Just curious if anyone knows the answer to this. It's rated for 91 so would 91 be more efficient than 94?

 

3 octane.




Sorry had to say it.

 

Alright I left myself open for that one

Basically i'm wondering if putting 94 octane is a waste of money, or worse, if it's putting less efficient buring gas in my A4

 

better mileage, cleaner fuel, and cleans your fuel injectors. and 3 cents more.

 

depends on it you are chipped. With 91 and 94 you really are not going to see a difference. Your cars fuel range will never actulay think its using 94 because it will protect itself and assume a top average of 91. If you use a lower grade, your engine could ping but the computers are smart enough to change the engine timming based on the octane. If you are chipped however you must use the fuel that you have it programed for as the computers willnot change unless you tell them to.

Conclusion, use 91 unless your chipped.

 

I agree with Sonic, however if your running stock "wanthema" has a point that you'll get better mileage.

I drive down to Syracuse a few times a year, from Ottawa, using 91 I usually get around 700-725 km, i.e. back and forth on the same tank. however with 94, I find myself doing over 800Km.

 

ya if your going to use a whole tank doing a hwy way drive, 94 will help a bit. Its just if your doing the average city/hwy driving it wont help.

 

my car is chipped with APR. Went to tofino last summer and they only have 91 over there. Had to fill up half a tank to come back and my car has noticeably less power and runs not as smooth as on 94.

 

when you say your car is Chipped with APR, do you have both programs, 91 and 94?
when chipped there is a noticable difference when using 91 vs 94 program....im just really hoping you didnt use 91 well having the car programed for 91...guarantee you did some sort of damage to the valves.

 

my car is a 97, apr only has 91 for that year. But my car still likes 94 better.