Best octane for EcoBoost
07-21-2012, 12:26 PM
#11
I had a similar experiance with 87 at first it was better than 93 on MPG now after 8000 miles the 87 was getting 17.5 or less and the with 93 i am seeing 18.7 or higher.
07-21-2012, 12:53 PM
#12
Senior Member
I run 87 most of the time. I only load it with 91 (highest we can get in Arizona) when I am really pushing it. But when I am not pushing it I see no change in my MPG between the 2 fuels.
That is just my experience
That is just my experience
07-21-2012, 02:44 PM
#13
Senior Member
I tested this the other week with a road trip, here are my results.
The trip was from Roanoke, VA to Pittsburgh, PA, took the same route, similar driving conditions, load, etc..
I used 93 octane for the ride up and got 20.5 MPG
I used 87 octane on the way back and got 18.5 MPG, might have been able to squeak a few more 1/10's out of it as I got stuck in a traffic jam and idling kills the MPG readout, but whatever...
So, the difference was 2 MPG overall. I noted NO difference in driveability, idling, shifting etc....
For the folks that say its worth it for 93 and it pays for itself, have you done the math? It doesn't. That is, unless you have a MAJOR discrepancy on MPG's, around 5 MPG.
I took an average of the difference between 87 and 93 and came up with about a .35/gal. difference in price. I suck at math, so lets use nice easy numbers to make this easier.
Most of our fuel cells are 26.5, but we'll use 20 gal, to keep it simple.
@ 20.5 mpg you'll go 410 miles and spend $27 @ $1.35/gal.
@ 18.5 mpg you'll go 370 miles and spend $20 @ $1.00/gal.
A difference of $7.00 and 40 miles.
To get those extra 40 miles you will need approx. 2.1 gal. of 87, @ $1.00/gal thats roughly $2.00.
So, to travel the same difference with 87 your new total is $22, leaving a difference of $5.00
In order to break even on spending the extra money on 93 @ 20.5 mpg you would have to be getting approx. 15.2 mpg on 87 octane, again, thats to break even, not "paying for itself" to run 93, a difference of 5 mpg, thats pretty huge.
Having done the math, its not worth it to me to run 93. When might it be?
- You have a tune that requires 93
- Heavy towing, I think the manual recommends it
- There is little to no difference in the price of 87 vs. 93
- Traveling that extra 40-50 miles is worth the extra $5.00
- You really get off on the instant MPG read out
The trip was from Roanoke, VA to Pittsburgh, PA, took the same route, similar driving conditions, load, etc..
I used 93 octane for the ride up and got 20.5 MPG
I used 87 octane on the way back and got 18.5 MPG, might have been able to squeak a few more 1/10's out of it as I got stuck in a traffic jam and idling kills the MPG readout, but whatever...
So, the difference was 2 MPG overall. I noted NO difference in driveability, idling, shifting etc....
For the folks that say its worth it for 93 and it pays for itself, have you done the math? It doesn't. That is, unless you have a MAJOR discrepancy on MPG's, around 5 MPG.
I took an average of the difference between 87 and 93 and came up with about a .35/gal. difference in price. I suck at math, so lets use nice easy numbers to make this easier.
Most of our fuel cells are 26.5, but we'll use 20 gal, to keep it simple.
@ 20.5 mpg you'll go 410 miles and spend $27 @ $1.35/gal.
@ 18.5 mpg you'll go 370 miles and spend $20 @ $1.00/gal.
A difference of $7.00 and 40 miles.
To get those extra 40 miles you will need approx. 2.1 gal. of 87, @ $1.00/gal thats roughly $2.00.
So, to travel the same difference with 87 your new total is $22, leaving a difference of $5.00
In order to break even on spending the extra money on 93 @ 20.5 mpg you would have to be getting approx. 15.2 mpg on 87 octane, again, thats to break even, not "paying for itself" to run 93, a difference of 5 mpg, thats pretty huge.
Having done the math, its not worth it to me to run 93. When might it be?
- You have a tune that requires 93
- Heavy towing, I think the manual recommends it
- There is little to no difference in the price of 87 vs. 93
- Traveling that extra 40-50 miles is worth the extra $5.00
- You really get off on the instant MPG read out
07-21-2012, 03:48 PM
#14
07-21-2012, 03:52 PM
#15
I noticed 40 + more miles per tank on 93 compared to 87 on my 3000 mile round trip this summer. First trip was 87, 2nd trip was 93 and 3rd was 91. 93 octane is the only one that made a difference. I also noticed better throttle response IMO on the highway. I don't notice any difference city driving.
07-21-2012, 05:38 PM
#17
I tested this the other week with a road trip, here are my results.
The trip was from Roanoke, VA to Pittsburgh, PA, took the same route, similar driving conditions, load, etc..
I used 93 octane for the ride up and got 20.5 MPG
I used 87 octane on the way back and got 18.5 MPG, might have been able to squeak a few more 1/10's out of it as I got stuck in a traffic jam and idling kills the MPG readout, but whatever...
So, the difference was 2 MPG overall. I noted NO difference in driveability, idling, shifting etc....
For the folks that say its worth it for 93 and it pays for itself, have you done the math? It doesn't. That is, unless you have a MAJOR discrepancy on MPG's, around 5 MPG.
I took an average of the difference between 87 and 93 and came up with about a .35/gal. difference in price. I suck at math, so lets use nice easy numbers to make this easier.
Most of our fuel cells are 26.5, but we'll use 20 gal, to keep it simple.
@ 20.5 mpg you'll go 410 miles and spend $27 @ $1.35/gal.
@ 18.5 mpg you'll go 370 miles and spend $20 @ $1.00/gal.
