Awesome, I know you'll put more of a scientific twist on it.wasinger3000 said:I'll try 500 miles of 91 then 87 and see where it stands.SHOnUup said:From a TON of guys on ecoboosted page...doubt it was very scientific. But many mentioned the change in mileage on the same daily commute they always take. Could be them easing off the throttle a bit to reinforce the idea, but if was a wave of guys.FoMoCoSHO said:Well, what are their testing methods? Just like the track, there are too many variables to know.SHOnUup said:I've only watched about a 100 guys report on better mileage in their F150 ecoboost by moving up to premium...they all must be lying?ajpturbo said:SHOnUup said:I've read that using 93 gets better mileage and ends up being same money spent as using 87...but your vehicle would appreciate the higher octane, and is better for it.wasinger3000 said:So what's the consensus on knock in relation to fuel economy. Is it more economical to run a higher octane to prevent knock which will reduce the amount of fuel sprayed in compensation of the knock. Or is it not worth the price increase over 87? I'm taking the f150 on a trip over 4k miles and it's not tuned so no need for 91.
Rich
Then u read a bad article...a fuels octane rating is its ability to resist preignition..common myth that higher octane yields better mpg and burns hotter....running higher octane fuel than what the vehicle was tuned for will only increase operating cost...the car doesn't appreciate anything....commanded lambda will remain the same no matter the fuel being used...
Rich
If there was any advantage to MPG with premium, you can bet Ford would lock it down to premium to get those extra CAFE points.....manufacturers are seriously under the gun with future fuel economy requirements....
Rich
Rich