Focus Fanatics Forum banner

101 - 120 of 2130 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
684 Posts
Prior to the V-Pover/Optimax I had run a tank of Chevron 91 and Circle K 91 and saw little to no difference. So I can't say that the V-Power is that much better than the other premiums since others in other threads have said it takes multiple tanks for the ECU to adapt without a reset. But if this trend in MPG maintains, I will continue to use premium as it is a 5% premium at the pump, that appears to yield near a 10% increase in MPG. Others have said their cost per mile is less with premium. Plus, I think the car runs better on premium.
Well if you can stomach the price difference and the results are consistent, it doesn't really matter what's causing them.... just keep doing it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
329 Posts
This whole Octane vs. Fuel Mileage thing in and of itself, doesn't really mean anything. The question is more of whether you are buying fuel with any significant amount of ethanol blended with it... Now all fuel sold in the US has some in it since they outlawed MTBE, but for all intents and purposes, E0 should be meant to mean the lowest amount of ethanol as required by Federal and/or your state..

Generally from my experience in where I live... They use ethanol to increase R+M / 2 octane numbers... which tend to hurt mileage as octane increases (all things being equal)...

Fuel Mileage numbers really don't mean anything other than bragging rights...
when it all comes down to it in the end...

Because...

The numbers that matter is the cost of fuel per mile driven .... which in my experience... the lower octane numbers (assuming no ethanol is present) produces the lowest cost per mile to operate..)

Where I Live ethanol blended fuel costs about 10 cents per gallon less at the pump (excluding premium)

.. but in the real world, the cost per mile is higher running ethanol blended fuel because i end up burning more of it for a given distance.
Now when comparing octane ratings to actual power outputs (especially with todays engine control technology) thats a whole different ball game.. and if you want maximum power potential from what is available under the hood, higher octanes may be exactly what you want.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
48 Posts
Oh great, another one of these threads

It's simple: bottom line, try running higher octane fuel and see if it makes a difference for you. If it does, is that difference enough to justify the price increase? If it is, go ahead and switch. It's not hard people.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
431 Posts
The 2012 TiVct 2.0 is 12:1 compression. The use of premium fuel will allow the ECM to add more timing compared to 87 octane regular gas. It's up to the user if they want the additional performance that premium gas allows.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,673 Posts
It's simple: bottom line, try running higher octane fuel and see if it makes a difference for you.
It's not that simple because of the variables involved. For example, gasoline with an octane rating of 92 from vendor A may have a different ethanol content than 92 octane from vendor B.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
658 Posts
It's not that simple because of the variables involved. For example, gasoline with an octane rating of 92 from vendor A may have a different ethanol content than 92 octane from vendor B.
That is why, for this experiment, I have been sticking with Shell V-Power from the same station. The video showed Shell Optimax generated the greatest HP and Trq numbers. Optimax was later re-branded V-Power in the US. If you can believe what you read on the internet, a quick google search of Optimax/V-Power found articles that did seem to indicate that Shell worked at developing a premium fuel for later model, higher tech, cars that can take advantage of a higher octane/quality fuel. Whereas other manufacturers may have just primarily worked on an increase in octane alone.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
535 Posts
MPG variables

It's not that simple because of the variables involved. For example, gasoline with an octane rating of 92 from vendor A may have a different ethanol content than 92 octane from vendor B.
I filled up with non-ethanolized premium from a BP station and it did not seem to make any difference as far as MPG or performance that I could tell but there are tons of variables when dealing with fuel economy and I haven't tried any stopwatch runs to judge performance. For example, we've had a lot of really windy days lately and you will use a lot more fuel driving against the wind and having it at your back will increase it. Rain, even a light rain causing wet roads will reduce your MPGs more than you might think. I wish the Focus had a bit more fuel economy info to give besides an average on the trip meter but I'm coming from a Prius that gave quite a lot of info in that area. I may have to get one of those Scan Gauges or something similar eventually.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
832 Posts
I run the cheapest 87 octane piss-water closest to me, because I get a discount with my WM Discover.

I'm reminded of the git-er-done comedian, "Well douche me with some dirty dishwater!"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
27 Posts
I live in Colorado where 'regular' is 85 octane. The manual says to use 87.. so I do. Otherwise I don't believe it makes a difference.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
431 Posts
I live in Colorado where 'regular' is 85 octane. The manual says to use 87.. so I do. Otherwise I don't believe it makes a difference.
Explain why you think it makes no difference?. Less timing is less power to get the car moving with the same throttle angle. Also less timing means more fuel for catalyst protection.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
658 Posts
I live in Colorado where 'regular' is 85 octane. The manual says to use 87.. so I do. Otherwise I don't believe it makes a difference.
If you didn't follow the link from page 2 to the video, you may want to check it out. Here is a link directly to the video. Also, if you are already paying for mid grade, I would find a Shell station and try a few tanks of V-Power/Optimax and see what happens.

http://http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQghB4asSnI
 

·
Rubber Side Down
Joined
·
2,415 Posts
Since this has been gone over time and time again I'll only add my 11,000 miles of experience with this car; ethanol free is the way to be aka e0 is my hero.
Posted via FF Mobile
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
658 Posts
Since this has been gone over time and time again I'll only add my 11,000 miles of experience with this car; ethanol free is the way to be aka e0 is my hero.
Posted via FF Mobile
I hear ya. Not available in my area. Screw the corn grower/ethanol producer lobby for screwing all of us who can't buy gas.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
160 Posts
Ethanol’s energy content was not found to be a direct predictor of fuel economy. All four vehicles tested exhibited better fuel economy with the ethanol blends than the Btu-value estimates predicted.

