Premium fuel or Regular? GT Coyote V8

[ricardocabesa]

Premium (91-93) before tune, and after tune. Ford's published HP specs are using premium fuel, and the curve in all of the dynos show that it's worth the extra few cents a gallon.

https://www.ford.com/cars/mustang/2017/models/gt-premium-fastback/

I noticed a difference in my 2012 when I switched over, and haven't used anything else in my 2016 since I've owned it.

A few extra cents? Please point us to which station or chain please.

Sponsored

 

[1mic]

A few extra cents? Please point us to which station or chain please.

Let me guess, along with liking shitty pirellis you also fill up 87 octane or whatever the lowest grade fuel is? :lol:

 

[millhouse]

Should have bought an EB or v6.

Funny, 87 octane is FAR more detrimental to the EB than it is the GT.

Honestly, some in here sound like they think the S550 GT is a supercar instead of an average priced american coupe.

 

[2veloce]

93 is only a few hp difference at peak but it picks up a lot everywhere else. 87 gets a little better mileage. I run 93 in mine, the added cost is only like $150 a year.

Agree

 

[MRose]

Has anyone dyno'd a GT back to back on both octanes? If someone can provide some empirical evidence of the benefits to running 93 octane that might help people justify the cost.

Around here 93 is $.60 or more a gallon up-charge. At $2.50 a gallon that's about 25% more fuel cost.

 

[fewt]

A few extra cents? Please point us to which station or chain please.

It costs roughly $0.76 per day more per 10k miles driven over the course of a year to run premium (91-93) based on today's fuel prices.

It's literally pocket change.

 

[1mic]

Funny, 87 octane is FAR more detrimental to the EB than it is the GT.

Honestly, some in here sound like they think the S550 GT is a supercar instead of an average priced american coupe.

You can also go to Apple bees and eat steak there, I prefer flemings or Ruth’s Chris.

I put premium in all my vehicles.

To me this is like comparing hard drive to SSD. Lol at being cheap and slow.

 

[millhouse]

It costs roughly $0.76 per day more per 10k miles driven over the course of a year to run premium based on today's fuel prices.

It's literally pocket change.

$300/year, hardly pocket change. Sure, most of us can afford it...but that doesn't mean we want to.

I personally drive nearly 20k miles per year, so I save $600 and have a power loss that is never felt.

 

[tom_sprecher]

But more than every Civic, Corolla, Camry, Accord, and many other vanilla cars.

You can easily pay more for a 2017 V6 Camry than a 2017 EB Mustang. Like $5k more. The Mustang is not an expensive car.

Our F250 6.0 crew cab 4WD cost $3k more when purchased new back in 2004 than my 2016 Mustang did last year.

 

[millhouse]

You can also go to Apple bees and eat steak there, I prefer flemings or Ruth’s Chris.

I put premium in all my vehicles.

To me this is like comparing hard drive to SSD. Lol at being cheap and slow.

Terrible analogies.

Premium and regular perform the same function here...the premium just allows the engine to run slightly more timing. This isn't a difference between Ruth's Chris and Applebees, it's a difference between tap water and bottled water. Both do the same thing, one just costs more.

 

[fewt]

$300/year, hardly pocket change. Sure, most of us can afford it...but that doesn't mean we want to.

I personally drive nearly 20k miles per year, so I save $600 and have a power loss that is never felt.

Nobody's twisting anyone's arm here, or saying you have to run 91+. If you're spending most of your time in traffic and not doing any spirited driving I'm sure it's fine to run 87. The car will pull back timing and sacrifice some peak power, but it'll still work.

Ford wouldn't benchmark their vehicles using only 91+, and the car wouldn't have the maps to advance timing if there wasn't any benefit to running it though. :cheers:

 

[1mic]

Terrible analogies.

Premium and regular perform the same function here...the premium just allows the engine to run slightly more timing. This isn't a difference between Ruth's Chris and Applebees, it's a difference between tap water and bottled water. Both do the same thing, one just costs more.

Negative, a steak at apples bees is a good enough steak for some, just like 87 octane is good enough for some. For those that dont want to spend.

I would never put 87 on my Viper, LOL. Specially if im hitting the road course or drag strip, both of which I want the absolute most power/max engine out put.

 

[millhouse]

Nobody's twisting anyone's arm here, or saying you have to run 91+. If you're spending most of your time in traffic and not doing any spirited driving I'm sure it's fine to run 87. The car will pull back timing and sacrifice some peak power, but it'll still work.

Ford wouldn't benchmark their vehicles using only 91+, and the car wouldn't have the maps to advance timing if there wasn't any benefit to running it though. :cheers:

I have had this discussion before. I have no issue with anyone choosing their proffered fuel of choice. But let's not pretend the price difference is insignificant (for most of us), or that the performance delta is huge.

The thing is, Ford doesn't recommend 93 octane...they recommend 87.

Per the manual...

"We recommend regular unleaded gasoline
with a pump (R+M)/2 octane rating of 87.
Some stations offer fuels posted as regular
with an octane rating below 87, particularly
in high altitude areas. We do not
recommend fuels with an octane rating
below 87.
To provide improved performance, we
recommend premium fuel for severe duty
usage, such as trailer tow"

So it 87 isn't just "ok" here, it's recommended for daily driving. If I decide to take it to the track, I will absolutely put in 93 octane for heavy duty use. I will likely change the engine oil to something a bit more heavy duty as well. But for the daily driver, IMHO...93 octane is a complete and udder waste.

 

[millhouse]

Negative, a steak at apples bees is a good enough steak for some, just like 87 octane is good enough for some. For those that dont want to spend.

I would never put 87 on my Viper, LOL. Specially if im hitting the road course or drag strip, both of which I want the absolute most power/max engine out put.

Except, the quality of 93 octane is no better than the quality of 87 octane...that is where your logic is flawed.

As for your viper...unlike the mustang it recommends a minimum of 91 octane premium. No one here suggest you do otherwise.

A better analogy using restaurants is to compare Top Tier stations to non Top Tier stations. I would then wholeheartedly agree.

 

[fewt]

I have had this discussion before. I have no issue with anyone choosing their proffered fuel of choice. But let's not pretend the price difference is insignificant (for most of us), or that the performance delta is huge.

The thing is, Ford doesn't recommend 93 octane...they recommend 87.

Per the manual...

"We recommend regular unleaded gasoline
with a pump (R+M)/2 octane rating of 87.
Some stations offer fuels posted as regular
with an octane rating below 87, particularly
in high altitude areas. We do not
recommend fuels with an octane rating
below 87.
To provide improved performance, we
recommend premium fuel for severe duty
usage, such as trailer tow"

So it 87 isn't just "ok" here, it's recommended for daily driving. If I decide to take it to the track, I will absolutely put in 93 octane for heavy duty use. I will likely change the engine oil to something a bit more heavy duty as well. But for the daily driver, IMHO...93 octane is a complete and udder waste.

I'm familiar with the owner's manual, you're quoting page 125. Like I said, 87 is fine for sitting in traffic. Their (Ford's) specifications page that I linked previously states that the power ratings are using premium fuel. You're not going to get the best performance with 87, but if you're racing from stop light to stop light that's ok.

I've posted this before, but here's a dyno of 87 vs 93 from a stock 2011 5.0.

Sponsored