I tanked up at BP for $2.89 a gallon for premium — at a great service station near me charges the same for full service as self-service. I’ve been paying over $3 for quite some time now. (Now I have to figure out what to do with my new found cash windfall — about $4 per fillup).
You can see various prices via EIA Weekly Retail Gasoline and Diesel Prices, with Gasoline down to $248.9 from $3; Premium is down from $3.157to $2.668. See also This Week In Petroleum, and Short-Term Energy Outlook.
>
click for larger charts
>
AAA maintains a site to check on local prices; See also the Fuel Gauge Report, and the MSN shows a map of your local gas stations.
After going straight up this spring, crack spreads have been crushed lately (gratifyingly for me, since I shorted refiners when they went through $18, headed up). They went over $20, worrying me plenty, and then headed right back down, currently ~$4, which even I as an erstwhile bear think is a little low.
The EIA did a nice commentary on unleaded after spreads, ahem, cracked.
A fill up still costs me over $50. That’s still an arm & a leg by my standards.
It’s not like I’m rushing on a buying binge with my new found wealth. I’m just a little less irritated is all it does.
The bond market is a great place to track money flow with regards to the news.
It’s now almost fully priced in a no rate hike scenario. So any new money, if at all, flowing into equities on the non-news Fed will be just money that was waiting as an excuse to buy.
I suspect after the fast exhaustion of new money (and the remaining short covering) there will be an air pocket of sellers with the mindset of “why are we holding and not selling?” and buyers thinking “what now?”
Premium????
Poor ability to differetiate value.
re: short covering
I think Fred Hickey and Bill Fleckenstein are in quite a bit of pain with their shorts. As for Fleck, most of his positions are down at least 20%. Perhaps the next time down won’t commenced until they’ve capitulated.
“Premium????”
Makers of luxury brands and sports cars typically mandate use of premium fuel. It’s not stupid to use the fuel the maker recommends.
Indeed. Your main cost is the vehicle and its maintenance, not its fuel. At an extra $0.20/g, even driving a 20mpg guzzler 10k miles a year sets you back only an extra $100 per year. If you bought a $30,000 BMW with a high-compression engine, then not budgeting that $100 seems anything like a poor ability to differentiate value.
I tank up with regular in my old ’64 Volvo (a $2,000 car currently on loan to a friend), but I do not sniff at those who put 0w-40 synthetic and premium in their fancy new cars. They’d rather spend the money for that vehicle, I’d rather trade it.
Must be a gem ’64 Volvo, or a ’64 volvo with a $1500 stereo system or a collectable ’64 Avanti maybe…
wcw, is part of that $2000 value, sentimental? How could you loan it out like that? [Only your friend knows how precious it is and will drive it with all the due care and attention that a 50yr old rust bucket deserves inspite of that warning that he’s liable for $2000?]
Ok, my car is older but it’s been a few decades since I could claim that it was worth $2000. Even sentimentally.
Ok, Fed is over.
Now what?…
Maybe the new
Tickle Me Elmo TMX doll this holiday season will keep the economy running.
The car is nothing special; a solid, clean ’64 122s goes for about two grand. If I had one of the last 544s or first 1800s from that year in like condition, it would be worth no small amount more. It’s all about condition; a rickety 122 might be worth $500, a parts car, even less. I used to have a ’62 544, but it was a rustbucket, so I think the few hundred I paid for it might have been a premium to market.
As for the loan, I live in the city (SF) so I don’t much need my own car, and my pal is a single man in the LA basin — he needs something cool to drive. He pays the insurance and maintains it, and gets a cool date car. In hot, dry California, I don’t worry about rust. I don’t have to garage it or move it for streetcleaning. Win-win.
My Acura requires 91 Octane.
I drive Atlanta to Charleston, SC (380mi) multiple times a year. If I use lower octane then the mileage goes down (based on trip computer in Navi system) – so it ends up as a wash. Varies 2-3 miles/gal.
Cheaper gas = lower mileage.
BTW – Unleaded here in NE Atlanta is $2.16 today at Kroger.
My Contour SVT calls for Premium. Running a lower octane in an engine designed for it is unadvisable. The carbon build up on the heads when running regular is going to cost you a round trip to Europe in business class. Major ouch. I do not like paying for it, but I must. But I do use a Shell credit card which gives me a 5% back as long as I buy at their stations. So it basicly evens things out comared to the price of reg.
I have two (of 3) cars that I wouldn’t think of putting anything but:
rotary engine RX8 — not only is it premium only, but I feed it a quart of oil every 1-2000 miles by design — a 9000 RPM redline (that I try to stay close to all the time) is the reason why.
1986 560 SL — it just runs so much sweeter with premium — barely 100k miles, which in this car is like a baby
You might like http://www.gasbuddy.com
beechdriver: I’ve heard all Honda engines (even the ones that don’t require premium normally) will see better gas mileage on higher octane gasoline. Happens on mine, a 2.2 4 cylinder also.
Barry: The RX-8 requires premium? My RX-7 doesn’t. Actually, an old mechanic guy once told me the rotaries will burn very low octane gas without problems. (Which I’ve never tried.) What oil do you put in the gas tank? A 2 cycle, or that Japanese oil that’s made specifically for rotary engines? I’ve used Amsoil Interceptor in mine.
The issue of fuel octane requirements by auto manufacturer and model brand/engine should be discussed in more detail.
Hondas requiring higher than 87 octane cracks me up. Same for Toyota Lexus products. And others.
Plenty of auto manufacturers have serious problems getting the desired power levels of some of their engine designs.
All the hype about the 4 value engines, as an example, was an exercise in futility, as you have to really turn these engines up to hit the power curve. Something that many owners don’t realize until later on.
Some manufacturers are behind in engine designs by at least a generation. When you note that you are recommended to use 91 octane for your engine, that should be a red light unless it’s a screamer of a vehicle.
The only vehicles I still own that require 91 octane are Typhoons and Syclones. All of them are screamers, running 0-60 in less than 4.3 seconds. One, modified, will fly at 2.8 seconds. They’re built around GM’s 4.3 liter V6 engine which is a design that is over 17 years old. So, shelling out for 91 octane is worthwhile to me, but these are just street and track toys.
I wouldn’t waste my money on a new vehicle that requires higher than 87 octane if buying a new vehicle. It’s packing old engine technology or it’s a screamer of a hot rod. If not a hot rod, then it’s a dumb decision as the manufacturer is behind the power curve on its engine designs.
Search for in all major search engines simultaneously on the site http://www.iknowall.com.
Simultaneous search on Google, Yahoo and MSN Live Search.
Try http://www.iknowall.com
In an ongoing effort to learn more and do something about gas prices and energy related issues, not only locally but globally as well, I would like to share an energy related resource I have ran accross at Gas prices at energylord.com