- Thread starter
- #1
Has anyone compared their mpg running 87 verses 93? I'm curious if there is a gain and if so is it enough to overcome the price difference.
Sponsored
Sponsored
Octane vs MPG, 87 vs 93, anyone compared?
- Thread starter greenweever
- Start date
- Watchers 6
It's worth about 10HP and maybe 1 mpg.
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2022
- Threads
- 4
- Messages
- 133
- Reaction score
- 122
- Location
- Interior Alaska
- Vehicle(s)
- 01 2500 HD, 15 Santa Fe, 94 XJ
- Engine
- 2.0L EcoBoost
For daily driving, the 20¢ per gallon difference isn’t worth it.
Most modern engines run just fine on 87 octane, you start to see a benefit with octane on higher output engines. Primarily in a track setting.
- First Name
- Luke
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2022
- Threads
- 13
- Messages
- 761
- Reaction score
- 1,158
- Location
- Phoenix, AZ
- Vehicle(s)
- Maverick XLT FX4 EB
- Engine
- 2.0L EcoBoost
- Banned
- #4
What crystal ball and gypsy woman did you consult to determine this? On the average car with no other changes, changing octane make approximately ZERO difference in HP. Or, are you just trolling this dude and me? LOL
- First Name
- Mike
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2022
- Threads
- 1
- Messages
- 346
- Reaction score
- 453
- Location
- Berwyn Heights, Maryland
- Vehicle(s)
- 2017 F-250 4WD crew 8' bed; 2022 Maverick XL AWD
- Engine
- 2.0L EcoBoost
Actually with electronic engine control, when the engine adapts to lower octane gas, performance is affected. Somewhere Ford published horsepower numbers for the 2.0L Ecoboost on 87 and 93 octane. Results were 236 and 250 hp if I recall correctly. If the ECU kept everything the same, then octane shouldn't make any difference. Retarding ignition timing an additional 10 degrees makes a difference.
Last edited:
Sponsored
That’s not true. For example the “Mazda CX-9 engine produces 227 horsepower and 310 pound-feet of torque on standard gasoline. Using premium fuel increases horsepower to 250 hp”. Premium fuel makes a bigger difference on turbo engines.
- Banned
- #7
I an a hybrid engine it does nothing for you.
In a turbocharged engine it can help you in very heavy load conditions and wide open throttle conditions.
Also this is one of the most commonly asked questions and one of the most commonly done experiments.
In a turbocharged engine it can help you in very heavy load conditions and wide open throttle conditions.
Also this is one of the most commonly asked questions and one of the most commonly done experiments.
- First Name
- Luke
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2022
- Threads
- 13
- Messages
- 761
- Reaction score
- 1,158
- Location
- Phoenix, AZ
- Vehicle(s)
- Maverick XLT FX4 EB
- Engine
- 2.0L EcoBoost
- Banned
- #8
That is not arbitrarily true. Octane is a measure of a fuels resistance to detonation. Some cars may make more peak power with a fuel change, others lose power. Here is a single article that tests on 4 cars and is pretty good information. It also shows that sometimes the power increase doesn't come close to matching the increase in cost.
https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a28565486/honda-cr-v-vs-bmw-m5-ford-f-150-dodge-charger/
- First Name
- John
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2021
- Threads
- 3
- Messages
- 171
- Reaction score
- 258
- Location
- Detroit suburbs
- Vehicle(s)
- Lariat Lux Hybrid, Focus
- Engine
- 2.5L Hybrid
Since original query was mpg difference, I have never seen a claim that higher octane fuel was cost effective…but feel free to enlighten me.
- First Name
- Mike
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2022
- Threads
- 1
- Messages
- 346
- Reaction score
- 453
- Location
- Berwyn Heights, Maryland
- Vehicle(s)
- 2017 F-250 4WD crew 8' bed; 2022 Maverick XL AWD
- Engine
- 2.0L EcoBoost
Isn't that the truth. Some of my local gas stations charge $0.90 to $1.00 extra per gallon for 93 octane. I'm sure glad I don't own a vehicle that requires the higher octane. To just break even, an EB Maverick would have to gain something like 8-10 mpg at those prices.
Sponsored
I used a dragy unit and picked up over .1 0-60, the 1/8 and 1/4 mile which is equivalent to 10hp. Plenty of info on ecoboost motors picking up 10 hp/tq. I gained 1-1.5 mpg based off off of an average of about 400 miles from tank to tank.
- Banned
- #12
Well, MOST gas stations make this claim.
But I agree with the road warriors out there actually doing the driving. Octane alone is not a MPG booster.
The data gets muddied by the fact once in a while, in some markets, "Premium" fuel is ethanol free and "regular" is 10% ethanol.
It is the change in ethanol, not the change in octane that boosts MPG.
- First Name
- Luke
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2022
- Threads
- 13
- Messages
- 761
- Reaction score
- 1,158
- Location
- Phoenix, AZ
- Vehicle(s)
- Maverick XLT FX4 EB
- Engine
- 2.0L EcoBoost
- Banned
- #13
I would be curious at some point to test myself. But a .1 drop in 0-60 OR 10hp is negligible to me, and to most drivers. Again, depending on local fuel costs the increase in fuel cost is not likely to pencil out in terms of the gain in mileage. Read the article I posted. Also, you are describing a potential of 10 PEAK hp. What is the increase at a 2K RPM cruise where everyone drives their truck?
I have no idea and I could care less.
Ford admitted there is a loss of HP in the Mustang 2.3 Ecoboost using lower octane fuel. Someone obtained a copy of their Mustang training manual. It was a drop of 35HP from 310 to 275 when using 87 octane.
Many articles and blogs about it.
Seeing as this is a same family EB engine, would expect the same type of drop in power on the maverick also.
Links to forum discussions about it
https://www.mustang6g.com/the-2-3l-...tes-275hp-and-300-ft-lbs-torque-on-87-octane/
https://www.mustang6g.com/forums/th...ne-updated-with-ford-training-materials.9805/
Sponsored
Last edited:
