Topic: Day-by-Day Review: 2013 Buick Verano Turbo; Day 1

[ArticSteve]

If a manufacturer states Premium gas "recommended" that is marketing code for "IT REQUIRES 91" octane gas.

There is not a car salesman alive that will tell a customer NO, it needs 91 or don't buy it when a customer asks the $69 question: "87 will be OK, right?"

[ChaosphereIX]

If a manufacturer states Premium gas "recommended" that is marketing code for "IT REQUIRES 91" octane gas.

There is not a car salesman alive that will tell a customer NO, it needs 91 or don't buy it when a customer asks the $69 question: "87 will be OK, right?"

wrong. Recommended, in marketing speak, means put it in if you want to match our official ratings for power, fuel economy, etc. Required means just that. Audis or MINIs "require" premium gas - DO NOT PUT IN REGULAR in those cars. Cars that say recommended, such as Saab, Volvo, or some other turbo cars, which means you can put it in but it is not required. This usually is the case if the engine is tuned to run on 89 octane or thereabouts - 91 gives it better everything, but it can retard timing back down to 87 safely.

That being said, I always tell my customers that although it is only recommended, the benefits of paying extra at the pump for the 91 will far outweigh the little extra you pay for the gas [see my post above]

[sacrat]

I may be missing something here.  But after just reading the Day 4 comments regarding the fuel economy with an average of 9.6L, James seemed a little disappointed.  Thats about the same real world fuel economy average of the new Accord (V6).  I know they are not direct competitors.  But both cars have over 260hp I believe, and as James pointed out, the Verano is using a manual!  With no cylinder deactivation technology built in. No premium fuel either, so the real world performance maybe over hyped by the manufacturers a little bit, but I think maybe we are expecting too much as well. 

I just read Day 4 after being down for a bit with the flu. My reaction was pretty much the same, thinking that 9.6 seems very respectable for this level of performance. My 2.4 NA Sonata doesn't do much better with 175 hp.

[Northernridge]

I think 9.6 isn't very impressive at all. Over 13,000km in the Berlin taxi I've averaged 9.9 and it's a lot bigger and somewhat heavier than the Verano and it drives all 4 wheels.

Or, maybe the Mercedes actually gets good mileage...nice thought.

[whaddaiknow]

I think 9.6 isn't very impressive at all. Over 13,000km in the Berlin taxi I've averaged 9.9 and it's a lot bigger and somewhat heavier than the Verano and it drives all 4 wheels.

Or, maybe the Mercedes actually gets good mileage...nice thought.

Second that. My 3L I6 taxed by xDrive averages 9.5 in conbined driving. Not impressed by 9.6 in FWD 2.0T.

[sacrat]

I would argue that the Verano represents excellent execution of badge engineering.
For those not old enough to remember truly hideous badge engineering, I present the 1982-88 Cadillac Cimarron based on the lowly Cavalier. Honorable mention goes to the 1977-80 Lincoln Versailles based on the Ford Granada.



http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6b/1981_cimarron_2.jpg/800px-1981_cimarron_2.jpg

[ChaosphereIX]

I would argue that the Verano represents excellent execution of badge engineering.
For those not old enough to remember truly hideous badge engineering, I present the 1982-88 Cadillac Cimarron based on the lowly Cavalier. Honorable mention goes to the 1977-80 Lincoln Versailles based on the Ford Granada.



http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6b/1981_cimarron_2.jpg/800px-1981_cimarron_2.jpg

badge engineering implies the underpinnings are the same, as are the majority of the body panels. The Verano does not share body panels with the Cruze, nor does it share any engines with it.

[revalations]

Looking at the skeletons of most mass produced modern cars, badge engineering is everywhere....its just a whole lot better executed nowadays.

[dirtyjeffer]

I present the 1982-88 Cadillac Cimarron based on the lowly Cavalier.

not just the Cavalier...that GM J Body also shared itself with:

Buick Skyhawk
Oldsmobile Firenza
Pontiac J2000
Pontiac 2000
Pontiac Sunbird
Opel Ascona
Vauxhall Cavalier
Holden Camira
Isuzu Aska

[ArticSteve]

If a manufacturer states Premium gas "recommended" that is marketing code for "IT REQUIRES 91" octane gas.

