Premium fuel for longevity?

[Matticus]

BTU’s and Octane are not the same thing or directly related.

Right. I didn't imply that they were related.
But you kind of are in a round about way in your claim that the refinement process to get greater octane is related to BTU energy returned.

I HAVE googled it. That's why I'm asking for you to cite a credible source that indicates gasoline was refined and sold with different BTUs based on/related to the octane level. Everything I've read about increasing octane through additional refining with cracking and/or isomerization and the other refinement/additive processes to further increase octane, point to only changes in octane and not BTUs

I'm not saying I'm an expert or that it's not possible, but I am saying that until I see a credible source, I'm going to chalk this up as another claim that belongs with the other good ol boy claims like "changing your transmission fluid will ruin your transmission" that seem to just keep getting perpetuated with nothing but anecdotal evidence

 

[Fozzy]

I didn’t read it that way. But I know these fuel threads go bat [emoji90] crazy. I do know the Ecoboost loves ethanol, top tier fuel and likes to be driven hard.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[LokiWolf]

Right. I didn't imply that they were related.
But you kind of are in a round about way in your claim that the refinement process to get greater octane is related to BTU energy returned.

I HAVE googled it. That's why I'm asking for you to cite a credible source that indicates gasoline was refined and sold with different BTUs based on/related to the octane level. Everything I've read about increasing octane through additional refining with cracking and/or isomerization and the other refinement/additive processes to further increase octane, point to only changes in octane and not BTUs

I'm not saying I'm an expert or that it's not possible, but I am saying that until I see a credible source, I'm going to chalk this up as another claim that belongs with the other good ol boy claims like "changing your transmission fluid will ruin your transmission" that seem to just keep getting perpetuated with nothing but anecdotal evidence

HAHA! Again, the processes they are using now, do NOT affect BTU's. My comments were in relation to the fairly common misconception that a higher Octane Gasoline has higher BTU's made by a previous post. My statement was to show how wrong that is, because in the past it was the opposite, and currently they are pretty much the same.

The processes they used in the past(several decades ago) did have a negative effect on BTU's. It was through improvements in the process's formulated and tested in college and industry research labs like those I participated in in the late 90's that changed that. Process's and QC that allowed the refinement without the negative results of losing BTU's. Have you ever done testing on fuels in a lab to determine things like flash point, BTU's, and break down the sample into it's individual components, I have. It was 20+ years ago, and it has gotten WAY easier since then!

 

[Matticus]

HAHA! Again, the processes they are using now, do NOT affect BTU's. My comments were in relation to the fairly common misconception that a higher Octane Gasoline has higher BTU's made by a previous post. My statement was to show how wrong that is, because in the past it was the opposite, and currently they are pretty much the same.

The processes they used in the past(several decades ago) did have a negative effect on BTU's. It was through improvements in the process's formulated and tested in college and industry research labs like those I participated in in the late 90's that changed that. Process's and QC that allowed the refinement without the negative results of losing BTU's.

Great! But all I'm asking for is a source that shows anything done (whether now or 30+ years ago) to adjust the octane had an affect on BTU's (increase OR decrease) in a gallon of gasoline that was sold to the consumer in the way you claimed that correlated to the octane rating

Have you ever done testing on fuels in a lab to determine things like flash point, BTU's, and break down the sample into it's individual components, I have. It was 20+ years ago, and it has gotten WAY easier since then!

Nope, never have done testing on fuels in a lab. That's why I'm asking for a source to back up your claims. Otherwise, it's just another thread of anecdotes and/or false claims to add to the pile on the internet of a topic that has been beaten to death

 

[Plati]

Great! But all I'm asking for is a source that shows anything done (whether now or 30+ years ago) to adjust the octane had an affect on BTU's (increase OR decrease) in a gallon of gasoline that was sold to the consumer in the way you claimed that correlated to the octane rating



Nope, never have done testing on fuels in a lab. That's why I'm asking for a source to back up your claims. Otherwise, it's just another thread of anecdotes and/or false claims to add to the pile on the internet of a topic that has been beaten to death

not what you're looking for but gasoline and diesel are both refined from crude oil ...
different refining process
diesel has more btu's
https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/fuel_comparison_chart.pdf

sort of similar to your sticking point isn't it?

 

[Jeremygsu]

While 93 does net better fuel economy and power I seriously doubt it adds to actual longevity of the vehicle. Ford knows that most people who buy these are only going to run 87 octane. I don't think you would get 200k out of a 93 octane run vehicle and 150k out of an 87. I'm sure it's just as reliable, it's just with less performance. My thoughts.

 

[Plati]

While 93 does net better fuel economy and power I seriously doubt it adds to actual longevity of the vehicle. Ford knows that most people who buy these are only going to run 87 octane. I don't think you would get 200k out of a 93 octane run vehicle and 150k out of an 87. I'm sure it's just as reliable, it's just with less performance. My thoughts.

One might postulate that higher octane could decrease longevity. More power = more stress on the whole vehicle if said power was used. But I kind of doubt that too unless a throttle jockey was into ditch banging the Expy and loved high octane since he could bang harder.

 

[Dice Roll]

Loki nailed it. I confused the discussion I was in years ago when ethanol first became a real thing and the conclusion was running non ethanol in old muscle cars was the better idea for several reasons.

I still have seen the benefit in late model stuff to running 89 over 87. It nets out about the same cost per mile, but the cars run much better both power and mpg with some extra timing that allows.

 

[Yupster Dog]

not what you're looking for but gasoline and diesel are both refined from crude oil ...
different refining process

FUN FACT: Gasoline started out as a throw away byproduct of heating oil. (diesel)
Until the man himself (Ford) said let me see some of that stuff.

 

[Expedition Dave]

Thank you Loki. I too have noticed only the slightest of gains in fuel mileage with 93, as to be better served with running proper PSI in the tires IMHO/YMMV I am not a lawyer/cop/surgeon but play one on TV. Again, w/o a doubt 93 makes the truck much more snappier, but at $10 more per fill-up for premium--not interested.

Again Loki that is interesting (and annoying) that the engine makes less than advertised on 87. And for those who think you are going to kaboom your engine on lower grade fuel, the engine just keeps pulling timing in boost till you see better fuel. I ran it on 86 for a long time w/o any negative effects or ever heard even normal knocking--despite high ambients.

Further, if the weeds are where you play, if you think of "wear and tear", more boost = more power. That adds additional stress to an engine, so theoretically lower octane (less power/boost) could allow the engine to last longer. Again--well within spec, obviously but just speculating here.