To quote: you implied that Premium is a fraud, not different and a advertising ploy. Ford specifically added a page in the manual, mentioning it. You may be happy driving like a grandpa, to save on beer money. Most people do not want a de-tuned vehicle, running at 80%. Ford misled data on the EcoBoost, regarding power and mileage. It was tested with 91 octane.Recommended is a much different standard than required.
Just how much "reduced performance" is the question Numbers aside it's inconsequential in normal driving of our trucks. Performance cars (or pseudo performance cars) will feel the difference. That 350 Mustang will still get to the next stop light sooner. Heck my S2000 will.
This is what Colonel Cooper referred to PII. Preoccupation with inconsequential increments.
23 gallons is my normal fill up. At 60¢/gallon extra for "premium" that computes to nearly two six-packs of a good micro-brew to put it in a meaningful number. I'll drink the beer until I need some increased power.
-- Chuck
Regular or premium
- Thread starter J Ski
- Start date
Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.
JExpedition07
That One Member
The MPG stays the same on the ecoboost 87 octane or 93 octane it’s alk the same. Performance might see a tiny improvement...... they still get the claimed numbers on regular. Hence they did not lie.... the HP and torque I’m sure were tested on high octane but who cares.
The mileage has not been as good as advertised. VW just had to buy back a bunch of autos, for misleading buyers and EPA. I would say Ford is doing similar, or covering its ass, with this "premium recommended" page.
To be more accurate, VW got caught committing fraud by programming the engines to re-tune automatically to comply with emission limits only when the car detected something connected to the OBDII port.
Thats not misleading. Its a crime.
It was brilliant german engineering too bad they got caught. The USEPA is too powerful and some standards are ridiculous.
chuck s
Full Access Members
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2006
- Posts
- 1,990
- Reaction score
- 753
Premium fuel is indeed a fraud when used where not needed. Advertised as better. It ain't if you don't need it. Better for the fuel company profits, of course, hence the advertisements for it.
Where did you come up with the "Most people do not want a de-tuned vehicle, running at 80%." factoid? Surely "most people" buying Expeditions and other SUVs neither care nor have a clue.
-- Chuck
Where did you come up with the "Most people do not want a de-tuned vehicle, running at 80%." factoid? Surely "most people" buying Expeditions and other SUVs neither care nor have a clue.
-- Chuck
JExpedition07
That One Member
I don’t know about others, but when I bought an Expedition I didn’t even look at fuel economy ratings, not material to my decision or I wouldn’t have bought one. The 6.2L F-150 claimed 17 MPG but reality is 14 MPG...would I still buy one? Hell yes, 379 cubic inches of goodness. The 6.2L is a high compression engine that requires premium..... at 14 MPG..... and it’s not Optianal at all like the ecoboost. but if you stomp on it it’s all worth it. same situation in the real world people drive harder. All the powertrains do worse than advertised. My point being it’s not just ecoboost <Eveyone does it!!>.
Last edited:
1955moose
Full Access Members
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2014
- Posts
- 6,004
- Reaction score
- 1,351
Bottom line, unless your vehicle has modifications raising compression ratio, theirs no reason to use anything above 87 octane. As a vehicle ages it builds up carbon, both on pistons, and combustion chambers of cylinder heads. That along with a failing sensor that controls spark, or temperature, are the only reasons you'd need 89 or 91 octane. Their are no mileage increases. Some people want to think since their paying more, their getting more, but sadly it ain't true!
Sent from my N9131 using Tapatalk
Sent from my N9131 using Tapatalk
JExpedition07
That One Member
Everything is like that. For instance:
What you ordered:
View attachment 23351
View attachment 23350 What you got:
This is the perfect analogy
Youre obviously one of those people
I like how I'm supposedly contributing to fraud by using premium in my truck when its not "needed". Its funny you think Ford is somehow in cahoots with big oil and pushing people to use 93 when they don't need to. Yet because of big oil theyre designing smaller more fuel efficient motors every day. Seems like a contradiction to me.
Go stroke your 230hp S2000 that your probably putting premium gas in (when you certainly don't need to) and give up on this argument. Your posts are getting dumber by the minute
People, this is not a new issue. Google it. Premium and Ecoboost. Ford concept is same power and better mileage. The motor has 20 to 30hp less on 87 octane. I bet salesman doesn't mention that. That means its on par with 325hp 5.4l. The mileage is also lower on 87 octane appx 1.5MPG. Ford is not new misrepresenting HP. The early 90's 5.0l Mustang was listed at 225hp. Many say it was actually closer to 300hp. The lower rating was to keep insurance rates, on the cars down.
Last edited:
I did not buy a new Expedition after reading and hearing, all the negatives. Two co-workers confirmed everything online was true (including its peppy acceleration). One guy had a major turbo failure and oil leak. The truck was in the shop for weeks. Both said the gas mileage was not that great and pretty bad if you step on it a lot. One knew almost nothing about cars and was a lease. Many "owners" on this forum, seem in denial or ignore criticism. They post things like " its faster than a 5.4L" or "mine runs fine on 87 octane". I rather see the horror stories, problems and details of service visits.
JExpedition07
That One Member
Not sure what you expect, one motor is a big decked out stroked modular V8 and one is a twin turbocharhed V6. neither are fuel efficient by any stretch. You can find duds of any engine, just take care of it and Change your oil, don’t drive it like a rental, and fix things as they go.
Last edited:
J_82
Full Access Members
Go Briggs and Stratton!
JExpedition07
That One Member
22 Horsepower V-Twin! Go for the Vanguard line!
I run 91 ethanol free in my Craftsman zero turn.
i have no skin in the game. i could give two ***** what people online think of me or my opinions. i would ABSOLUTELY admit it if something i bought was a dud.
that being said...... 3.5 EcoBoost is a hell of a motor!!!! I have beat on my latest harder than most will beat them in a lifetime. 60,000 HARD miles in two years!!!!! I have ONLY changed my oil. It is the strongest, most reliable motor i have ever owned. there are millions more just like me. i have several dozens friends and tradesman who do the same. most with well over 100,000 miles.
keep in mind, they sold 894,000 f150s last year alone!!!! this was double the closest competitor. the more of something there is, the more likely you will hear something negative.
no denial here, just real world first hand experience from someone who knows more than your average joe about vehicles.
if you are not buying a new expedition because of what you stated, you are doing yourself a major disservice.
Similar threads
