Octane Differences - Page 2

Octane Differences

This is a discussion on Octane Differences within the F150 Ecoboost Chat forums, part of the F150 Ecoboost Forum category; Good post. I just returned from a 4800km trip from mb to victoria n back.I ran premium the entire trip. Like stated lots of long ...

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 62
Like Tree33Likes

Thread: Octane Differences

  1. #11
    Ecoboost Pro Neolise's Avatar

    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    manitoba canada
    Posts
    680
    Member #
    4700
    Liked
    210 times
    Good post. I just returned from a 4800km trip from mb to victoria n back.I ran premium the entire trip. Like stated lots of long steady inclines along the route.I averaged 12.6 liters p 100 kms. With the extended range tank and premium fuel i was impressed with getting over 1000 km per tank in the mountains. :beer:

    Sent from my SGH-I747M using Xparent Green Tapatalk 2

  2. #12
    Ecoboost Sr Member Atlee's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Richmond, VA area
    Posts
    74
    Member #
    6132
    Liked
    17 times
    The owners manual for my 2014 Eco Boost advises against using 85 octane, even in the mountains. It also suggested using 91 octane in higher elevations when pulling.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fly boy View Post
    Something that is overlooked quite often is the altitude. Depending on your attitude, depends on the minimum octane you want to run. Octane and pre-ignition go hand in hand, so if you are up at say 6000 feet, you don't need to run 87/91. But if your are at sea level, you are more likely to have pre-ignition and want to run the higher octane.

    When I lived in Cheyenne WY, 6200' elevation - I had no trouble running 85/87 octane. I moved to Wichita Falls TX (1,000ft) and make sure I run 87 as bare minimum.

    Hope this doesn't throw a wrench into your plan.

  3. #13
    Ecoboost Pro Woofer700's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    S/E SD
    Posts
    750
    Member #
    6379
    Liked
    287 times
    I've started doing my own testing on fuel. Bought truck with a full tank of whatever they put in it. Guessing the cheapest they could buy. My next 2 tanks I filled with 89 non ethanol, my 04 Ranger loved it, so I figured this new one would too. Then went back to 87 with 10% ethanol, and didn't notice any change at all. Maybe when I get a few more miles I will notice a change with different fuels. For now I'll keep running the 87.

  4. Remove Advertisements
    F150EcoBoost.net
    Advertisements
     

  5. #14
    Ecoboost Veteran kngranch1's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    263
    Member #
    5132
    Liked
    52 times
    I only run 93 in my KR. You can feel the power difference don't really care about gas mileage though it sucks I get it.
    scap99 likes this.

  6. #15
    Eco-Beast EcoXLT's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    1,820
    Member #
    6645
    Liked
    892 times
    You would have to use the higher octane if you have knock on 87. Don't know if i figured this out right but 30 gal of 87 $4.00= $120. Premium at $4.20 =$126. so the $6 you pay more would have to get you 27 miles farther then 87. to break even ave 18 MPG does that sound right?

  7. #16
    Ecoboost Pro HuntTruck's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    522
    Member #
    6581
    Liked
    281 times
    Ok I'll bite...

    As I understand it, octane levels are designed to combust and make your motor go vroooom based on compression ratios. Higher compression engines will burn higher octane more efficiently based on the chemical make up of the gas... thus why vehicles that recommend 93 will burn 87, but be very sluggish and get poor milage.

    Here's my experience: I lived in the Toyo FJC world for a while and built a *****in' one. They take/recommend 93. This topic was discussed at UBER MEGA SUPER length on the FJC forum from probably 2008-2011. We were fortunate enough to have a Chemist for BP on the boards and he gave a hella-complex science answer that basically said what I stated above. You cant escape the chemical science of how the different octane fuels physically burn and create energy.

    My FJC would run a solid 2 mpg better on 93 than 87, justifying the cost for me. Others negated that and only ran 87. To each their own, it's your truck and your money buying the gas. That being said, I've never owned a forced induction engine before, and never tuned either, and I'm sure that a multitude of factors will determine which fuel will burn the most completely, read efficiently, in each EB.

    I am new to the learning curve of turbos and EB in general, but science is science.

