87 is 2.15 right now, 89 2.79, and 93 is 3.00 & up depending on the location. Sometimes our local Valero gets into a price war with other gas stations & that is when I attack!! I don’t use my D1/D2’s as D/D’s. My wife drives the 06 LR3 as a D/D, and the lowest grade she uses is 89.

I do use higher grade stuff when I can, but lately with the kid’s, house stuff, LR3 (trying to fall apart), and life in general I have to save what I can at the pump. Now back in my single & ready to mingle days my 97 RR saw nothing but the best!! Of coarse back then it was only .15 more a gallon at say 1.35 a gallon lol.

 

this is the biggest difference for me. my Discovery runs best and gets the best fuel mileage on No Ethanol 93 Octane.

 

Unicorn blood?? No way, I strictly use 3-4 drops of cobra venom!! Son of a gun is ready for Ricky Bobby to test drive after that! No need for a live cougar in the car!!

 

I bought a small test tube of Chuck Norris sweat on ebay and put a couple drops in the tank every 1k miles, gives the truck a real kick

 

Nothing beats some good old Texas Ranger lol

 

There's one on the way up the ski pass too, Stevens and Snoqualmie both if I'm not mistaken. Not exactly local though for ya. In Montana it's everywhere for the reasons you stated and for our Snowmobiles!

It's shelf life is more than tripple that of it's evil ethanol brother.

I wonder, has anyone experimented with a slightly thicker headgasket to avoid prem fuel? You will lose a little efficiency by giving up compression ratio but often just a half point of compression will allow for quite a few octane drop. I could stand to lose 10hp in this motor in exchange for 87 octane. Does anyone actual floor this LandRover V8? I cringe as I apply throttle to that motor ha! I find this motor to be so sad all around, in contrast to other motors from, say, the late 90's design that can produce 120hp/liter on prem or 110hp/liter on 87. Furthermore they can handle 11.1:1 compression with 14lbs of boost from a supercharger on regular bump. That's a far cry from what Land Rover was pushing to us still in 2004 with the latest Disco2.

 

In regards to build up of carbon and such from lower octane fuels, I generally find that the same guy who runs lower than recommended fuel in his vehicle, is the guy who also runs cheaper oils. Furthermore he's OFTEN the guy who gives less love to the vehicle in regards to maintaining it. So when I look at the carbon build up on a vehicle, I have to consider a few variables are likely at play here. There's exceptions to this rule, probably the folks on here for example, who are knowledgable in their actions and walking the thin line while understanding the possible outcomes. For me, when I know I'll be easy on the throttle I'll skimp on octane in many vehicles, such as a long highway drive where I'm just conserving fuel. If I intend to go over the pass and I know I'll be requesting a lot of power from the engine, I won't skimp, relying on the knock sensors to retard timing is waiting for a damaging situation and then applying a fix.

 

@05TurboS2K Well after 4 days of 2000-2600 low range driving for hours at a time, running the Sea to Sky hiway from Pemberton to Vancouver I averaged 60 miles an hour, and the Disco boomed along up hills, mostly I passed everything. It nice to actually have good throttle response however had slow down for the corners marked 40kph handling is not that good

 

Quite jealous!

I hope to get this new motor in and do something similar. Not everyone has the same luck, I cringed and babied this motor and it lasted 2 weeks from the purchase date before the block cracked on me, meanwhile you cruise around and all is well. ha!

I don't think I'll be taking many high speed corners in the Disco regardless of motor. lol

 

Driving back from MN, first tank was 88 15% ethanol, got 15mph. Second tank 93 no ethanol averaged 16.5. Not perfectly flat or identical routes, a bit slower due to traffic on the second tank. But that is what the scangauge read which is accurate as far as I can tell.