Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
RAM TRX - TRX-Forum.com
Bronco Raptor - BroncoRaptorForum.com
Forums
GEN 1 (2010-2014) Ford SVT Raptor Forums
Ford SVT Raptor General Discussions [GEN 1]
Supercharger or not?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="BoostedToy" data-source="post: 1536079" data-attributes="member: 31712"><p>Everyone has their own perspective. I appreciate that. I build in some margin of safety. If I purely use the paper blend requirements for 90 to 93, $300 gets me to 110 complete fills of a 34 gallon tank at .09c/gallon. Personally, I am willing and it makes sense to me to pay the slight premium. JDM was more optimistic on the loss than VMP. Either way, vs the Roush 93 tune, this allowed a little more boost (1.5psi-1.75psi), cleaned up the tune and all the while providing significantly improved non-load fuel consumption. Average mpg went from 11.3 over 3k summer month period to 15.1. That is a meaningful increase. It’s not a like vs like comparison though, as this is neat (no ethanol) fuel in Alaska. Still, E10 vs neat wouldn’t explain the full difference. When in Cincinnati two summers ago, I would achieve 14.2-14.5mpg at 70 mph. Post-tune on level highway, I am getting 18.8-19.0mpg. </p><p></p><p>There are other variables that have an effect, but on the macro, the tune certainly makes more power and consumes less fuel (even at WOT on the upper 1500rpm of the tune). </p><p></p><p></p><p>So for me, it’s probably closer to .12-15c/gallon. I also likely have 40-50fwhp on a 90 octane tune with the stock boost versus the additional timing afforded and mild boost increases. </p><p></p><p>I’ll pay for that. I’ll look forward to getting back to not messing with my routine of pouring 7-8oz of this additive with each full. It’s not too much of a hassle though.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="BoostedToy, post: 1536079, member: 31712"] Everyone has their own perspective. I appreciate that. I build in some margin of safety. If I purely use the paper blend requirements for 90 to 93, $300 gets me to 110 complete fills of a 34 gallon tank at .09c/gallon. Personally, I am willing and it makes sense to me to pay the slight premium. JDM was more optimistic on the loss than VMP. Either way, vs the Roush 93 tune, this allowed a little more boost (1.5psi-1.75psi), cleaned up the tune and all the while providing significantly improved non-load fuel consumption. Average mpg went from 11.3 over 3k summer month period to 15.1. That is a meaningful increase. It’s not a like vs like comparison though, as this is neat (no ethanol) fuel in Alaska. Still, E10 vs neat wouldn’t explain the full difference. When in Cincinnati two summers ago, I would achieve 14.2-14.5mpg at 70 mph. Post-tune on level highway, I am getting 18.8-19.0mpg. There are other variables that have an effect, but on the macro, the tune certainly makes more power and consumes less fuel (even at WOT on the upper 1500rpm of the tune). So for me, it’s probably closer to .12-15c/gallon. I also likely have 40-50fwhp on a 90 octane tune with the stock boost versus the additional timing afforded and mild boost increases. I’ll pay for that. I’ll look forward to getting back to not messing with my routine of pouring 7-8oz of this additive with each full. It’s not too much of a hassle though. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
livefree
jekyll537
mojohead
mzuern
alockbox
rschap1
Five0Raptor
eljefe_tx
eanevarez
Ruger86
jdm_sixtwo
jhamiltonak
rfranklin1
HookEm
raptorgroyper
tominphx
AZ_Raptor
Brody Goble
MrHobbs
HighwaySentinel
WTX
Specialtyperformanceparts
Jetjock15
SeasickLI
dsiggi
FMoon83
matt_carmody
Brenford2005
Erich_Hagen
Waterfowler41
tcm glx
Cody Templeton
lawtonmc
shaikhasm
Jakenbake
cfmistry
White fog
Rptrrob702
Robertcrav
NJ2020
khodge
kirkb
BushwiickBill
Skai
FordTechOne
ReddingRaptor
Jay_P
raptordawg08
blazn5667
signalbobby
... and 44 more.
Forum statistics
Threads
93,206
Posts
1,955,986
Members
56,496
Latest member
bolilly
Forums
GEN 1 (2010-2014) Ford SVT Raptor Forums
Ford SVT Raptor General Discussions [GEN 1]
Supercharger or not?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top