anyone using premium gas ? - Page 78 - Focus Fanatics
Ford Focus Forum
HomeContact UsAbout UsGalleryDiscussion ForumsMarketplace


Go Back   Focus Fanatics > Ford Focus Third Generation > DURATEC Ti-VCT Performance (2012-Current)

DURATEC Ti-VCT Performance (2012-Current) The place to chat about any Duratec 2.0L Ti-VCT engine performance, tuning and exhaust related upgrades.

Search This Forum | Image Search | Advanced Search    
Ford Focus Tire & Wheels FocusFanatics Merchandise

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-06-2013, 11:20 PM   #771
Bombadil
Focus Rookie
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Fan#: 110973
Location: Verona, WI
What I Drive: 1997 Silver Acura Integra GS-R

Posts: 24
FF Reputation: 1 Bombadil Good Standing Member
Buy-Sell-Trade Rating: (0)
You don't seem to know much about how Consumer Reports does car testing. They have an entire staff of professional drivers. They buy cars off of lots and subject them to very meticulously measured and regulated tests. They have their own test track where they subject each car to the exact same tests. They precisely measure fuel consumption. They have mapped out driving routes where they drive the cars for thousands of miles as closely the same way as possible. One loop is 150 miles long with mixed types of driving. They run performance tests, 0-60, 45-65, quarter mile drags, and through obstacles, with multiple runs on each. Every car goes through the same tests.

The people who do this have nothing to do with testing appliances or anything else at CR.

So when they state that they have tested multiple vehicles with 87 vs 91 in precisely controlled gas mileage tests and have found no difference, I have no reason to doubt them. They have no reason to lie. They have every reason to be accurate because their reputation depends upon them being fair and accurate.

They also made a statement which makes a lot of sense. If Ford, Toyota, Honda or whomever could back up a claim that using 91 gets 2 mpg better, in this age of MPG being king and all of them being in a fierce competition to claim the highest MPG, then they would do it. For that could increase their sales by millions of dollars. But none of them make such a statement.
Bombadil is offline  
    Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 03-06-2013, 11:28 PM   #772
Bombadil
Focus Rookie
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Fan#: 110973
Location: Verona, WI
What I Drive: 1997 Silver Acura Integra GS-R

Posts: 24
FF Reputation: 1 Bombadil Good Standing Member
Buy-Sell-Trade Rating: (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by emsvitil View Post
If you have E10 87 octane, and E0 91 octane, you'll get 5-10% better mileage with the 91 due to the lack of ethanol.


You can make up for the higher cost of the 91 with the better mileage.......
This could be true, if the engine does properly combust the E0 91. For the pure gas will have a higher BTU/gal.

However if the increase is just 5% and you pay 8% more for premium, then it won't pay for itself. I've seen premium selling for 40 more cents per gallon!!!

I am open to the idea that a DI engine could be good at handling higher octane. But I don't believe this is universally true for all DI engines. Mazda sells some of their DI engines with a 13:1 ratio in England because they use 91 octane (95 RON) petrol. But they detune the engine to 12:1 in the states. That doesn't mean the US engine will run fine on 91, because it really isn't the exact same engine as sold in England.
Bombadil is offline  
    Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2013, 11:29 PM   #773
suss6052
Focus Addict
 
suss6052's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Fan#: 95752
Location: ..., MI
What I Drive: 2013 Ford Focus ST2 Ingot Silver

Posts: 12,267
FF Reputation: 23 suss6052 Great Standing Member
Buy-Sell-Trade Rating: (3)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bombadil View Post
You don't seem to know much about how Consumer Reports does car testing. They have an entire staff of professional drivers. They buy cars off of lots and subject them to very meticulously measured and regulated tests. They have their own test track where they subject each car to the exact same tests. They precisely measure fuel consumption. They have mapped out driving routes where they drive the cars for thousands of miles as closely the same way as possible. One loop is 150 miles long with mixed types of driving. They run performance tests, 0-60, 45-65, quarter mile drags, and through obstacles, with multiple runs on each. Every car goes through the same tests.

The people who do this have nothing to do with testing appliances or anything else at CR.

So when they state that they have tested multiple vehicles with 87 vs 91 in precisely controlled gas mileage tests and have found no difference, I have no reason to doubt them. They have no reason to lie. They have every reason to be accurate because their reputation depends upon them being fair and accurate.

They also made a statement which makes a lot of sense. If Ford, Toyota, Honda or whomever could back up a claim that using 91 gets 2 mpg better, in this age of MPG being king and all of them being in a fierce competition to claim the highest MPG, then they would do it. For that could increase their sales by millions of dollars. But none of them make such a statement.
Sorry to break it to you, but if Ford says it improves performance than it likely does, maybe not enough as far as fuel economy is concerned.

