuel door has a label specifying the minimum octane level. My indicates 91. I have owned three BMW's and never used anything less than 91.

Originally Posted by Hoosier1

The fuel door has a label specifying the minimum octane level. My indicates 91. I have owned three BMW's and never used anything less than 91.

Concur, there's no upside to using 87 since the car is asking for 91 and saving 3-4 dollars a tank is pointless. However, there's probably little to gain from buying 93 as well.

Originally Posted by yogi799

Wow... Our premium is 91, I thought this was good enough... Now, I'm confused hearing so many put 93 in. We only have 93 at very few stations, not to mention the cost...

Aren't any 'Petro Canada' gas stations in Toronto ? I'm sure there are. You can get 94 at them

Originally Posted by gicamuci

Aren't any 'Petro Canada' gas stations in Toronto ? I'm sure there are. You can get 94 at them

Petro Canada stations (now owned by Suncor) do not offer any higher octane than 91 in western Canada (AB & BC). In AB the highest octane you can get is 91, unless you use Husky's ethonal blended 93. Chevron statiions in BC offer 93 (non ethanol).

Originally Posted by grizzles

I cant tell the differerence between 87 and 93.

Your car can. But hey, if you need that extra 3 bucks a week after spending $70k on the car, then what's the risk in not following BMW's recommendations and common sense???

91's the best we've got in California

Originally Posted by gicamuci

Aren't any 'Petro Canada' gas stations in Toronto ? I'm sure there are. You can get 94 at them

I know, but 1) is 94 really required and much better for the engine in the long run over 91, and 2) is whatever is the answer to #1 worth the increased cost of the 91 octane (plus being stuck with Petro Canada for good).

Any insights...?

Obviously I put in diesel, there are a couple of types offered around, with claims for more miles per gallon and oe cleaner combustion.
I have not been able to find any difference in between them.

What's interesting to me is the new 2012 manual talks about fuel quality on page 264. At the bottom it mentions "BMW recommends BP fuels". Okay, got it.... However if you go to http://www.toptiergas.com/retailers.html - a site supposedly recommended by BMW and 5 other automakers - BP is not on the list for recommended retailers. Just marketing?

Originally Posted by flobey540

What's interesting to me is the new 2012 manual talks about fuel quality on page 264. At the bottom it mentions "BMW recommends BP fuels". Okay, got it.... However if you go to http://www.toptiergas.com/retailers.html - a site supposedly recommended by BMW and 5 other automakers - BP is not on the list for recommended retailers. Just marketing?

Two reasons. One BP elected not to pay the money to join the Top Tier group. Two BP 91-93 octane with invigorate is the only BP gas to meet or exceed Top Tier standards. Top Tier requires all three levels of octane meet their standards to get the listing. BMW recommends BP fuels because they are saying to use the ultimate or 91-93 octane version of BP fuels. I religiously use BP, Shell and Chevron and my cars have always run well.

Originally Posted by nhs156

Your manual should be specific about whether 93 is "recommended" or "required" - there's a crucial difference. For the vast majority of cars these days, onboard electronics are programmed to compensate for lower octane fuel, technically making 93 octane obsolete for all but the highest end of sports cars. Various tests by car mags and consumer organizations have confirmed that lower octane fuel has no/neglible adverse effects (performance, wear, emissions or mpg) on the vast majority of new cars.

That said, I could've sworn I felt a slight performance difference when using 89 and 91 fuel in my wife's Audi (a 3L supercharged engine with 333hp). It was ever so slight, but I could've sworn I felt a tiny difference. That combined with unfounded doubt in my mind, made me switch back to 93. I figured the marginal incremental cost annually of 89 vs 91 vs 93 didn't warrant the lower grade fuel. I only use 93 in the M5, but would be comfortable with lower octane fuel in a non-M BMW if BMW only "recommends" 93.

This is true, but premium luxury/sports car engines are not "most vehicles", and thus the difference you think you felt in your supercharged Audi, which was most likely real and not placebo effect. I wouldn't put anything less than 91 in a turbocharged BMW either. And as more and more smaller displacement forced-induction engines come out in 'normal' cars, I wouldn't be surprised if this rule of thumb starts to change either.

Not sure about the rest of the country, but all major metropolitan areas of Texas have gasoline that is 10% ethanol. I now even see the ethanol sign in rural areas. Many of us don't have a choice when it comes to ethanol, but it's easy to find 93 octane which is what I use.

Premium which around here is 93. Generally Shell. I do at least try to find a top-tier provider but some times cheat! I had two different cars that would run like crap on BP premium. But that was in the days before Invigorate and I haven't been back since.

Hi, I've filling up with Shell 91 NON-ETHANOL. Seems to be working very well. I bought this 645 CI 2004 few months ago with 10,555 miles on it and according to the first owner.....that's all that has been used.
Best Regards!
Safaripete

Originally Posted by nhs156

Ethanol is a HUGE performance killer. You're lucky to find ethanol-free fuel.

Actually, it's a mileage killer, not a performance killer.

Lucky you can get gas without Ethanol. Not available here.

Only Sunoco has 91 by me, so I typically fill up with 93, preferably Shell.

Putting under 91 just does not make any sense. If you can't afford premium gas, you probably should not have purchased a BMW.

Originally Posted by flobey540

What's interesting to me is the new 2012 manual talks about fuel quality on page 264. At the bottom it mentions "BMW recommends BP fuels". Okay, got it.... However if you go to http://www.toptiergas.com/retailers.html - a site supposedly recommended by BMW and 5 other automakers - BP is not on the list for recommended retailers. Just marketing?

100% marketing.

All gas is the same, its the additive package that is the difference. For the most part, most "name brand" additive packages are sufficient for everyday use. Off brand gas may or may not have suitable additives.