Compression adds heat. With compression this low, wouldn't higher than 91-92 octane be just wasted? Come on engineers, I know you know the answer.
Octane requirements for various engines are determined by a lot more than just static compression ratio's. For instance, there are plenty of other engines on the market running 10:1 or higher static compression ratio's on 87 octane fuel. Here's a partial list of the many things that affect the octane requirements of an engine:
-cylinder head design
-bore size
-operating temperatures
-cam timing (affects dynamic compression ratio and pressure)
-air/fuel ratio's
-ignition timing curves
-humidity
-intake air temperatures
-engine speed and load (detonation is more likely at lower speeds and higher loads)
-engine condition (deposits, hot spots in the combustion chamber, etc.)
etc.
In theory, when a manufacturer determines the octane requirement for their vehicles they test under varying conditions representative of what the vehicles could be expected to see in the real world. So under ideal conditions, you should expect to be able to run satisfactorily with slightly less octane than they recommend, and under severe conditions you might expect to see slight detonation (or in the case of vehicles with good engine management systems you might notice a slight drop in performance as the system compensates automatically by retarding ignition for instance). I don't count Harley's system as being one of the really good ones, since you still get obvious ping even when the ECM retards spark to try to control it. The best automotive systems are almost unnoticeable in operation.
Anyhow, back to the subject. Excess octane, above and beyond what the engine actually requires, serves no useful purpose. Putting 91 octane in a vehicle designed to run on 87 octane won't make the vehicle run any better, and will in fact usually degrade performance and economy. Don't take my word for it, there are plenty of SAE papers and other studies doubters can look up at the library or online. So someone running a stock engine in a Harley with a 91 octane requirement will NOT get any real benefit from paying $10 or more per gallon for some 110 octane racing fuel.
Oh, btw, when referencing octane and comparing products, you need to note the difference in rating methods and which one applies to the product in question. Regular motor fuels sold in the USA are required to be labeled with the [(R+M) / 2] method (the average of the Research number and the Motor number). But racing fuels may be rated with just the Research number, which is higher. To give you an idea, the 92 octane (R+M/2) stuff at your local gas station is approximately 97 octane on the old Research number scale.
Jerry