I didn't notice too much difference in this respect, although the high compression engine ran smoother and seemed to still get about the same fuel economy even when driven harder than on 87 octane fuel.
__________________
Moderator for: DURATEC Ti-VCT Performance, ST Performance, MK3 Focus
suss6052 is online now  
    Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2013, 05:15 AM   #774
dyn085
That Guy
 
dyn085's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Fan#: 98047
Location: Fayetteville, NC
What I Drive: 2014 FiST/FoST

Posts: 11,998
FF Reputation: 47 dyn085 Great Standing Member
Buy-Sell-Trade Rating: (5)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bombadil View Post
This could be true, if the engine does properly combust the E0 91. For the pure gas will have a higher BTU/gal.

However if the increase is just 5% and you pay 8% more for premium, then it won't pay for itself. I've seen premium selling for 40 more cents per gallon!!!

I am open to the idea that a DI engine could be good at handling higher octane. But I don't believe this is universally true for all DI engines. Mazda sells some of their DI engines with a 13:1 ratio in England because they use 91 octane (95 RON) petrol. But they detune the engine to 12:1 in the states. That doesn't mean the US engine will run fine on 91, because it really isn't the exact same engine as sold in England.
The point that everyone in this thread is trying to get across to you is that higher octane fuel is beneficial to our engine. This had been a discussion that has come up multiple times in the past couple of years that continually ends up the same. Run three tanks of premium in your tank and you will see a difference.

I understand what you are trying to say about not using anything more than the minimum required octane, but that just does not apply to our engines/pcm's. Our engines are highly sensitive to small changes and it has been thoroughly documented through this site in many places.

I did the math a year ago and found that the difference in cost for mileage (at that time) would equate to $70 in savings over 15,000 miles by using premium fuel (Shell 93 V-Power). While that is not a substantial amount of money, it is a savings and I get the benefit of a better running car that runs cleaner. That was at the then-current cost difference; I haven't done the math since.

It's your car and you don't have to try it, but arguing against all of us that have is a lost cause. Fwiw, my Ti with the 18" wheels gets 32.5 mpg on summer 93 octane while my SEL with 17" wheels only got 29.2 on 87. I do have additional mods, but the majority came from the fuel switch.

Further discussion/debate is encouraged, but don't let this thread devolve into more arguing or it will be locked.
__________________

FocusFest 2013: Best of Show
Gateway FFW: Show Class Outstanding
September '13 ROTM
2014 FiST-
dyn085 is online now  
    Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2013, 08:19 AM   #775
dan50
Focus Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Fan#: 91789
Location: Too much info, IL
What I Drive: 2012 SEL White Platinum 5 Dr 302A

Posts: 1,155
FF Reputation: 11 dan50 Great Standing Member
Buy-Sell-Trade Rating: (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by dyn085 View Post
The point that everyone in this thread is trying to get across to you is that higher octane fuel is beneficial to our engine. This had been a discussion that has come up multiple times in the past couple of years that continually ends up the same. Run three tanks of premium in your tank and you will see a difference.

I understand what you are trying to say about not using anything more than the minimum required octane, but that just does not apply to our engines/pcm's. Our engines are highly sensitive to small changes and it has been thoroughly documented through this site in many places.

I did the math a year ago and found that the difference in cost for mileage (at that time) would equate to $70 in savings over 15,000 miles by using premium fuel (Shell 93 V-Power). While that is not a substantial amount of money, it is a savings and I get the benefit of a better running car that runs cleaner. That was at the then-current cost difference; I haven't done the math since.

It's your car and you don't have to try it, but arguing against all of us that have is a lost cause. Fwiw, my Ti with the 18" wheels gets 32.5 mpg on summer 93 octane while my SEL with 17" wheels only got 29.2 on 87. I do have additional mods, but the majority came from the fuel switch.

Further discussion/debate is encouraged, but don't let this thread devolve into more arguing or it will be locked.
Adding one more set of anecdotes, I've noticed no appreciable difference in fuel economy (or driveability, for that matter) from 87 vs 89 vs 93 octane. If there is a difference, maybe it's more noticeable in city vs highway driving or maybe it has something to do with driving style: perhaps aggressive driving brings out economy gains while moderate driving does not.
dan50 is offline  
    Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2013, 08:45 AM   #776
AZfocus2012
Focus Addict
 
AZfocus2012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Fan#: 92484
Location: Apache Junction, AZ
What I Drive: 2012 White Platinum SEL 303A Focus

