Octane Matters

[FordPerf Addict]

How in the hell do you get 21 MPG? Granted i installed an MPT Tune but in town my average is 13 or 14 MPG

I get 15.5-16.5 at best.
Run normally 68-75 on the highway. About 20-30% city driving


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[FXT]

Guess i should slow down. Truck is comfortable at 80

 

[MaxFord]

What really sucks is that when I worked in the fuel industry 20 years ago the wholesale cost difference between 87 octane and 93 octane fuel was 5 cents. It was most common for stations to charge +.10 for 89 and +20 for 93. At that time some stations still had a separate tank for 89 but most stations were already blending 89. Every station I see today is blending mid grade. Also drivers would accidentally drop regular fuel in premium underground tanks. That does not get pumped out. Also if a tanker cannot fit all of the regular fuel in a tank he would cross drop the remaining fuel in the premium tank.
I am trying to make the point that you do not 93 from the 93 hose. Blending was also coplicated. At certain branded stations the blend ratio was fixed so customers pumped higher than 89 in the mid selection.

 

[Jason Snokhous]

Nice to see College Station in the forum. Whoop! I haven't seen a material difference in mpg between 87 and 93 - not enough to make the cost worth it. I'm lucky to break 15-16 mpg on the road with relatively conservative driving but thats likely the tires it came with.

Thanks man

 

[Jason Snokhous]

How in the hell do you get 21 MPG? Granted i installed an MPT Tune but in town my average is 13 or 14 MPG

I got that on a highway trip according to the computer. It was a little under 200 miles. Was going 65-70 mph.

The last 500 miles I’ve gotten 18.2, 75%ish highway. It’s stock besides a JLT catch can.

When I filled up a couple weeks ago my range showed 668 miles to e.

 

[Badgertits]

I got that on a highway trip according to the computer. It was a little under 200 miles. Was going 65-70 mph.

The last 500 miles I’ve gotten 18.2, 75%ish highway. It’s stock besides a JLT catch can.

When I filled up a couple weeks ago my range showed 668 miles to e.

I work from home in MA w/ my main office being 330 miles away in NJ - I also do long road trips visiting accounts every 3-6 weeks on average, so long highway stretches account for a good chunk of my mileage, but the other part of my driving is strictly around town local hwy & getting on it regularly. So its a pretty eclectic mix of driving, and I average 15.5

Thing is, I think this truck is very frugal around town actually especially taking the power/gearing/tires into equation - it doesn't drop off a cliff like a typical lifted V8 1/2 tons running 35"s & 4.10s would normally. I think I could probably get alot closer to a 17ish average, except I can't seem to keep the highway cruising speed below 73ish - seems for me the second I start driving @ like 75-80 on cruise I lose 1.5-2.5 mpg, like the MPG hit from aero on hwy from a % standpoint is worse than the weight/gearing/tires/power around town.

Not sure if anyone else notices this, but its remarkable how much a few extra mph @ highway speed can drop the MPGs down so hard.

 

[lawdog]

I don't deny the performance gains from higher octane, I just don't wish to pay 60 cents more a gallon for it (87-93= 60 cents, 87-91 = 30 cents). If I had money to spare where I felt it was worth it, that would be different.

Why do people care about what octane other people put in their tank? I readily admit that those that run 91 or 93 are more hardcore than me and all that jazz. It's not going to impact your trucks performance, the availability of the fuel you want, or the value of your truck.

With what you spent on the Raptor and the stereo upgrades posted here, that covers a lot of 93. Look this is America, and you can do whatever you want with your truck. But, what you've done in buying it and upgrading it suggests that pure cost savings/penury are not your aim. I run 93 and supplement at times with 91 because I want the performance vehicle I paid for to perform at the level intended. The C&D test makes it patent that on 87/89, it isn't. For most folks who are paying the premium for a Raptor, the cost of 93 gas should not really be an issue. IF it is, perhaps you shouldn't have spent $65-70k on a truck. JMO/YMMV.

 

[Badgertits]

25% seems high to me, at least based on what I've personally seen on Dynos. I've typically seen 18-20% driveline losses through torque converted trannys

auto cars sure closer to that range, trucks more like 20-25%, lowest would be a sportbike ;-)

Forget about all that though - LOOK AT THE REAR WHEEL TQ figures!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Right below the HO 3.5 F150 #'s are the 87 vs 93 #'s on a charger rated @ 395 TQ @ the crank, they say on 87 its still pushing 364 lb/ft to the wheels vs. 395 @ the motor - less than 8% loss? I don't think so.

Something is off about these dyno results, the HP #'s are definitely believable/reasonable, but the TQ figures make no sense. Maybe they used a hub dyno & that's the reason for the extremely high TQ figures???

On 1 hand using a hub type dyno is a little misleading b/c most people are more familiar w/ a chassis-type, but on the other hand hub dynos read way more accurately & for the purposes of their test would be a better tool since their concern is really the immediate before/after effects of low vs higher octane on the same vehicle.

Now that I think about it, probably the case - anyone w/ a copy of the mag can, does it say what type of dyno they used to test the cars?

 

[melvimbe]

With what you spent on the Raptor and the stereo upgrades posted here, that covers a lot of 93. Look this is America, and you can do whatever you want with your truck. But, what you've done in buying it and upgrading it suggests that pure cost savings/penury are not your aim. I run 93 and supplement at times with 91 because I want the performance vehicle I paid for to perform at the level intended. The C&D test makes it patent that on 87/89, it isn't. For most folks who are paying the premium for a Raptor, the cost of 93 gas should not really be an issue. IF it is, perhaps you shouldn't have spent $65-70k on a truck. JMO/YMMV.

I think it's makes great sense to use premium fuel for those that can properly appreciate the performance gain, for it's cost. It also makes sense if helps maintain the vehicle and avoid potential repair costs, which I'm going to look into.

Yes, I can afford to put premium in the tank, but I can't afford everything. I spend money where I personally see value. The last thing I want to do is spend money on fuel just so that I'll be viewed as proper Raptor owner when it doesn't do anything for me.

I recognize that you guys know a lot more about the Raptor and vehicles in general than I do. I'm on here to learn, and I'm not just blowing off advice. Not that it matters, but the conversation has prompted me to look at higher octane again. Maybe I'll change, but I don't want to spend money for the wrong reasons.