See reply #1.
Testimonials mean squat. There is nothing to back them except "feelings".
"Feelings are best understood as a subjective representation of emotions, private to the individual experiencing them."
Being an
individual phenomena, they aren't transferable to another individual and certainly not to masses of individuals.
Add to that, people lie and mislead. Actual physics and science do not.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octane_ratingThere is so much misinformation in this thread it is not even funny.
Tell me about it. 
Just because a fuel is higher octane does not mean it will burn slower...
Um, actually, it does. Do you know what detonation is, and its cause?
Heres is a PDF. Check out the FACTS of octane (specifically, bullets 2 & 3) and the subsequent Myths.
http://mn.gov/commerce/weights-and-measures/images/OctaneFacts.pdf
No. The Minnesota writers are not scientists (or not qualified to be one) and are adding to the misinformation. Though they may have directed the statements to an undereducated audience, they got that one "fact" wrong.
Detonation and burn rates are two different properties.
What you want is to ignite the fuel at one location and have a flame front spread to involve the entire air fuel (a/f) mixture. Detonation ignites the entire a/f mixture at once. You get a high pressure explosion, instead of a lower pressure wave push on the piston. An octane rating is there to serve but one purpose, that of preventing detonation. Burn rates are NOT germain to the rating system. However, the ignition conditions are. And these are two different properties of a combustible material.
Imagine a forest fire. They generally begin at one point, the ignition point, and then spread to consume avail able fuel drawing oxygen from the atmosphere and sustain itself with the heat of that combustion. Remove heat or oxygen and the fuel ceases to burn. However, all that fuel with ignite at once if the temperature is raised to a high enough level. And it will all burn at once in one big flash. (Best to observe this from space. As most life would be well roasted at this ignition temperature.)
Moving on...
Do you favor paying more for the same energy?There is little difference in energy content of regular versus premium gasoline. They both contain about 111,400 British Thermal Units of energy per gallon. The only way to convert more of that energy into forward motion in to make the conversion device (engine) more efficient. It is only the engine specifics that may require premium fuel to allow an increase in conversion efficiency (or allow more conversion mass/volume within a set amount of time).
Did you know you are often paying more for less energy?As both gasohol and ethanol have far lower energy densities than gasoline, they will accomplish less work per unit of volume. In fact, a car burning one unit of ethanol will only travel 70% as far as the same vehicle burning the same volume of gasoline.
At least the government allows consumers the choice. Oh wait, they don't. But, they still collect tax per unit of volume, not the actual energy content of the mandated fuel. Can you imagine why they favor ethanol blends, and wish to increase the ethanol content? Hey it's a win-win for both gas companies AND government budget considerations! Who wouldn't like to collect an extra dollar from every consumer on the planet?
