2.0 MPG gas mileage tests (so far) and differences using 87 vs 92 octane

[Vinhnguyen54]

My F150 2.7 tune or not also benefit with 92 so that's all I run. Yours results seems right on for the Mav 2.0. You won't likely feel the performance difference unless u rev it out since it's likely up top.

For my hybrid mav I did not notice any diff with 92 or 87 so I guess that's a good thing. 87 only.

Sponsored

 

[Mavman123]

Compression in the 2.0 engine isn't high enough to warrant higher octane fuels than 87. Aside from towing a heavy load on a hot summer day uphill while blasting the air conditioning on high, I stick with 87 octane all day everyday.

Like a previous post mentioned, if you are looking for mpg gains, going with an ethanol free fuel will lead to that. Ethanol has a lower energy density than gasoline

 

[jtpc2021]

Everyone is all over the map with their gas milage so everyone can take this data with a grain of salt. It's simply my data.

XLT 4K AWD FX4 Ecoboost - 80% highway 20% city

Autostop Eliminator installed so my vehicle never turns off at lights.

Hand calculated numbers below. Car was very close on calculations - showed 28.3 for 92 octane and 27.2 for 87.

Only did two tanks of gas of each so this is very preliminary data.

92 Octane - 28.0 MPG avg
87 Octane - 27.0 MPG avg

$3.85 for 92 octane x 16 gallons = $61.60
$3.45 for 87 octane x 16 gallons = $55.20

If I use 87 octane for a fillup I save $6.40.

16 gallon tank - so with 92 I might get 16 miles more distance per tank

$3.45/27mpg = $0.127 x 16 = $2.032 to get the extra 16 miles with 87 octane

$6.40-$2.03= $4.37

So by my calculations if I use 87 octane I save $4.37 every fill up. Fill up every 10 days avg = $159.51 per year saving for using 87 octane.

Things I noted -

• Manual recommends 92 octane for best MPG performance and overall engine performance/HP but 87 is acceptable per the manual
• The engine definitely seemed slighly noisier and more "ticky" when running 87 vs 92 but this could also be a placebo effect
• I didn't notice any difference in performance but I drive like a grandma most of the time. It will be interesting to try towing with both octanes at some point.

I plan to own this truck for 10+ years and plan to run 92 as turbos are desgined to run better with higher octane. My view is that although the car has knock sensors it was designed to work best with 92+ and running it that way for 10 years may result in less wear in the long term. The 10 year cost for gas difference would be $1500 at current prices. Everyone can make their own assumptions about whether or not that is worth it vs possible repairs or wear.

If I only planned to have the truck for 5 years or didn't have the extra dough to spend on gas I would definitely roll with 87 octane. If gas prices continue to go up I might go that route as well. Lots of variables.

Well said.

The ticking noise is inherent with direct injection engines. I prefer multipoint with port, but ford didn’t go that route with their ecoboost engines.

 

[Shakesbear]

Great job, very pertinent info, interesting to us EB owners, easy to follow. I love a well-written article that boils down tech info.

I'm still under 1k miles; on my 3rd tank, 1st was dealer fill-up which I'm sure was regular, 2nd fill was 92 octane, 3rd was 87 octane. I thought I noticed more noise on start-up/warm-up with 87, but the truck is still new to me. Also, it seemed not quite as punchy but I have no acceleration times to support/compare. I'll use 92 in next fill and see what I observe.

BTW, this is my 1st turbo ever, so I appreciate the reminder about potential longevity on higher octane fuel. The minor savings with 87 does not sway me. I want what's best for the truck (and me!).

"Non high performance engines do not gain horsepower from the use of premium gasoline. ... Premium gasoline cleans the fuel system to a degree but does not add horsepower."

Manual states 87; 91 if towing or high air temps. Unless your vehicle is designed or "tuned" to perform with higher octane gas, you're wasting your money. Had a 2011 Genesis coupe that was "tuned" for 91 and ran well with it. I have a 2016 Genesis coupe that was designed for 87, and it runs better than the 2011. I've had a couple of turbo engines as well (T-bird and Volvo). Used what the manual called for (87-91) and never had any issues. I only had the T-bird for 3 years, and the Volvo for 4. 2011 coupe I had for 5 years, and I still roll the 2016 to date. All ran very well the entire time I had/have them. All that being said, one can do whatever they believe will be better for/improve their own vehicle. I'll run 87, and throw in some 91 every now and then if towing or the temps hit triple digits (that's what I consider high temps). One thing I will always do, and that is to utilize Tier 1 gasoline. Vroom, Vroom

 

[desmobob]

Appreciate this information. Curious, would using octane booster be cheaper? I've always assumed it was far inferior to premium fuel.

Ford Maverick window sticker Information regarding fuel recommendations for the Maverick w/2.0 Ecoboost specifically warns against the ingredient in at least some octane boosters....

 

[MaverickMan39845]

Ford Maverick window sticker Information regarding fuel recommendations for the Maverick w/2.0 Ecoboost specifically warns against the ingredient in at least some octane boosters....

