I know some people in my family have done that in the same situations to an E46 325ci, and E39 528i. A little bit of lost performance but the car adapts much wuicker than 40 miles...
I get better gas mileage when I use 93 vs 91 vs 89, and it pretty much compensates for the extra fuel cost.
I get a 2-3mpg tank average increase when using non-oxy premium versus using gas with ethanol.
I think the car was designed for 91+, which is why you get better gas mileage. It's more optimized for it. 89 won't get you as good results as 91 or 93. Plus you run the risk of pinging by running the wrong fuel, which is very bad for the engine.
Non-ethanol fuel can increase your gas mileage quite a lot, but the problem is finding stations that carry it. There isn't a single place that I've seen that carries non-ethanol fuel now.
Street Rods/Hot Rods ie: old classic cars that are from the 60's or older. Most states have clubs.
I don't have to drive out of my way to find non-oxy premium since there are dozens of places here that sell it. YMMV
I noticed CT isn't listed on this site but others may find it useful.
http://www.pure-gas.org/
Shell V-Power 93, but BP and Sunoco occasionally. Owners manual calls for 91 minimum.
I use 93 in my chipped '92 M50 also.
The previous owner used 89 all the time in the Z. Can't say I'm thrilled about that.......
Yup, CA has 91 only... usually with "name" brands, or Costco. Not Arco though... I could tell the difference in my '80 Triumph when I used Arco (didn't perform as well), so I've never used it in my ZHP. John