    The can is open. I'm already sorry...
    BlueMonte and pmt1228 like this.

  8. #17
    6IX
    6IX is offline
    Ecoboost Veteran 6IX's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    California
    Posts
    360
    Member #
    1850
    Liked
    43 times
    Quote Originally Posted by EcoXLT View Post
    I have a 2013 XLT. ECO. Sea level. 87 only for the almost 8000 miles on truck. Trip B never reset and I average.16.9 with 50/50 freeway/city on what ever garbage gas California wants to use. It just my thoughts but I dont think using 91 octane gives you enough extra MPG to make it worth using. But I will watch this thread to see what you find.
    I'm right there with you. Sea Level in Southern California and will leave Trip B to monitor the miles between each oil change. 16+ average for me too running 87 Octane. I've seen 20+ on a 500 mile road trip when the truck was new and I was babying it, but when driving it like you want to on long trips I'll usually drag it down into the 18-19 range. I have no plans to try Premium fuel.

  9. #18
    Eco-Beast stevenmverrill's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Frederick md
    Posts
    1,902
    Member #
    6032
    Liked
    925 times
    Quote Originally Posted by Grim Reaper View Post
    I have tried putting Premium (91 & 94) in a bone stock truck (including stock PCM tuning) and it did not produce any noticeable increases in fuel economy.

    However, when I tuned my PCM for higher performance octane from a number of tuners, not only did I get the performance increase, but I often got a small increase in fuel economy (1 or 2 mpgs) on a standard route I take to visit family.

    I do have a couple of "economy tunes" but ... I was spoiled by the performance tunes, and quickly ignored them. Maybe others who have specifically ran economy based tunes will have more to say.
    I have 4 more days to endure my canned tuna. I have had super chips for all most a year and can not say I ever used stock or the gas saving tune yet. Hell I went back to the tow tune, for a few days (had to hall an SUV) and it felt like I was driving a slug with a blown head gaskit.

  10. #19
    Eco-Beast stevenmverrill's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Frederick md
    Posts
    1,902
    Member #
    6032
    Liked
    925 times
    O and a lot more on topic since the tune it has never seen anything other than 93 with 10% ethanol.
    before the tune,I noticed the difference from when I added 93 after using up the dealer gas. my truck will never see anything other than 93 ever again. but for anyone testing, that can monitor boost and timing. you should do a wide open throttle 1-2-3 pull 87 and 93. I promise there will be significant differences. IMO the real question at hand is... is the price difference between 87 and 93, relevant to the increased mileage??? if I had to speculate. I highly doubt the added cost of 93 would negate the added fuel economy.
    My 2/100
    Grim Reaper likes this.

  11. #20
    Eco-Beast stevenmverrill's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Frederick md
    Posts
    1,902
    Member #
    6032
    Liked
    925 times
    So I did a proof read after pressing Send,and found what I meant to say is I wanted to post this in the I'm drunk forum
    Let me try again, the added cost of 93 will probably outweigh whatever potential added fuel economy.
    Grim Reaper likes this.

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Differences in Ford Truck Models
    By ckjaecks in forum F150 Ecoboost Chat
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 07-22-2014, 06:42 PM
  2. Differences in Off-road trim packages?
    By grock in forum F150 Ecoboost Chat
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 05-18-2014, 07:48 AM
  3. 87 octane (10% ethanol) versus 91 octane (no ethanol)?
    By MajorPain in forum F150 Ecoboost Performance
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 12-10-2013, 11:07 PM
  4. Differences in the Eco-Boost 2011 - 2013??
    By HiHoStevo in forum F150 Ecoboost Chat
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 05-18-2013, 12:50 AM

Search tags for this page

91 octane gas in the ecoboost
,
eco boost 85octane
,
eco bust differences gas mileage
,

ecoboost 85 octane

,
ecoboost and 85 octane fuel
,
ecoboost on 85 octane
,

ecoboost worse mileage on low octane gas

,

f150 ecoboost fuel octane

Click on a term to search for related topics.

Tags for this Thread

Connect with us: F150 Ecoboost Forum on Twitter F150 Ecoboost Forum on Facebook F150 Ecoboost Forum RSS Feed
Find us on Google+