Peak horsepower is usually measured with 93 octane....all I use in my vehicles!

 

[jcnnjc]

One more thing to think about Premium fuel has much more cleaning additives then regular.
Especially if you are using top tier gas. Always get gas at costco normally less than 10 cent per gallon difference vs regular at other stations. If you plan on keeping the Maverick till the wheels fall off then, IMO its totally worth it. On Mini Cooper S it would get 3-4 MPG better with premium, so the cost difference was really Nil. Will be putting 93 in my Mav!

 

[Portcqb]

One more thing to think about Premium fuel has much more cleaning additives then regular.
Especially if you are using top tier gas. Always get gas at costco normally less than 10 cent per gallon difference vs regular at other stations. If you plan on keeping the Maverick till the wheels fall off then, IMO its totally worth it. On Mini Cooper S it would get 3-4 MPG better with premium, so the cost difference was really Nil. Will be putting 93 in my Mav!

It fine having extra cleaners for the pumps and injectors but keep in mine without a port injector fuel can't clean the top of the valves which is where it's really needed on these engines.

 

[Shakesbear]

https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a28565486/honda-cr-v-vs-bmw-m5-ford-f-150-dodge-charger/

A good read on just what a higher octane than recommended will do for you

 

[Mainer500]

Everyone is all over the map with their gas milage so everyone can take this data with a grain of salt. It's simply my data.

XLT 4K AWD FX4 Ecoboost - 80% highway 20% city

Autostop Eliminator installed so my vehicle never turns off at lights.

Hand calculated numbers below. Car was very close on calculations - showed 28.3 for 92 octane and 27.2 for 87.

Only did two tanks of gas of each so this is very preliminary data.

92 Octane - 28.0 MPG avg
87 Octane - 27.0 MPG avg

$3.85 for 92 octane x 16 gallons = $61.60
$3.45 for 87 octane x 16 gallons = $55.20

If I use 87 octane for a fillup I save $6.40.

16 gallon tank - so with 92 I might get 16 miles more distance per tank

$3.45/27mpg = $0.127 x 16 = $2.032 to get the extra 16 miles with 87 octane

$6.40-$2.03= $4.37

So by my calculations if I use 87 octane I save $4.37 every fill up. Fill up every 10 days avg = $159.51 per year saving for using 87 octane.

Things I noted -

• Manual recommends 92 octane for best MPG performance and overall engine performance/HP but 87 is acceptable per the manual
• The engine definitely seemed slighly noisier and more "ticky" when running 87 vs 92 but this could also be a placebo effect
• I didn't notice any difference in performance but I drive like a grandma most of the time. It will be interesting to try towing with both octanes at some point.

I plan to own this truck for 10+ years and plan to run 92 as turbos are desgined to run better with higher octane. My view is that although the car has knock sensors it was designed to work best with 92+ and running it that way for 10 years may result in less wear in the long term. The 10 year cost for gas difference would be $1500 at current prices. Everyone can make their own assumptions about whether or not that is worth it vs possible repairs or wear.

If I only planned to have the truck for 5 years or didn't have the extra dough to spend on gas I would definitely roll with 87 octane. If gas prices continue to go up I might go that route as well. Lots of variables.

Good info. I just had my Wife put the 93 in on her last fill up so we haven’t had time to compare. I run the 87 in my 150, it runs well, no performance issues but I’m not opposed to her using the 93, or whatever BJ’s here in Maine has. I’m more interested in the longevity because she keeps her vehicles longer then I do (I once traded in a 150 with 13k miles on it because I wanted a bigger touch screen, yeah I know

 

[Jmav2152]

Maybe i missed something but what does a turbo have to do with fuel octane? Those two operate relatively independent of one another. Maybe if it burned cleaner and didn't gunk the exhaust side i could see better performance but I'm pretty sure there's no difference in that between regular and premium.

 

[Deleted member 9167]

https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a28565486/honda-cr-v-vs-bmw-m5-ford-f-150-dodge-charger/

A good read on just what a higher octane than recommended will do for you

Thanks for posting that. The butt dyno and placebo effect are strong with some people.

The idea of running premium fuel in an economy car (truck) is laughable, but to each their own.

 

[dalola]

Compression in the 2.0 engine isn't high enough to warrant higher octane fuels than 87. Aside from towing a heavy load on a hot summer day uphill while blasting the air conditioning on high, I stick with 87 octane all day everyday.

Like a previous post mentioned, if you are looking for mpg gains, going with an ethanol free fuel will lead to that. Ethanol has a lower energy density than gasoline

Compression is only part of the story. FI (forced induction) creates higher cylinder pressures, and heat. Combined with variable timing, this is why higher octane gas yields substantial power increases in these type engines.

Granted, if you drive like granny and don't push your 2.0 Mav, you will not benefit much from higher octane gas. But those looking for max performance, whether for sport or work, 91-93 makes a BIG difference.

Sponsored