E20 and E30 ethanol blends outperformed unleaded gasoline in fuel economy tests for certain autos. Contrary to Btu-based estimates of fuel economy for ethanol blends, three of the four vehicles tested achieved their highest fuel efficiency not on gasoline, but on an ethanol blend. Mid-level blends of ethanol E20 (20% ethanol, 80% gasoline) and E30 (30% ethanol, 70% gasoline) offered the best fuel economy in these tests.

E30 offered better fuel economy than gasoline (a 1% increase) in both the Toyota and the Ford.

E20 offered better fuel economy than gasoline (a 15% increase) in the flex-fuel Chevrolet.

The non-flex-fuel Chevrolet more closely followed the Btu-calculated trend for fuel economy, but did experience a significant improvement over the trend line with E40 (40% ethanol, 60% gasoline), indicating that this may be the optimal ethanol blend level for this vehicle.

The standard, non-flex-fuel vehicles operated well on ethanol blends beyond 10%. The Ford Fusion operated on E45, the Toyota on E65, and the non-flex-fuel Chevy on E55. No engine fault codes were displayed until these levels were surpassed.

http://www.greencarcongress.com/2007/12/study-finds-cer.html
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
658 Posts
This is as far as I needed to read: The new study, co-sponsored by the US Department of Energy and the American Coalition for Ethanol (ACE)

Another slick piece of propaganda put out by the ethanol producers. How anyone can believe anything these idiots have to say is beyond me. The more of this crap they can force US drivers to burn, the more money they will make. Thus their need to try to present lies as truths and hope that someone will believe them.
 

·
Focus Addict
Joined
·
14,131 Posts
That test ignored the long term fuel line degradation risks associated with running blends of ethanol in excess of 10% in non flex fuel vehicles, or the effects on older cars, therefore its not conclusive of anything other than the limited thesis that on a few specific modern cars which were flex fuel capable with the proper fuel sensors to prevent the car from running too lean and burning up some how also managed to prevent the required over fueling on ethanol blends due to the higher latent oxygen content of the ethanol fuel as opposed to pure gasoline, although they don't mention if their test was actually e0 vs ethanol blends vs e10 gasohol which has been bad for fuel economy due several factors, the least of which is the lower energy content, the extra o2 in the fuel means you need to burn more fuel and take in less intake air to maintain the proper a/f mixture to feed into the catalyst.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
160 Posts
That test ignored the long term fuel line degradation risks associated with running blends of ethanol in excess of 10% in non flex fuel vehicles
That's why I've done my own tests. I have a 1992 Toyota 4x4 22RE that has used mostly 50% ethanol since April 2001--haven't even changed the fuel filter yet. 1995 Ford Aspire E30 since August 2002---no problems and drove it a few hours ago. Degradation, I haven't had it happen yet.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
658 Posts
That's why I've done my own tests. I have a 1992 Toyota 4x4 22RE that has used mostly 50% ethanol since April 2001--haven't even changed the fuel filter yet. 1995 Ford Aspire E30 since August 2002---no problems and drove it a few hours ago. Degradation, I haven't had it happen yet.
Good for you, just don't try to suggest the forced use of ethanol on US drivers is anything other than a big bureaucratic debacle showing the worst of Washington D.C.'s corruption.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
160 Posts
Something doesn't add up. Some of you say because of ethanol more gas is consumed.
O’Malley said laws approved during the Bush administration requiring fuel to contain 10 percent corn ethanol had reduced the demand for fuel refined from oil, even though it costs less to make than ethanol.
Also, unsubsidized ethanol CBOT price today $2.20 and New York Harbor RBOB $3.20.
Ethanol, environmental mandates blamed for Phila. refinery woes

April 26, 2012|By Andrew Maykuth, INQUIRER STAFF


Oil-industry experts told a congressional panel on Thursday that regulations requiring more ethanol in motor fuel and setting stricter federal emission standards have driven some refineries out of business.

A Joint Economic Committee hearing in Washington on the effect of the closure of Philadelphia area refineries turned into a broad-spectrum denunciation of federal environmental mandates. U.S. Sen. Robert Casey (D., Pa.), the committee’s chairman, called the hearing in response to moves by ConocoPhillips and Sunoco Inc. to sell or shut down their Philadelphia area refineries.

Republican members of the committee — Casey was the only Democrat who attended, and he missed a big part of the hearing to attend a floor vote — singled out Obama administration policies for blame. But Thomas D. O’Malley, chairman of PBF Energy, which owns refineries in Paulsboro, N.J., and Delaware City, Del., spared no party in his colorful testimony.

O’Malley said laws approved during the Bush administration requiring fuel to contain 10 percent corn ethanol had reduced the demand for fuel refined from oil, even though it costs less to make than ethanol.

“The reason for the closure of the refineries in Pennsylvania is that they didn’t make money, and the reason they didn’t make money is that you took away their market,” he said. “You delivered the market to the farm industry.”

Later, he said: “In essence, if you want to know why the refineries were closed down, I would kind of say, look in the mirror and we can find the guilty parties.”
O’Malley’s characterization of various federal mandates as “nuts” or “insane” or “dumb” prompted U.S. Rep. Kevin Brady (R.,Texas), the committee’s vice chairman, to jokingly tell the executive, “Don’t hold back.”


So now ethanol is blamed for shutting down east coast refineries. Of COURSE it is.

More: http://articles.philly.com/2012-04-26/business/31410867_1_refinery-woes-corn-ethanol-delaware-city
 
101 - 120 of 2130 Posts
Top