# 2014 1.8 Turbo, Premium or Regular gas?



## SinnerGTI (Jan 22, 2005)

Hi there, 

I've been searching and reading a lot about the replacement for the current inline 5 2.5L: a 1.8 Turbo engine for all 2014 VW models. 

This engine looks pretty nice, with more ponies (170 hp -> http://jayscarblog.com/vw-of-canada-spills-the-beans-on-the-new-1-8t-engine/) than expected by earlier reports (158 hp and 185 lb-ft -> http://blog.caranddriver.com/new-volkswagen-golf-wont-come-to-the-u-s-until-2014/). 

But one thing I haven't been able to find out: 

Will the 1.8T need regular gas like the current 2.5L ? Or will it require premium gas, like the 2.0T FSI ? 

I hope it's made to run on regular, like the 2.5, so the fuel costs will be down. 

What is your opinion? 
What have you read? 

Thanks in advance.


----------



## GTINC (Jan 28, 2005)

All VW engines can be operated on regular fuel. Premium may be _*recommended*_ to obtain the advertised power/torque. Premium is not *required* for any VW production engine.


----------



## Matty_Ice (Nov 17, 2012)

Even the old 1.8T's required premium fuel so ill just assume that the new ones will want the same


----------



## GTINC (Jan 28, 2005)

Matty_Ice said:


> Even the old 1.8T's required premium fuel so ill just assume that the new ones will want the same


 Look up the difference in the words "required" and "recommended" in the dictionary. No VW engine requires anything but regular.


----------



## SinnerGTI (Jan 22, 2005)

All I've read says this is a completely different engine from the old 1.8T 

Hope the differences include the ability to run on regular!


----------



## candy11 (May 22, 2011)

http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?5971986-swapping-2.5L-for-1.8T-in-new-Vw-models


----------



## GTINC (Jan 28, 2005)

SinnerGTI said:


> All I've read says this is a completely different engine from the old 1.8T
> 
> Hope the differences include the ability to run on regular!


 All VW engines can be run on regular if you prefer. Premium is recommended, not required.


----------



## 87vr6 (Jan 17, 2002)

*FV-QR*

it will run just fine on regular. That's the beauty of EFI... Anyone tells you otherwise are misinformed.


----------



## GTINC (Jan 28, 2005)

87vr6 said:


> it will run just fine on regular. That's the beauty of EFI... Anyone tells you otherwise are misinformed.


 :thumbup::thumbup: Finally someone that understands modern VW engines.


----------



## Matty_Ice (Nov 17, 2012)

Any car can run on regular gas, obviously better gas is better for the car, but it's not gonna stop running just because of regular fuel


----------



## GTINC (Jan 28, 2005)

Matty_Ice said:


> Any car can run on regular gas, obviously better gas is better for the car, but it's not gonna stop running just because of regular fuel


 _*IF*_ the engine has knock sensors like VW's do.


----------



## PG13GLI (Oct 11, 2012)

I think VW would be out of their minds to put a 93 oct recommended sticker. Cheap american public loves 87 oct


----------



## GTINC (Jan 28, 2005)

PG13GLI said:


> I think VW would be out of their minds to put a 93 oct recommended sticker. Cheap american public loves 87 oct


 If the 91 premium is only "recommended" what is the problem? It is not required.


----------



## Matty_Ice (Nov 17, 2012)

They're not completely crazy, they only require 91 on the label


----------



## GTINC (Jan 28, 2005)

Matty_Ice said:


> They're not completely crazy, they only _*require*_ 91 on the label


 Recommend, not require. The words have two different meanings.


----------



## feels_road (Jan 27, 2005)

SinnerGTI said:


> But one thing I haven't been able to find out:
> 
> Will the 1.8T need regular gas like the current 2.5L ? Or will it require premium gas, like the 2.0T FSI ?


 The current 2.0T *does not require premium.* It only is _recommended _for best power output. I would also recommend premium, because most likely, the better mileage you get will make up for more than the price of premium (e.g., a 5% difference currently where I live, while premium in many European engines will give you 5% to 10% better mileage). 



PG13GLI said:


> I think VW would be out of their minds to put a 93 oct recommended sticker. Cheap american public loves 87 oct


 Well, to start with, premium is 91 in the Rockies and west, thereof. 93 is also called unobtainium. Secondly, if 91 gives you sufficiently better mileage - who cares?


----------



## Rockerchick (May 10, 2005)

feels_road said:


> Well, to start with, premium is 91 in the Rockies and west, thereof. 93 is also called unobtainium. Secondly, if 91 gives you sufficiently better mileage - who cares?


 Opposite here in the East, as far as I've seen at least. 92 is the lowest I've seen, but 93 is by far most common. I run premium only in my 1.8T. I want the most performance and mileage I can get


----------



## numlock44 (Nov 1, 2012)

Any car with a turbo will be better on higher octane gas. It's not worth putting lower octane in it for the amount of money saved.


