Can Running Regular Fuel GRENADE An Engine That Recommends Premium?

The New York Times reports:

Last week, Gunnar Heinrich, who runs the site Automobile De Luxe, wrote that a 2010 Cadillac SRX Turbo he had borrowed from General Motors for a review suffered serious internal damage during a test drive, and he had to be plucked from the side of a mountain road.

According to Mr. Heinrich’s article, using the wrong fuel was partially to blame:

The V-6 in the Cadillac requires a minimum 91 Octane. Lab tests had shown that the SRX was running on regular, which meant that yours had inadvertently fed the car 88 Octane gas and not the factory mandated premium.

At some point during travel, between 2,000-2,500 r.p.m. — or normal highway cruising speed — the engine’s management system had adjusted the air fuel mixture to work too lean causing a retarded spark –- but crucially –- it allowed for a simultaneous turbo boost, which led to a catastrophic pressure build up in the cylinder chambers.

2010 New York Auto Show Photo Gallery

2011 Ford Mustang Photo Gallery

Geneva Motor Show Photo Gallery

AutoSpies.com Photo Galleries

If you want to see your photos running on our homepage photo ticker, be sure to upload your photos on the go by sending them to Mobile@AutoSpies.com

Share on Facebook

Read Article

aarononymous - 3/30/2010 1:11:59 PM

+6 Boost

crap engine management...

Agent009 - 3/30/2010 4:36:06 PM

+2 Boost

That sucker had to be pinging big time before hand.

Agent00R - 3/30/2010 4:39:12 PM

+5 Boost

Well if the car was in fifth or sixth gear running uphill at 2k RPM, that sounds pretty stressful to me...

Neverfollow - 3/30/2010 5:11:22 PM

+3 Boost

Well, my take on it is that the retarding of the spark is correct to prevent detonation and thus the pinging but you also said the car was in the mountains. Depending on altitude, the ECU would also tell the engine to increase boost to make up for the lack of oxigen which ultimately caused the pressure build up and engine failure. If the car wasn't at altitude, it never would have happened.

clsboy - 3/30/2010 5:52:16 PM

+2 Boost

Sad story!!!... Whatever the reason... bad fuel, high altitude... If a brand new Caddy can't make it up a wimpy mountain, you wonder why GM is where they are....

LexSucks - 3/30/2010 6:11:03 PM

+1 Boost

Any modern car's ECU should switch it over to a low octane fuel map once low octane fuel is detected.

Shredmo - 3/31/2010 11:11:50 AM

+1 Boost

A car with forced induction needs higher octane for differing reasons than a N/A V8.

XYZZ - 3/31/2010 2:36:16 AM

0 Boost

whatever the details, GM/Caddy screwed up royally.

the ECU/tranny controller should've called for a DOWNSHIFT if it was running at just 2000 rpm and more power was being called for.

i drive up a 3-mile grade everyday on the way home. even my corolla's ECU/smart tranny knows enuff to call for a downshift when i TRY to pull down a section in OD without building up to at least 2500 rpm first.

XYZZ - 3/31/2010 2:53:04 AM

0 Boost

so it has to be concluded: toyota trannies are MUCH SMARTER than gm trannies. just as the WHOLE COMPANY is so much SMARTER AND RICHER than gm.

Shredmo - 3/31/2010 11:15:31 AM

+1 Boost

I like how a vehicle tester blatantly ignores manufacturer's fuel recommendations. Assuming he was reviewing this vehicle, what attribute was this guy testing?

dumpsty - 3/31/2010 11:34:44 AM

+1 Boost

Exactly! The tester put in the wrong fuel knowing that he would be doing some hard (harsh) driving. If other testers had been putting cheaper fuel into the SRX for an extended period, engine failure should have been most certainly expected.

theman440 - 3/31/2010 2:53:59 PM

+2 Boost

Yes