Tweet
Clax, sorry I didn't catch that it was not availiable on your lake. I'm not trying to say you are wrong just stating there is a reason pcm says 93+ Required in the 450 manual. If im not mistaken the only differences in the 409 and the 450 are tuning. There clearly has to be some big differences in paramaters like timing and fuel maps to make that large of a difference (unless the 409 is just a detuned pig). Aluminum heads disapate much more heat than iron heads do which really allows much higher compression ratios on pump gas. Were the 500 efi iron headed engines? Just curious.
I didn't want anymore compression on my 86 351 when assembled because I wanted to run garbage 87 in it all day long. We do 150 hours a season average so that saves some pretty good $$$. 240 hp is plenty to get anything done in that boat I need. Now the Skylark is a 10 to 1 range engine and I don't mind throwing premium at it.
On the other hand if I were a G owner 450 would be where I would go. We just ordered the first 409 G for a customer and we are pretty curious to see how it stacks up against the 450 boats we have in the showroom. (Then again if I had the cash to own a G I would opt for the XR).
If you can get by with lower octane then go for it (I used to run 87 in all my turbo cars when I commuted just made sure I watched the boost gauge when I was in the throttle to keep it out of the danger zone). I run 87 in the truck for every day commuting but if I am doing a long highway towing run I will fill up with the reccomended 89. (never heard a hint of detonation on a hot day yet). Clearly current combustion chamber design with modern quench areas makes all of todays engines much much less likely to experience detonation on sub par fuels. Even on a cold day in my 67 if you pull a bone head and put 87 in it it lets you know as soon as you get into the loud pedal.
As 281 stated, an engine will run best on which fuel it was designed for. If you run premium in something designed for 87 it will not properly burn the fuel with the higher burn point thus creating less power and fuel economy from an incomplete burn. The power loss and fuel economy would be so marginal nobody would probably notice but the point is the extra cash for the premium fuel is completely negated. It has always made me laugh when someone says they want to run the "good stuff" (premium fuel) in a car to clean it out which actually creates more carbon despoits from a less efficent burn.
Other variables go into it like elevation etc. and all that jazz so everyone may well use 87 for thousands of hours in an engine that requires premium with no ill effects. The only reason I am so apt to want to use proper octane is that boats are constantly under load which all of you know. That being said the G boat with a non lifting hull and a fully loaded ballast tank is probably the most load ever put on an engine in a wake boat so holy crap haha. Heck a 450 with no ballast will only run 38mph!
I didn't want anymore compression on my 86 351 when assembled because I wanted to run garbage 87 in it all day long. We do 150 hours a season average so that saves some pretty good $$$. 240 hp is plenty to get anything done in that boat I need. Now the Skylark is a 10 to 1 range engine and I don't mind throwing premium at it.
On the other hand if I were a G owner 450 would be where I would go. We just ordered the first 409 G for a customer and we are pretty curious to see how it stacks up against the 450 boats we have in the showroom. (Then again if I had the cash to own a G I would opt for the XR).
If you can get by with lower octane then go for it (I used to run 87 in all my turbo cars when I commuted just made sure I watched the boost gauge when I was in the throttle to keep it out of the danger zone). I run 87 in the truck for every day commuting but if I am doing a long highway towing run I will fill up with the reccomended 89. (never heard a hint of detonation on a hot day yet). Clearly current combustion chamber design with modern quench areas makes all of todays engines much much less likely to experience detonation on sub par fuels. Even on a cold day in my 67 if you pull a bone head and put 87 in it it lets you know as soon as you get into the loud pedal.
As 281 stated, an engine will run best on which fuel it was designed for. If you run premium in something designed for 87 it will not properly burn the fuel with the higher burn point thus creating less power and fuel economy from an incomplete burn. The power loss and fuel economy would be so marginal nobody would probably notice but the point is the extra cash for the premium fuel is completely negated. It has always made me laugh when someone says they want to run the "good stuff" (premium fuel) in a car to clean it out which actually creates more carbon despoits from a less efficent burn.
Other variables go into it like elevation etc. and all that jazz so everyone may well use 87 for thousands of hours in an engine that requires premium with no ill effects. The only reason I am so apt to want to use proper octane is that boats are constantly under load which all of you know. That being said the G boat with a non lifting hull and a fully loaded ballast tank is probably the most load ever put on an engine in a wake boat so holy crap haha. Heck a 450 with no ballast will only run 38mph!
Comment