Thanks for the real world report. I think I am just like you- I will drive (generally) for the efficiency and economy. I presently drive a Buick Encore that is supposed to average 27 mpg and I average 31.5. Drive sanely and you will be rewarded. Looking forward to receiving the Maverick I ordered in October someday.
I think this is a really good question. I keep my vehicles for at least 10 years so if there's anything I can do with break-in that helps longevity that's what I'm interested in. After break-in, I'll be in eco or normal mode most of the time sport mode when I'm trying to show someone what the Mav can do.
. So, yes, any break-in for longevity thoughts?
The highlighted is false, it's a perception since the mapping on the throttle has been changed.
Fuel delivery is also changed. More fuel equals more power.
Ok……here’s a question for the gang…….
That’s wildly inaccurate. More fuel actually means less power as it would be too rich. Actually, leaner is faster and makes the most power. More AIR coupled with more fuel will net you more power, so just adding fuel will do nothing unless you increase boost pressure along with it.
Wow did you just step into a debate. I agree that leaner is meaner but richer can be quicker too. Until now I have never heard running richer won't get you more speed. My post was NOT wildly inaccurate. I run my motorcycles and boats as lean as I can but my vehicles a little to the rich side. You should see my diesel. I cant dump enough fuel to it. It's not pure throttle points because at the EXACT same power(as best as the gauge can do) the mpgs drop tremendously. Also this is a hybrid. Zero gears. Oh and BTW with ford it's generally towing that holds the higher rpm for rpms sake.
Completely different modes of operation between a gas and diesel engine. A gas engine controls power by controlling the amount of air going to the engine with the throttle. The fuel stays fairly close to stochiometric with the amount of air. A diesel has no throttle plate and controls power with the amount of fuel. They use a very wide range of air/fuel ratios.
Just an example buddy.
Brandon,
Nah, I’m not going to debate really. I’ve been tuning for over a decade now and understand how air / fuel ratios work. Richer doesn’t add speed and probably never will, unless it’s a diesel. The original debate was sport vs eco and there being a power difference, which is certainly not the case. The differences being they hold higher RPMs to hold turbo spool to increase throttle response. In the hybrids case, it’s a belt controlled by a centrifugal force primary clutch pack that spins a secondary. You can manipulate weight and speed at which the primary opens, thus giving the same effect of “holding a gear” and keeping rpms raised. This will also give the illusion of more power because you will again, have better throttle response because of being in the power band of the rpms.
Then your not a very educated tuner. Never deal in absolutes. When we drag boats running 10k rpms some run lean some run rich. Too lean and bang. To rich and problems as well. You must be good to break with tuners doing engines for 30 years and spending thousands on research.
So your graph proves my point further. If you were to reverse propagate that out further to the left, the graph line would continue to decline. Thus proving my point and disproving your statement of “more fuel equals more power.”Then your not a very educated tuner. Never deal in absolutes. When we drag boats running 10k rpms some run lean some run rich. Too lean and bang. To rich and problems as well. You must be good to break with tuners doing engines for 30 years and spending thousands on research.
Here is one graph from o e preference.
I'm assuming that you can't think I mean tons of fuel equals tons of power. You can go too far both ways. That graph proved my point and actually shows less power running lean which I disagree with. I kept my last Harley so lean I had to change plugs every 1500 miles. Ran like a scalded dig though. My current runs a little on the rich side.
