Is anyone else really affected by winter blend?

[Floyd]

I don't know about everyone else on here, but I'm running 87. Always have, will continue to do so. The price difference for higher octane doesn't make it worth it for me given the type of driving I do.

I have found that my truck doesn't need anything more than 87 octane either, since I don't drive it anywhere near the the limits to which higher octane might affect the performance.
Two main reasons...
1] I want to keep my driver's license!
2] I don't tow anything which even approaches the rated limit.

However...
Regional formulations may require "premium" , though not necessarily higher octane, such as High Altitude, for turbocharged engines.
Meanwhile Top Tier 87 octane RBOB will do just fine for midwest folks like us.
I went to Backus recently towing my Scamp, so while in MN I tried regular (non ethanol) gasoline, which to my surprise made no noticeable difference in performance either.
It certainly has in my other normally aspirated, MPFI engines.

Sponsored

 

[HenryMac]

Yep I always run regular 87 octane. Premium isn't worth it imo.

Hmm. You start a thread about lack of power and decreased mileage... maybe premium might be worth it during the winter blend months?

Why not fill up with a tank full of 91 octane and see? I'm getting 25 mpg.

 

[VAMike]

Hmm. You start a thread about lack of power and decreased mileage... maybe premium might be worth it during the winter blend months?

The manual you quoted said that the performance gains are most noticeable in hot weather...

 

[THLONE]

It depends on what your blend is. In AZ we get more ethenol in the winter. My understanding is that the computer adjusts to blends but it may take more than one tank full.

 

[Texasota]

i buy Costco gas often, and I see they are listed as a Top Tier detergent supplier.
Is that with all octane offerings?

Because I see others like shell and petro Canada that seem to only offer their best detergents in the higher octanes

Yes, in order to qualify as a top tier retailer they must meet the top tier requirements for all grades of their gasoline.

 

[IdahoRanger]

Haven't noticed a problem yet. Just filled after a trip and got 24.1 mpg with mostly highway...and some mud /snow playing.

 

[Traneman]

I went from 22-23 to 16 on my last fill!

Use 88, and w/ colder temps, it runs more now than it warm w/ Auto Stop.

 

[I_smell_like_diesel]

I'm getting about 18-19 mpg, here in SE Michigan now. Milage tanked a bit from the 21-23mpg I was getting. I just run 87 octane, I primarily just commute and dont care for getting into the "skinny pedal" unless I absolutely need to. But I'm running a small lift and larger tires as well.

Minimum IS 87 octane. It is not necessary to run a higher octane unless your a very spirited driver or hauling/towing a load.

 

[caprtaineddie]

I noticed that most of the complaints about poor winter mileage are from folks who live where the temperatures go very low. Could the reduction in MPGs be related to colder air being more dense than warmer air, thus creating more resistance?

 

[P. A. Schilke]

Hi Folks,

We really need the Ford calibrators to chime in here, but maybe this might make sense. Octane numbers mean the higher the number the slower the fuel burns in the cylinder. So for an naturally aspirated low compression engine with fixed spark advance, higher octane fuels are a total waste...Now with modern EcoBoost, you can take advantage of more aggressive calibrations with higher Octane fuels, ie more power! So if you drive with your foot in it all the time...93 octane will create more power. If you drive like there is an egg between your foot and the accelerator pedal...you are wasting your money at the pump for 93. 87 octane is well and good for you.

Okay...another back story. 2.3L Ranger in 1986. We had just gone to Electronic Control Fuel Injection in 1985, and for 1986 we had a program to put a structural Oil pan on the motor, a cast aluminum oil pan in place of the stamped steel pan. (what does this have to do with engine performance???) Well, the motor had a knock sensor and its range of authority of spark advance was 20°. The knock sensor would ramp up the spark advance until it sensed knock and then back off a degree or two until no knock was sensed. This occurred so fast, you could not hear it. So dumping 91 into the motor made it a bit more powerful.

The structural oil pan was for Noise, Vibration and Harshness reasons (NVH). What happened was that the structural oil pan caused internal engine vibrations to be fed into the knock sensor. So when I fired up the Ranger after the oil pan install, I tried to pull out into traffic and merge onto I94 freeway and the truck could not even accelerate to anything close to freeway speeds! WTF??? Back to the shop that did the install. We checked the engine out...nothing wrong...then it dawned on me...the mechanical noise of the engine into the knock sensor was so much the EEC IV processor retarded the spark advance to zero..thus no power. So limped the poor Ranger back to Dearborn and dropped it off the the Engine Engineering Calibrators. They confirmed my suspicion was correct.. So there was an emergency program to recalibrate the knock sensor as to its ranger of authority to only 5 degrees from 20 degrees. and to relocate the knock sensor from the bottom of the intake manifold to the side of the upper intake manifold close to the throttle body... Who would have thought a knock sensor would have caused such a major headache...

Best,
Phil Schilke
Ranger Vehicle Engineering
Ford Motor Co. Retired

 

[RCNGunnr]

I have noticed since the blend switch and as the temperature has dropped my Mileage has gone down, during the summer I was running 11.5-12.5 l/100km (19-20 mpg) , over the fall it has creeped up (down for those mpg folks) (probably in part to auto stop start not running sue to low temperature) to 13-14 l/100km (16-18 mpg). Once the temperature plunges in december (right now it is hovering around 0 celsius) I'm going to try some experimenting with fuel economy and the block heater to see how much of a difference pre warming has on the mileage, not to mention that it should allow the cabin to start heating a bit faster.

 

[doug910]

Hmm. You start a thread about lack of power and decreased mileage... maybe premium might be worth it during the winter blend months?

Why not fill up with a tank full of 91 octane and see? I'm getting 25 mpg.

Right now, the BP near me has Regular at $2.38/gal and Premium at $3.10/gal. That's a 30% increase in cost.

I went from ~21 mpg to ~17 mpg. That's a 19% decrease in fuel economy. If I switched to premium, I would most definitely not be getting my summer mpg's, and even then, I wouldn't get my money back. Therefore, premium is not worth it.

I would probably get a little bit of power and 1 or 2 mpg's back, but as others have stated, my daily commute is not a high temp high load condition.

 

[Deleted member 1634]

I was curious what the octane rating was for winter blend fuel... that's why I asked him about it.

But to your point, I too had planned to run 87 fuel also. Seeing as this was our first vehicle with a turbocharger and I had read previous to buying the truck about issues related to carbon deposits at our first fill up I referred to the owners manual.

At that point I figured why not go with the recommendation of the folks that built the truck.

Ahh, my bad. I interpreted that as a question to the floor. My apologies.

 

[t4thfavor]

Hmm. You start a thread about lack of power and decreased mileage... maybe premium might be worth it during the winter blend months?

Why not fill up with a tank full of 91 octane and see? I'm getting 25 mpg.

I get 23-25 with 87, 91 is $.50 more than 87, and 93 is $1 more than 87 in my area. It's just not worth it here. I've towed just under 5000# using 87, and didn't have any trouble at all.

 

[HenryMac]

I get 23-25 with 87, 91 is $.50 more than 87, and 93 is $1 more than 87 in my area. It's just not worth it here. I've towed just under 5000# using 87, and didn't have any trouble at all.

Wow, 25 mpg on 87 octane. That's impressive. First time I've seen anybody write that.

In our case, we're not running the 91 octane top tier fuel because our Ranger has experienced issues with mileage or poor performance, I'm simply doing it because the manufacturer recommends this in the owners manual.

Because the OP's Ranger was having MPG and Performance issues I merely thought he might want to try 91 octane to see if that remedied the issues his truck is experiencing.

Sponsored