A difference of $7.00 and 40 miles.
To get those extra 40 miles you will need approx. 2.1 gal. of 87, @ $1.00/gal thats roughly $2.00.
So, to travel the same difference with 87 your new total is $22, leaving a difference of $5.00
In order to break even on spending the extra money on 93 @ 20.5 mpg you would have to be getting approx. 15.2 mpg on 87 octane, again, thats to break even, not "paying for itself" to run 93, a difference of 5 mpg, thats pretty huge.
Having done the math, its not worth it to me to run 93. When might it be?
- You have a tune that requires 93
- Heavy towing, I think the manual recommends it
- There is little to no difference in the price of 87 vs. 93
- Traveling that extra 40-50 miles is worth the extra $5.00
- You really get off on the instant MPG read out
The trip was from Roanoke, VA to Pittsburgh, PA, took the same route, similar driving conditions, load, etc..
I used 93 octane for the ride up and got 20.5 MPG
I used 87 octane on the way back and got 18.5 MPG, might have been able to squeak a few more 1/10's out of it as I got stuck in a traffic jam and idling kills the MPG readout, but whatever...
So, the difference was 2 MPG overall. I noted NO difference in driveability, idling, shifting etc....
For the folks that say its worth it for 93 and it pays for itself, have you done the math? It doesn't. That is, unless you have a MAJOR discrepancy on MPG's, around 5 MPG.
I took an average of the difference between 87 and 93 and came up with about a .35/gal. difference in price. I suck at math, so lets use nice easy numbers to make this easier.
Most of our fuel cells are 26.5, but we'll use 20 gal, to keep it simple.
@ 20.5 mpg you'll go 410 miles and spend $27 @ $1.35/gal.
@ 18.5 mpg you'll go 370 miles and spend $20 @ $1.00/gal.
A difference of $7.00 and 40 miles.
To get those extra 40 miles you will need approx. 2.1 gal. of 87, @ $1.00/gal thats roughly $2.00.
So, to travel the same difference with 87 your new total is $22, leaving a difference of $5.00
In order to break even on spending the extra money on 93 @ 20.5 mpg you would have to be getting approx. 15.2 mpg on 87 octane, again, thats to break even, not "paying for itself" to run 93, a difference of 5 mpg, thats pretty huge.
Having done the math, its not worth it to me to run 93. When might it be?
- You have a tune that requires 93
- Heavy towing, I think the manual recommends it
- There is little to no difference in the price of 87 vs. 93
- Traveling that extra 40-50 miles is worth the extra $5.00
- You really get off on the instant MPG read out
Your math is fatally flawed based upon the price of gas. Your reflect a 35% premium for premium gas. Premium usually runs 20 cents more than regular. The Roanoke, VA Sam's Club shows regular at 3.14 and premium at 3.34 for premium per gas buddy, which is only 6% more expensive, nowhere near the 35% you initially assumed.
Utilizing your logic for the updated gas prices:
Most of our fuel cells are 26.5, but we'll use 20 gal, to keep it simple.
@ 20.5 mpg you'll go 410 miles and spend $66.80 @ $3.34/gal.
@ 18.5 mpg you'll go 370 miles and spend $62.80 @ $3.14/gal.
A difference of $4.00 and 40 miles.
To get those extra 40 miles you will need approx. 2.1 gal. of 87, @ $3.14/gal that's roughly $6.59.
So, to travel the same difference with 87 your new total is $69.39, costing $2.59 over premium.
@ 20.5 mpg you'll go 410 miles and spend $66.80 @ $3.34/gal.
@ 18.5 mpg you'll go 370 miles and spend $62.80 @ $3.14/gal.
A difference of $4.00 and 40 miles.
To get those extra 40 miles you will need approx. 2.1 gal. of 87, @ $3.14/gal that's roughly $6.59.
So, to travel the same difference with 87 your new total is $69.39, costing $2.59 over premium.
07-21-2012, 09:03 PM
#18
Senior Member
Originally Posted by exponentialpi
Your math is fatally flawed based upon the price of gas. Your reflect a 35% premium for premium gas. Premium usually runs 20 cents more than regular. The Roanoke, VA Sam's Club shows regular at 3.14 and premium at 3.34 for premium per gas buddy, which is only 6% more expensive, nowhere near the 35% you initially assumed.
Utilizing your logic for the updated gas prices:
07-21-2012, 09:41 PM
#19
For the record, sitting in front of a camp fire with a beer so my math could be screwy but...
If you get 2 mpg better on premium, you are getting 52 more miles out of a 26 gallon tank. It would take roughy 2.5 gallons more of 87 to equal what the premium is. Let's say 87 is 3.50 a gallon, you would spend $8.75 to make up the mileage.
Premium on the other hand is .25 cents more. X's that by 26 and it equals $6.50. An overall savings of $2.25 per tank.
Mileage may waiver to make the end result more equal as well as costs in your area but at the end of the day they are VERY close.
So, are you going to put 87 in your 40k+ truck because it seems cheaper today?
If you get 2 mpg better on premium, you are getting 52 more miles out of a 26 gallon tank. It would take roughy 2.5 gallons more of 87 to equal what the premium is. Let's say 87 is 3.50 a gallon, you would spend $8.75 to make up the mileage.
Premium on the other hand is .25 cents more. X's that by 26 and it equals $6.50. An overall savings of $2.25 per tank.
Mileage may waiver to make the end result more equal as well as costs in your area but at the end of the day they are VERY close.
So, are you going to put 87 in your 40k+ truck because it seems cheaper today?
07-21-2012, 10:20 PM
#20
