New Bronco Seems To Confirm What We Suspected

[Bludrok]

Wait will I gain horsepower and torque just by running a higher octane gas? Or is a time required? What gas should I be putting in this thing?

Thank you

Yes, you can get higher HP and Torque by running higher Octane. The reasons have already been explained in this thread.

Obviously, you will get several different answers to which fuel you should be running. For me personally I dont run anything but 91. I came from a 1.5L Turbo Honda Civic Si that got me into that habit. I ran a tune on the Civic as well as the Ranger, and notice a difference.

Sponsored

 

[VAMike]

Or is a time required?

Some amount of time is required for the engine to (slowly) change the OAR. That probably varies based on how you're driving, and I have no idea what the range is. If you notice an immediate difference, it's the placebo effect.

 

[TechnicallyReal]

My past 2 vehicles each had higher reported HP and Torque on premium, stated by the manufacturer (not in marketing material - I only found out well after buying). Not sure why this seems so out of place to some. The increases were in line with the Ranger.

Day to day it probably makes next to no difference. When pushed, I'm sure the engine can take advantage. We've had this technology for decades now. I even seem to recall Ford literature suggesting to run premium when towing, for this reason.

 

[Langwilliams]

I remember the old 87-88 T bird turbo coupe had a switch on the dash for if you ran premium. Now the engine management takes care of it for you.

 

[WhyNot21]

I remember the old 87-88 T bird turbo coupe had a switch on the dash for if you ran premium. Now the engine management takes care of it for you.

Mustang SVO's had that too.

 

[Rviator]

My 1980 Firebird Turbo Formula had a knock sensor which would retard the timing if knock was detected. Premium fuel was recommended and anything less would retard the timing. Thus the default factory tune was for premium fuel.
If the Ranger is tuned to take advantage of premium fuel then yes it will make more power with premium. However, I have seen no evidence from the manufacturer that the default factory stock tune is for premium fuel. If as some say the electronics can adapt to octane rating then why does the Ford performance tune require premium? If the electronics could adapt then it would recommend premium for maximum performance gain but not require it.

 

[Silverfox]

My 1980 Firebird Turbo Formula had a knock sensor which would retard the timing if knock was detected. Premium fuel was recommended and anything less would retard the timing. Thus the default factory tune was for premium fuel.
If the Ranger is tuned to take advantage of premium fuel then yes it will make more power with premium. However, I have seen no evidence from the manufacturer that the default factory stock tune is for premium fuel. If as some say the electronics can adapt to octane rating then why does the Ford performance tune require premium? If the electronics could adapt then it would recommend premium for maximum performance gain but not require it.

Why would you get a tune and then run 87 totally negating the tune.
In order to get the advantages of the tune it requires 91.

 

[Silverfox]

It’s really very simple. Yes 91 doesn’t make more power by itself, but as others have mentioned modern Ecu’s will advance timing to make more power as long as it isn’t detecting knock.

 

[P. A. Schilke]

It’s really very simple. Yes 91 doesn’t make more power by itself, but as others have mentioned modern Ecu’s will advance timing to make more power as long as it isn’t detecting knock.

Hi Ed,

This is nothing new...when I built the first 2.3L EFI Ranger back in 1983, we had a knock sensor that responded to advance timing until knock was detected and then back off a degree or two. That said, the range of control back for the 1985 MY Ranger was such that there was no advantage to run above 89 Research Octane.

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

 

[Silverfox]

Hi Ed,

This is nothing new...when I built the first 2.3L EFI Ranger back in 1983, we had a knock sensor that responded to advance timing until knock was detected and then back off a degree or two. That said, the range of control back for the 1985 MY Ranger was such that there was no advantage to run above 89 Research Octane.

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

Hey Phil,

I was oversimplifying it. There is much more too it as far as the Ecu’s nowadays. Not just the knock sensor. If the motor and Ecu aren’t designed to take advantage of 91 octane then the benefits are limited. However in the case of our motor it obviously is designed to take advantage of higher octane. Or do you disagree?

 

[P. A. Schilke]

Hey Phil,

I was oversimplifying it. There is much more too it as far as the Ecu’s nowadays. Not just the knock sensor. If the motor and Ecu aren’t designed to take advantage of 91 octane then the benefits are limited. However in the case of our motor it obviously is designed to take advantage of higher octane. Or do you disagree?

Nope! Agree... Far more capable ECU than our old 96 pin processor...

 

[TORQUERULES]

Nope! Agree... Far more capable ECU than our old 96 pin processor...

I remember moving pins around and then getting extra connectors and wiring up sequential injection with a Mustang A9L computer (mass air flow ), on a '90 F-150 my Dad had. I was a 302 and we put ported GT-40 heads on it with a stock Mustang cam (roller and with the proper firing order for the computer) and an Edelbrock intake. Kind of a mini Lightning at the time. Ran fantastically. Filled the gap until I got my 2000 Lighting...

 

[Langwilliams]

why get a tune when i can nearly get the same results running higher octane?

buy tune, run premium get 45hp
dont buy a tune, run premium get 30hp

something doesnt add up there.

I think if you use 91 you get the advertised 270. Add the ford tune an get 315. These are "at the crank" HP an TQ numbers, dyno's measure at the wheel HP an TQ which are approx 15% lower putting the stock engine at around 230 HP. There's tons of videos an articles on Ranger tunes. I know my Livernois makes my truck feel like a totally different truck...very snappy. I'm not gonna waste any 5.0's but I bet it equals my stock 97 cobra which I ran 14 flat in at 100. https://www.offroadxtreme.com/engin...rnois-mycalibrator-touch-on-2019-ford-ranger/

 

[Langwilliams]

here's a post from another thread comparing stock 93 to tuned 93, that previous article was 87 to 87.

Here are the results from our 93 Performance tune versus stock on a bone stock truck.

 

[TechnicallyReal]

why get a tune when i can nearly get the same results running higher octane?

buy tune, run premium get 45hp
dont buy a tune, run premium get 30hp

something doesnt add up there.

I wont argue that premium has benefits in specific circumstances. What i will continue to question is why so many people believe in this voodoo magic that simply running premium can get us to roast the tires off this thing.

show me some damn dyno numbers to the effect, and not propaganda charts. someone real, non biased and looking for the real truth. not internet hearsay and lacking proof. I can read 10 different articles and get 10 different views.

I will not buy that the Bronco suddenly gets more power with just a fuel choice. there is more going on and I suspect the tune is tweaked for it much like our performance tune for Ford.

Can you explain how Hyundai and KIA get more HP and torque with only higher octane fuel as well? From their own mouths, and not advertised in marketing material. Pretty sure Ford has said the same themselves about the Ranger. But I'm too lazy to go digging it all up for sake of argument. I only bother to reply because seems silly to be so opposed to the idea. Shrug

Sponsored