flyingcoach2

Thanks for uploading the report. Interesting read on the speed / fuel eco charts and intercooler shutters.

w00t692

It's isn't from lack if ability to easily make way more power on 93. It's Ford artificially limiting it exactly where they limit it at. If they allowed the ECU to add more timing, it absolutely would.

But a combination of a ton of different factors limit spark, and the driver demand torque tables and transmission torque truncation tables limit it to making only certain amounts of power.

MNgopher

There is a of good stuff in here that actually quantifies a lot of what goes around as yes it does, no it doesnt, or my butt dyno says this is better... etc... Here a is a fully instrumented and scientifically conducted set of tests.

Stuff that was interesting to me:
-operation of the radiator shutters - they default to 30% open when operated in the cold test. Many here are under the idea the shutters are full closed when its cold. Reality (and matching what I have seen using torque and forscan) the programming defaults them 30% open when the temp goes below roughly 35 F to remove issues with the shutters freezing.
-Fuel economy changes in cold and hot temperature operation (which we likely have all see - nice to quantify it)
-Actual operation changes and fuel mileage changes running regular and premium fuels (appears that if you run like the highway cycle, premium might net better fuel mileage, but for anything else, forget it).
-Quantification of fuel savings from start stop operation (which varies based on the drive cycle, but there was a savings from 1-10% depending on the cycle).
-Quantification of fuel mileage changes using different modes (sport, tow haul)

w00t692

Ford rates every motor of their current offering on 91 octane fuel. If you run 87 you are receiving 15-25 less horsepower than rated output.

flynavy812

iTrader: (2)

Still don't understand why eco mode isn't tested at all. And another thread pointed out how they use a default mode for the MPG numbers. So if ECO was supposed to be the best economy mode, in theory wouldn't Ford test their ratings in this mode and make it the default?

w00t692

Yeah, you can seriously find it in their marketing stuff. It's rated on premium fuel.

chimmike

2017 doesn't have drive modes other than normal, tow/haul, and sport.

MNgopher

Read the marketing material again. The 2019 F150 brochure clearly calls out the ratings on the 3.5 Eco H.O. (Raptor, Limited) as being on 93 octane fuel. It does not state that for any other engine.

Ford has actually been very clear in its brochures and information which engines the rated HP and TQ numbers are using premium fuels. The bulk of the F150 engines are not in that camp.

MNgopher

Also, if one monitors the Octane Adjustment Ratio (or OAR), which is essentially the number that tells you what octane the engine is interpreting it is being fed, the bulk of 87 octane fuels here cluster between 0.1 and -0.2 (with negative being better, range is 1 (worst) to -1 (best)). In otherwords, the normal (0) is for 87 octane.

My last tank fillup was 31 gallons of 93 octane BP fuel. My OAR is currently sitting at a -0.8 (again, negative is better here). It went from 0.1 to -0.5 within 5 miles of filling up, and the rest of the way in the next 30 miles. Highest I've ever seen in my truck is -0.85 running some Shell premium 91 (but only that one tank here - every other one is around -0.7)

acdii

That was a Tow test at GCWR of 10K, rest of the tests were at the baseline of 5250.