----------



## GTINC (Jan 28, 2005)

numlock44 said:


> Any car with a turbo will be better on higher octane gas. It's not worth putting lower octane in it for the amount of money saved.


 Is that turbos with some specific CR? Or ones with knock sensors?


----------



## Bsaint (Mar 26, 2008)

I switched to 89 from 93 after the first few weeks of ownership on my 2013 2.0 tsi and have noticed no change in mileage or performance.


----------



## 87vr6 (Jan 17, 2002)

numlock44 said:


> Any car with a turbo will be better on higher octane gas. It's not worth putting lower octane in it for the amount of money saved.


 And you have hard numbers proving that?


----------



## tmfmoney (Feb 7, 2011)

Hey everyone! I'm a Volkswagen product specialist working at all the auto shows representing the brand, we have been briefed on the new 2014 models including the new engines and redesigns of the Golf and Tiguan. I've gotten this question a lot at the shows and the new 1.8 does NOT take premium gas. Like all of the other VW models it will take regular. Hope to see you all at a VW show this year!


----------



## SinnerGTI (Jan 22, 2005)

tmfmoney said:


> Hey everyone! I'm a Volkswagen product specialist working at all the auto shows representing the brand, we have been briefed on the new 2014 models including the new engines and redesigns of the Golf and Tiguan. I've gotten this question a lot at the shows and the new 1.8 does NOT take premium gas. Like all of the other VW models it will take regular. Hope to see you all at a VW show this year!


Thank you very much on the informed answer! :thumbup:


----------



## Sixtysomething (Aug 7, 2003)

Some day, when 21st Century Beetles past 2014 become old enough to be $12-$15K used cars, I'll get one. I don't like paying 30 cents more for a gallon of gas either, but if Premium is best for the up and coming 1.8, then, I'll use it, just as I did in my 2.0T Passat. However, I'm not so sure about Premium resulting in better mpg. My Passat got about 31-32 on the highway, and so does my current 2.5 gas New Beetle with 87.


----------



## GTINC (Jan 28, 2005)

fiftysomething said:


> ....However, I'm not so sure about Premium resulting in better mpg. My Passat got about 31-32 on the highway, and so does my current 2.5 gas New Beetle with 87.


How could you compare to different cars with different engines to conclude fuel octane does not provide better fuel mileage?


----------



## SinnerGTI (Jan 22, 2005)

Well, the Passat is a little heavier than the New Beetle (3186 lb vs 2965 lb). But then, premium gas and regular gas contain a very similar amount of energy. See:

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2565/whats-the-difference-between-premium-and-regular-gas



> Contrary to widespread belief, the octane rating doesn't indicate how much power the fuel delivers; all grades of gasoline contain roughly the same amount of heat energy. Rather, a higher octane rating means the fuel is less likely to cause your engine to knock or ping.





> Higher-performance cars often require midgrade or premium gas because their engines are designed for higher compression (higher compression = more power), and regular gas may cause knock.



So if the new 1.8 Turbo is a lower-compression engine than the current Turbo engines (2.0T FSI), then it should be able to use regular gas just fine, without affecting MPG. This will mean a more economical car to drive.

The only gas that has less energy is the one with Ethanol. See http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/ethanol.shtml :

With 10% Ethanol (E10)


> ...vehicles will typically go 3–4% fewer miles per gallon on E10 than on straight gasoline.


----------



## Sixtysomething (Aug 7, 2003)

That's interesting that cars running on E10 get 3-4% lower mpg. I didn't know that. Unfortunately, almost all 87 gas in Wisconsin has 10% ethanol added. Now I'm wondering that since my 2.5 got 32 on the highway, it was because I happened to be in Illinois when I filled up.


----------



## talindsay (Mar 10, 2013)

I don't understand people's obsession with 87 - back when regular was $.80 and premium was $1.00 I could see it but when regular is $3.50 and premium is still just $.20 more at $3.70I can't imagine why anybody cares. 5% more to fill up isn't going to make a difference to anybody who can afford to buy a new car. I don't see why it would enter the buying process, and yet for some reason it does.


----------



## talindsay (Mar 10, 2013)

By the way, the reason running 87 can reduce fuel economy on high performance cars has nothing to do with the amount of energy and everything to do with how the cars ensure they can safely burn it. Before electronic engine management (and in the world of air cooled motorcycles, today) an engine with compression above about 9.5:1 needed higher grade fuel not because it needed more energy but because 87 would pre-ignite under compression when the engine was under load. Predetonation, or knocking, is hard on gasoline engines and could destroy them under heavy use.

Modern electronic controls largely get around this by retarding the engine timing when they sense that the fuel is at risk of predetonation. Basically, low octane fuel doesn't hurt because the engine de-tunes itself to avoid damage. Most of the time it doesn't even need to de-tune itself because most people don't push their cars hard enough to have trouble - so it's a win for everybody. But people who push their high compression cars will find they get better results with high octane fuel. basically, if you run 87 then the engine will just adjust if it finds itself at risk of trouble. Still, if the car is expected to operate under conditions that are likely to notice the difference, then the manufacturer will recommend or "require"premium. But I'm pretty sure all modern cars are capable of adjusting - my Fiat 500 is able to, and it's a tiny, cheap engine so I'm sure a high end company will.