Posts: 658
FF Reputation: 2 AZfocus2012 Good Standing Member
Buy-Sell-Trade Rating: (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by dan50 View Post
Adding one more set of anecdotes, I've noticed no appreciable difference in fuel economy (or driveability, for that matter) from 87 vs 89 vs 93 octane. If there is a difference, maybe it's more noticeable in city vs highway driving or maybe it has something to do with driving style: perhaps aggressive driving brings out economy gains while moderate driving does not.
For me, the best MPG gains on Shell V-Power come when driving in a hyper-mile fashion. With the good gas you can get away with lighter throttle inputs and still have good driveability and thus greater MPG. With more aggressive throttle inputs and driving the MPG difference between the grades diminishes. Also with positive, not vague or light, throttle inputs the driveability on 87 is fine.
AZfocus2012 is offline  
    Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2013, 10:09 AM   #777
cessna1
Focus Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Fan#: 97921
Location: Paullina, IA
What I Drive: 2012 Red Candy Sedan

Posts: 153
FF Reputation: 1 cessna1 Good Standing Member
Buy-Sell-Trade Rating: (0)
I'll throw in some more info about octane/energy content. While not DI,or high compression, my friend has a 2007 Camry(4 banger) that makes a 25 mile trip to work and then back home four times a week plus going to the store. This is in a rural area so not much city. He reports that the mileage on E10/89octane is 31 mpg and when he uses E30/94 octane, the mileage is 29 mpg. The E30 is about 20 cents less so it is a wash for cost per mile. I told him that if it wouldn't be such a sin, he should try E0/87 octane and see if the mileage jumps to 35mpg or so, and see if you guys are right.
cessna1 is offline  
    Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2013, 10:48 AM   #778
Bombadil
Focus Rookie
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Fan#: 110973
Location: Verona, WI
What I Drive: 1997 Silver Acura Integra GS-R

Posts: 24
FF Reputation: 1 Bombadil Good Standing Member
Buy-Sell-Trade Rating: (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by cessna1 View Post
I'll throw in some more info about octane/energy content. While not DI,or high compression, my friend has a 2007 Camry(4 banger) that makes a 25 mile trip to work and then back home four times a week plus going to the store. This is in a rural area so not much city. He reports that the mileage on E10/89octane is 31 mpg and when he uses E30/94 octane, the mileage is 29 mpg. The E30 is about 20 cents less so it is a wash for cost per mile. I told him that if it wouldn't be such a sin, he should try E0/87 octane and see if the mileage jumps to 35mpg or so, and see if you guys are right.
Not a surprise that he got lower MPG with E30. In fact, I can't see how that wouldn't happen.

Just like E85 makes a big hit on one's MPG. You can't push the same amount of weight, the same distance, under the same circumstances, at the same speed, with the same engine, with less energy. Despite this, I have had several people claim to me that they get the same MPG with E85 as with E10.

However if your friend could somehow find E0 87 and switches to it, they should only see a very small bump in MPG. There's only just over a 3% difference in BTU/gal.
Bombadil is offline  
    Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2013, 11:07 AM   #779
cessna1
Focus Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Fan#: 97921
Location: Paullina, IA
What I Drive: 2012 Red Candy Sedan

Posts: 153
FF Reputation: 1 cessna1 Good Standing Member
Buy-Sell-Trade Rating: (0)
Quote:
However if your friend could somehow find E0 87 and switches to it, they should only see a very small bump in MPG. There's only a 4% difference in BTU/gal.
You are correct(actually 3.5% less energy with E10, assuming the same gasoline blendstock). I threw this out since according to some here, for every 10% ethanol in the blend, there is a 10% hit in mileage. With that in mind, the E30 should be in the low 20's mpg, but that is not the case. My friend has never put the E0 in since most of his corn is delivered to the ethanol plant about 7 miles away. There is E0/87 at just about every station here in NW Iowa.
cessna1 is offline  
    Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2013, 11:20 AM   #780
97VQ30DE
Focus Jr. Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Fan#: 101752
Location: Los Angeles, CA
What I Drive: 2009 Ford Focus SE

Posts: 28
FF Reputation: 1 97VQ30DE Good Standing Member
Buy-Sell-Trade Rating: (0)
Lol @ people saying that Premium gas has better cleaning properties than regular and mid. Only difference is octane rating = prevents detonation/pre-ignition.
97VQ30DE is offline  
    Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks & Social Networks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:31 PM.


Copyright 2002-2014 FocusFanatics.com. All Rights Reserved : Terms of Use : Privacy Policy : Advertise Information : Site Map

Focus Fanatics Ford Focus Forum offers many fun ways for you to engage with other Ford Focus Owners from across the world. Whether it be about the aftermarket performance modifications, technical how-to's, European tuned suspension or awesome fuel economy similar to the Acura TLX or Fiesta ST. You can find all Ford Focus and Focus ST related information here. Join our Ford Focus discussion forums and chat with local Focus enthusiasts in your area.