I wonder why of six different dealerships I called, five of the service managers said it was a recommendation, but not required. Only one told me it is actually a recommendation, but he'd consider it a requirement and suggest 91+ only, as he needs to "cover his butt."
And I would suspect that while the majority of folks on this board are automotive enthusiasts, and have read the owner's manual cover to cover, 75% of LS drivers have never cracked the binding, except to see how to change the time on the clock, and are running 87 without issue.
If Ford had the factory tune to such a narrow margin that 87-octane fuel would destroy the engine, I'd think they'd have stated "REQUIRED" rather than "recommended," and would have a placard on the sun visor and a red flashing indicator in the fuel filler cap. Now, go to a tuner, and get things to the peak of performance with advanced timing curves, and all bets are off. I had an 87 Mustang with timing advanced to the point that it would ping like mad with anything less than Sunoco 94.
All this said, I've already considered a change to higher octane for the summer months, as there is increased potential for detonation with higher temps.
Bottom line:
There will be those who use 87 octane without care, concern, or problem.
There will be those who do so, experience pinging, pay attention, and upgrade their fuel.
And there will be those who "hear a weird noise," and figure it'll go away if they drive faster, then wonder why they're at the garage a month later.
The other school will follow the recommendation, pay a bit more for their gas, and have the peace of mind of following father Ford's suggestion, and getting top performance from their luxury sedan, with little or no risk of fuel-related catastrophic engine failure.
Either way, you're likely not going to convert one to the other no matter how many pages this post generates.
Andy