What octane fuel/petrol do you use?

[mlarma]

I have 93 available here and have made it a practice to use premium whenever boost is present. Does it matter that much? I think it does but wondered what everyone else thought and what octane they went with on the 2.3L EcoBoost.

Sponsored

 

[Radioman]

I have 93 available here and have made it a practice to use premium whenever boost is present. Does it matter that much? I think it does but wondered what everyone else thought and what octane they went with on the 2.3L EcoBoost.

There is a thread discussing octane levels that has 160 posts.

https://www.ranger5g.com/forum/threads/premium-fuel.8362/

 

[txquailguy]

Best we get here in Colorado is 91 octane and that's what goes in mine every tank full!!!
Thank you Costco and Sam's Club!

 

[mlarma]

There is a thread discussing octane levels that has 160 posts.

https://www.ranger5g.com/forum/threads/premium-fuel.8362/

Thank you! I need to find that search button more often lol

 

[Frenchy]

At first I was using 87 since it is the recommended minimum but later on read in the owners manual that 91 and higher is recommended for better overall performance and towing. After using premium fuel I wont go back with this truck. On a NA truck that doesnt require premium fuel I wont ise it on. Simple as that and im usually stopping at Conoco stations.

 

[NedKelly]

I use top tier 91 Octane, preferably from my local Valero, which "claims" to be ethanol free. Personal preference. I have run 91 Octane in all of our turbocharged and Hemi vehicles. Especially the Hemis. Wanted to get ahead of the "tick" on those.

 

[Trigganometry]

93 on mine until gas prices go through the roof again. That looks like its already started

 

[codestp202]

87- the truck is tuned for 87 and I don't need more performance. As long as Ford is warrantying it on 87 I'm running it on 87.

Last vehicle was a Fiesta ST track car that ran on a 91 / e85 blend and a few of my race bikes run on 110 leaded race gas blends. I'm super over running expensive fuels and blends so being able to put 87 in the Ranger was a big draw for me.

 

[dtech]

I reserve those types of decisions upon arrival at the gas pump - basing it on the pricing differential between 87 and 91 octane . For the initial 3 months of ownership was using 91, but upon using 87 I noticed less difference in performance than expected.
In my Saab it's a different story - difference between 87 and 91 is immediate and pronounced. Wife drives a Hyundai turbo and using 91 is pretty much a waste of money as the ECU isn't programmed to do much on 91 octane.

 

[codestp202]

I reserve those types of decisions upon arrival at the gas pump - basing it on the pricing differential between 87 and 91 octane . For the initial 3 months of ownership was using 91, but upon using 87 I noticed less difference in performance than expected.
In my Saab it's a different story - difference between 87 and 91 is immediate and pronounced. Wife drives a Hyundai turbo and using 91 is pretty much a waste of money as the ECU isn't programmed to do much on 91 octane.

Yeah I would 100% agree that its predominately based on how the ECU can handle octanes. The ecoboosts are so smart and with the octane learning and knock sensors, it can adjust the timing so well. For older performance vehicles that can't adjust up and down like a turbo Saab I can see how the difference would be huge.

 

[dtech]

Yeah I would 100% agree that its predominately based on how the ECU can handle octanes. The ecoboosts are so smart and with the octane learning and knock sensors, it can adjust the timing so well. For older performance vehicles that can't adjust up and down like a turbo Saab I can see how the difference would be huge.

actually the Saab uses a ion sensing knock system - in some ways better then acoustic detection as it senses conditions the cc and can adjust prior to spark - I think bmw and a few other companies continue to use it, but most rely on acoustic knock sensors. The turbo might be a larger one than used in the Ranger in terms of size so that could be why the octane difference is more noticable.

 

[JAKE2.3]

Not looking for a lot of performance with the ranger, so for now, its 87. Maybe I'll up that one day, who knows. For the mustang, nothing but 93, since I'm looking for performance. Considering doing an e30 tune now since we finally got a station here in the sticks that sells it.

 

[codestp202]

Not looking for a lot of performance with the ranger, so for now, its 87. Maybe I'll up that one day, who knows. For the mustang, nothing but 93, since I'm looking for performance. Considering doing an e30 tune now since we finally got a station here in the sticks that sells it.

Ran e30 on the Fiesta. It made a HUGE difference.

 

[Frenchy]

Those who say i dont need that much performance are probably looking at it like a number. Instead of doing that look at it as the amount of efficiency that the truck has. Even without a tune the overall efficiency will go up with premium fuel.

 

[codestp202]

Those who say i dont need that much performance are probably looking at it like a number. Instead of doing that look at it as the amount of efficiency that the truck has. Even without a tune the overall efficiency will go up with premium fuel.

Everything I've read here is that people pick up 1-2 mpgs MAYBE. It does not make sense to pay 50-80 cents more a gallon to get 1-2mpg more.

Sponsored