There is not a car salesman alive that will tell a customer NO, it needs 91 or don't buy it when a customer asks the $69 question: "87 will be OK, right?"

wrong. Recommended, in marketing speak, means put it in if you want to match our official ratings for power, fuel economy, etc. Required means just that. Audis or MINIs "require" premium gas - DO NOT PUT IN REGULAR in those cars. Cars that say recommended, such as Saab, Volvo, or some other turbo cars, which means you can put it in but it is not required. This usually is the case if the engine is tuned to run on 89 octane or thereabouts - 91 gives it better everything, but it can retard timing back down to 87 safely.

That being said, I always tell my customers that although it is only recommended, the benefits of paying extra at the pump for the 91 will far outweigh the little extra you pay for the gas [see my post above]

wrong. Recommended, in marketing speak, means put it in if you want to match our official ratings for power, fuel economy, etc.

    That's dealer speak for BSing the customer.  Any time a 91 octane engineered motor that uses 87 octane comes under load or accelerates the motor is detuned by the knock sensors to prevent damaging cylinder detonation.  But before that occurs, detonation must take place.  Hence you have motors that are in a brief state of detonation thousands of times per drive cycle.

[TheHire]

I present the 1982-88 Cadillac Cimarron based on the lowly Cavalier.

not just the Cavalier...that GM J Body also shared itself with:

Buick Skyhawk
Oldsmobile Firenza
Pontiac J2000
Pontiac 2000
Pontiac Sunbird
Opel Ascona
Vauxhall Cavalier
Holden Camira
Isuzu Aska

Fun fact:  Later on, the Isuzu Aska was also sold as a rebadged Honda Accord

[sacrat]

I would argue that the Verano represents excellent execution of badge engineering.
For those not old enough to remember truly hideous badge engineering, I present the 1982-88 Cadillac Cimarron based on the lowly Cavalier. Honorable mention goes to the 1977-80 Lincoln Versailles based on the Ford Granada.



http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6b/1981_cimarron_2.jpg/800px-1981_cimarron_2.jpg

badge engineering implies the underpinnings are the same, as are the majority of the body panels. The Verano does not share body panels with the Cruze, nor does it share any engines with it.

You're correct that badge engineering is probably not the correct term for the Verano. My choice of the term was inspired by many posters who implied it is dussied up Cruze. Your post nicely dispels that idea which is essentially what I was after .

[ChaosphereIX]

If a manufacturer states Premium gas "recommended" that is marketing code for "IT REQUIRES 91" octane gas.

There is not a car salesman alive that will tell a customer NO, it needs 91 or don't buy it when a customer asks the $69 question: "87 will be OK, right?"

wrong. Recommended, in marketing speak, means put it in if you want to match our official ratings for power, fuel economy, etc. Required means just that. Audis or MINIs "require" premium gas - DO NOT PUT IN REGULAR in those cars. Cars that say recommended, such as Saab, Volvo, or some other turbo cars, which means you can put it in but it is not required. This usually is the case if the engine is tuned to run on 89 octane or thereabouts - 91 gives it better everything, but it can retard timing back down to 87 safely.

That being said, I always tell my customers that although it is only recommended, the benefits of paying extra at the pump for the 91 will far outweigh the little extra you pay for the gas [see my post above]

wrong. Recommended, in marketing speak, means put it in if you want to match our official ratings for power, fuel economy, etc.

    That's dealer speak for BSing the customer.  Any time a 91 octane engineered motor that uses 87 octane comes under load or accelerates the motor is detuned by the knock sensors to prevent damaging cylinder detonation.  But before that occurs, detonation must take place.  Hence you have motors that are in a brief state of detonation thousands of times per drive cycle.

I am not going to argue with you, brick wall analogy and all that. I am just going to say that recommended premium forced-induction engines such as my Saab 2.0T, the 2.3T in the 9-5 [I know those best] or the Volvo 2.5T are tuned for around 89-90 octane specifically. They benefit from 91, but can easily run on 87 SAFELY....wait a second I am repeating myself. THEY ARE NOT ENGINEERED FOR 91! Any turbo can be tuned for different octane levels, and the knock sensors can easily adapt to different octanes WITHIN A CERTAIN MARGIN. For some, not all, turbo cars it is fine to run it on 87 technically. Wait I am starting to repeat myself again...

[Jaeger]

Looking at the skeletons of most mass produced modern cars, badge engineering is everywhere....its just a whole lot better executed nowadays.

Dude, the platform sharing of today does not equal the badge engineering of yesterday.