theoldwizard Posted July 9, 2009 Share Posted July 9, 2009 (edited) From page 11 of the 2010 Flex brochure EPA-estimated 17 mpg city/24 hwy., Flex FWD with 3.5L Duratec V6 engine. EPA-estimated 16 mpg city/22 hwy., Flex AWD with 3.5L Duratec V6 engine. EPA-estimated 16 mpg city/22 hwy., Flex AWD with 3.5L EcoBoost V6 engine with premium fuel Hmmm ... I think premium sells for about $0.20/gallon more in my neighborhood ! Edited July 9, 2009 by theoldwizard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted July 9, 2009 Share Posted July 9, 2009 It's recommended, not required, as just about every article on EB has taken pains to point out. http://www.motivemag.com/pub/feature/tech/...oBoost_V6.shtml Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chucky2 Posted July 9, 2009 Share Posted July 9, 2009 So is there a mileage hit when using 87 octane? Or is the mileage the same as when using 91-94 octane? Chuck Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralph Greene Posted July 9, 2009 Share Posted July 9, 2009 (edited) So is there a mileage hit when using 87 octane? Or is the mileage the same as when using 91-94 octane? Chuck In theory....at light throttle you should get best mileage with 87 with it's slightly slower burn rate (in theory). But burn rate between 87 and higher octanes is so close, I image mileage will be quoted the same. Also a lot will depend on how it's tuned. How much timing etc with 87. Edited July 9, 2009 by Ralph Greene Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted July 9, 2009 Author Share Posted July 9, 2009 In theory....at light throttle you should get best mileage with 87 with it's slightly slower burn rate (in theory). But burn rate between 87 and higher octanes is so close, I image mileage will be quoted the same. Also a lot will depend on how it's tuned. How much timing etc with 87. I disagree with your statement using the same data. If the fuel economy was the same with 87 octane, why would Ford footnote the fact that those numbers were obtained using premium fuel ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted July 9, 2009 Share Posted July 9, 2009 (edited) I disagree with your statement using the same data. If the fuel economy was the same with 87 octane, why would Ford footnote the fact that those numbers were obtained using premium fuel ? the exact wording regarding the SHO, and probably exactly the same regarding the Flex...reads....Based onFord projected 16 city/ 25mpg on Taurus SHO with ecoboost. Epa estimates unavail at printing. ( please not the full stop after the word printing ) Ratings acheived using 93 octane fuel. The use of 87 octane may reduce PERFORMANCE.....way I read it is PERFORMANCE pertains to Horsepower NOT MPG's. Edited July 9, 2009 by Deanh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigbuck15 Posted July 9, 2009 Share Posted July 9, 2009 If you can buy a $40,000 car you can pay for premium gas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralph Greene Posted July 9, 2009 Share Posted July 9, 2009 If I were tuning any of these cars for max fuel economy (MPG), I would tune them to use 87. For max performance as measured by HP and TQ, I would tune them for 91 and up. In a modern computer controlled car, striving for best A/F and timing, I see no reason why 93 would give superior fuel economy. Actually I think 87 gives slightly better fuel economy (though maybe not measureable). It may very well be that Ford did it's testing with 91 and up....to be able to advertise higher HP numbers. The question I responded to was: Would MPG suffer with the use of 87? And there is no reason why it should. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted July 9, 2009 Share Posted July 9, 2009 If the fuel economy was the same with 87 octane, why would Ford footnote the fact that those numbers were obtained using premium fuel ? It was answered in your Taurus SHO thread...are you just trolling now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted July 9, 2009 Share Posted July 9, 2009 If you can buy a $40,000 car you can pay for premium gas. does it really matter....I would think the choice is a huge BONUS.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papilgee4evaeva Posted July 9, 2009 Share Posted July 9, 2009 If you can buy a $40,000 car you can pay for premium gas. Say that again. :yup: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasonj80 Posted July 9, 2009 Share Posted July 9, 2009 In theory....at light throttle you should get best mileage with 87 with it's slightly slower burn rate (in theory). But burn rate between 87 and higher octanes is so close, I image mileage will be quoted the same. Also a lot will depend on how it's tuned. How much timing etc with 87. Octane slows the burning rate of gas, 87 has a faster burn rate than 91/93. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted July 9, 2009 Author Share Posted July 9, 2009 the exact wording regarding the SHO, ... NO ! The exact wording from the brochure (I downloaded) is listed in Post #1 ! Why do you think I listed the page number ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted July 9, 2009 Share Posted July 9, 2009 (edited) NO ! The exact wording from the brochure (I downloaded) is listed in Post #1 ! Why do you think I listed the page number ! I said regarding the SHO Wiz....relax, man youve been feisty lately....the fact that it does not mention 87 means NOTHING........you sre reading into it too much..... Edited July 9, 2009 by Deanh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralph Greene Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 Octane slows the burning rate of gas, 87 has a faster burn rate than 91/93. Burn rate is affected by the A/F ratio, not octane. Octane is just a measure of it's volatility. If I were tuning a car for a gas mileage contest, I would tune it around the use of 87.....which I know goes against popular myth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted July 10, 2009 Author Share Posted July 10, 2009 Burn rate is affected by the A/F ratio, not octane. Octane is just a measure of it's volatility. If I were tuning a car for a gas mileage contest, I would tune it around the use of 87.....which I know goes against popular myth. In fact, both of your statements are correct (although as you said, against popular myth.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 In fact, both of your statements are correct (although as you said, against popular myth.) Do you know whether Ford uses the one fuel type when doing emission/EPA tests and power figures? I suspect all turbo and V8 engines are rated with premium and standard engines with regular. Is that the way things were done in the past when you were with Ford? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charly Posted July 11, 2009 Share Posted July 11, 2009 (edited) Do you know whether Ford uses the one fuel type when doing emission/EPA tests and power figures?I suspect all turbo and V8 engines are rated with premium and standard engines with regular. Is that the way things were done in the past when you were with Ford? uh oh Edited July 23, 2009 by charly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted July 11, 2009 Share Posted July 11, 2009 (edited) Burn rate is affected by the A/F ratio, not octane. Octane is just a measure of it's volatility. If I were tuning a car for a gas mileage contest, I would tune it around the use of 87.....which I know goes against popular myth. I don't think premium makes that much difference with fuel economy tests, most of the EPA test runs are done on nil or partial boost so any change would be minimal. Edited July 11, 2009 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noah Harbinger Posted July 11, 2009 Share Posted July 11, 2009 Who fuckinkkkkkkkk cares, I'm with ford now and you are a knob gobbling thief so who cares what you think.????? and i use the term very looooooooosely.....mutt What the fuck is wrong with you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Oval Guide Posted July 11, 2009 Share Posted July 11, 2009 Who fuckinkkkkkkkk cares, I'm with ford now and you are a knob gobbling thief so who cares what you think.????? and i use the term very looooooooosely.....mutt People are here discussing a Ford product and they are attacked by a Ford employee? Nice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White99GT Posted July 11, 2009 Share Posted July 11, 2009 If I were tuning a car for a gas mileage contest, I would tune it around the use of 87.....which I know goes against popular myth. Why in the world would you do that? In most engines tuning for 87 octane requires slightly richer A/F ratios and less timing, both of which hurt fuel economy. Engines tuned for 91-93 octane usually get better fuel economy than those tuned for 87. Look at the Mach 1 and the 03/04 Mustang GT, the Mach 1 gets an extra mpg with an extra 50 hp. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted July 11, 2009 Author Share Posted July 11, 2009 Do you know whether Ford uses the one fuel type when doing emission/EPA tests and power figures?I suspect all turbo and V8 engines are rated with premium and standard engines with regular. Is that the way things were done in the past when you were with Ford? All testing procedures are defined by the EPA and CARB. The gasoline that is used is not even available commercially as it is tested and analyzed for exact octane and other properties by the refiners for every delivery. The short answer is, if you use a higher octane fuel for testing, it must be, at minimum, the "recommended" fuel (it could also be the most stringent "required" fuel) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted July 11, 2009 Share Posted July 11, 2009 Thanks wizard, that makes sense from an analytical laboratory perspective. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted July 13, 2009 Share Posted July 13, 2009 Who fuckinkkkkkkkk cares, I'm with ford now and you are a knob gobbling thief so who cares what you think.????? and i use the term very looooooooosely.....mutt WHOA!............medic...bring the straightjacket........... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.