No such control on most motorcycles though - if an air cooled bike requires premium, it probably really requires it.


----------



## Sixtysomething (Aug 7, 2003)

talindsay said:


> I don't understand people's obsession with 87 - back when regular was $.80 and premium was $1.00 I could see it but when regular is $3.50 and premium is still just $.20 more at $3.70I can't imagine why anybody cares. 5% more to fill up isn't going to make a difference to anybody who can afford to buy a new car. I don't see why it would enter the buying process, and yet for some reason it does.


Well, when you have to fork out $15,000 these days just to get a decent used car, every little bit helps. When gas was .80/1.00 a gallon, you could also get a new car for about $5000.


----------



## GTINC (Jan 28, 2005)

fiftysomething said:


> Well, when you have to fork out $15,000 these days just to get a decent used car, every little bit helps. When gas was .80/1.00 a gallon, you could also get a new car for about $5000.


If the difference in price of regular and premium is an issue, you are living beyond your means, IMO.


----------



## rhodri45 (Feb 19, 2012)

i actually found in the owners manual a while back that the 2.0tsi is actually best built to perform with 94 octane (so 99-100 RON)...the same is true in my buddy's owner's manual for a 2.0T FSI motor. i assume this gas would be sold in europe, as the highest pump gas i've seen is 93.5 octane. 

either way, 93 should suffice.

turbo motors are generally better known to give better performance with higher octane (but not too high unless you're tuned for it) as higher octane would be used in a higher compression vehicle, which IIRC the charge pressure adds to the ~9.0:1 compression we already have.


----------



## BobWinNJ (Jul 3, 2014)

*Just the facts on octane rating for 1.8L Turbo*

I just became a VW Jetta owner and like any other forum, people just randomly post opinions and guesses. i am here for the facts and appreciate VW Specialist taking the time to answer the question about the octane rating. I was confused first time I got gas, in the door it says Regular 87 then underneath Normale 91. So I am thinking is it 87 or 91? 

I have tried 87 and 89, no difference in mileage or performance. On the 87 it accelerates quickly and runs smooth.


----------



## DasCC (Feb 24, 2009)

BobWinNJ said:


> I just became a VW Jetta owner and like any other forum, people just randomly post opinions and guesses. i am here for the facts and appreciate VW Specialist taking the time to answer the question about the octane rating. I was confused first time I got gas, in the door it says Regular 87 then underneath Normale 91. So I am thinking is it 87 or 91?
> 
> I have tried 87 and 89, no difference in mileage or performance. On the 87 it accelerates quickly and runs smooth.


whew you bumped this thread up from the dead. I believe the 91 that you are seeing is related to the RON.... 87 is what this engine is tuned for.


----------



## germanhead (Jul 4, 2014)

I use premium gas, makes me feel better


----------



## mmmoose (Jan 8, 2014)

Matty_Ice said:


> Any car can run on regular gas, obviously better gas is better for the car, but it's not gonna stop running just because of regular fuel


:facepalm:

I presume the "better gas" you're talking about refers to higher octane gasoline. The *octane rating* only refers to the gasoline's resistance to detonation. It has nothing to do with being "better", cleaner, or otherwise. Unless you have a high compression engine that is specifically tuned to take advantage of higher octane, you're just burning your money away by using "better gas".










Here is a snapshot of the 1.8T Jetta fuel door sticker. Notice that it's only asking for 87 octane "regular" gas. The new 1.8T engine is specifically tuned for this type of gasoline. There are *ZERO* gains from using 91 or 93 octane gasoline on them. An aftermarket tune is the only way you'll ever see better performance or fuel economy with higher octane gas.

The 2.0T on the GTI also works in a similar way. It is specifically tuned for 91 octane gas. Anything above that is a complete waste without an aftermarket tune. You can also run 87 octane on a GTI perfectly fine. However it will come at the expense of decreased performance. *Edmunds even ran their own test with some dyno results*.

VW knows that Americans don't buy base trim cars just to use more expensive gas. A car like that would be tough to sell here! So they specifically tuned the stock 1.8T to be lower compression, so it can run on regular 87 octane gas. VW also knows that not all American states offer 93 octane gasoline. 91 is the highest you'll ever find in some areas! That's why the 2.0T on the GTI, GLI, etc. only works best with 91 octane gas.

*Bottom line: go by what the manual and fuel door sticker says. VW didn't put that information there just for decoration.*

_EDIT: I also want to add that the RON rating above is NOT the same as the US octane rating. RON (Research Octane Number) is a different standard used in other parts of the world. The foreign text next to the RON rating should be a dead giveway on that. So don't go thinking that RON 91 means the car runs best on 91 octane._


----------

