2015+ S550 Mustang Forum (GT, GT350, GT500, Mach 1, Ecoboost) - Mustang6G.com 5 - Hypermotive -1
2015+ S550 Mustang Forum (GT, GT350, GT500, Mach 1, Ecoboost) - Mustang6G.com
Homepage Wiki MOTM Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Ford Bronco Forum Calendar Garage


Go Back   2015+ S550 Mustang Forum (GT, GT350, GT500, Mach 1, Ecoboost) - Mustang6G.com > 2015+ Ford Mustang Forum > Mustang S550 General Forums

Mustang S550 General Forums General topics related to the S550 6th Generation Ford Mustang


User Tag List
Ace

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 07-04-2017, 01:15 PM   #4756
DarkestHour
Hi
 
DarkestHour's Avatar
 

Drives: 2016 Mustang GT
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: GA
Posts: 740
Thanks: 64
Thanked: 201 Times in 137 Posts
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
iTrader Score: 1 reviews
It's 2017 and people with cars that cost $40k still can't afford premium fuel. Sad.
__________________
2016 Shadow Black Mustang GTPP
DarkestHour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-2017, 01:31 PM   #4757
jimmbbo
Member
 
jimmbbo's Avatar
 

Drives: 2011 GT Sterling Gray
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 17
Thanks: 4
Thanked: 4 Times in 3 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Garage
iTrader Score: 0 reviews
Lessee... assuming 450 hp and 10 hp difference with 93 octane, that's a theoretical 2.2% increase in HP at FULL THROTTLE, which is likely below the perception threshhold of most Mustang owners.. I use 87 octane because 99.999% of my driving time is BELOW full throttle, and figure "why waste the money?"
It all comes down to the cost/benefit to the individual..
jimmbbo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-2017, 01:38 PM   #4758
Darkane
Member
 

Drives: 2016 GT350 Base
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Alberta
Posts: 634
Thanks: 34
Thanked: 215 Times in 149 Posts
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
iTrader Score: 0 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by millhouse View Post
Who said anything about not being able to "afford" 93 octane?

A few thing for you to consider...

1) 87 is the recommended fuel per the manual.
2) The power difference is less than 10hp. It's small enough that you cannot feel the difference on the street.
3) With a price delta of 0.50 per gallon, I save $450 per year on fuel. Thy my friend is enough to cover most of my insurance.
4) 93 octane will not make your 5.0 run any smoother, cleaner or better. It will not provide any benefit or protection outside of squeaking out the last 10hp Ford enables by adding a small bump in timing.

If someone approached you and told you how to save $450 a year by changing something in your life that is unnoticeable, something that will have no affect on anything you do....would you ignore and mock them?

Or you could think of it this way...What if when you bought your mustang Ford said...hey, for an extra $40/month...we can give you an extra 10hp. The kicker is, this $40/month lasts the life of the vehicle. How much is that 10hp worth? To me, it's sure as hell not worth $40/month for the next 10+ years.



Work a whole lot better at what? If you can't feel the difference between 87 and 93, you sure as hell won't be able to notice a difference between 87 and 91.
Holy you drive a lot.

A VERY conservative estimate based on what you said is over 17,000miles a year at 18mpg. If you do highway and get 22-25 it's a lot more.

Something more frugal might serve you even better.
Darkane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-2017, 01:52 PM   #4759
millhouse
Member
 
millhouse's Avatar
 

Drives: 2016 Ruby Red GT PP
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Simpsonville SC
Posts: 1,084
Thanks: 2
Thanked: 375 Times in 247 Posts
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
iTrader Score: 0 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkestHour View Post
It's 2017 and people with cars that cost $40k still can't afford premium fuel. Sad.
And again, who said anything about not being able to afford premium fuel?

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmbbo View Post
Lessee... assuming 450 hp and 10 hp difference with 93 octane, that's a theoretical 2.2% increase in HP at FULL THROTTLE, which is likely below the perception threshhold of most Mustang owners.. I use 87 octane because 99.999% of my driving time is BELOW full throttle, and figure "why waste the money?"
It all comes down to the cost/benefit to the individual..
Yep...you get it. If I decide to go to the strip or track, I'll put 93 octane in a few days prior. Otherwise, it's like buying extra cable channels that you'll never watch.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkane View Post
Holy you drive a lot.

A VERY conservative estimate based on what you said is over 17,000miles a year at 18mpg. If you do highway and get 22-25 it's a lot more.

Something more frugal might serve you even better.
I've never understood driving a cheap economy car over a mustang for your daily driver. I bought my mustang to drive...and drive I do. I enjoy every second of it. I actually feel sorry for those that feel the need to save the mustang for non rainy weekends. These aren't collectors cars, nor will they ever be. I'm not saving my car for fear of depreciation.

I put on between 17k and 19k per year and have a lifetime average right at 20mpg. Can I afford premium fuel? Certainly. Will I notice a difference if I use it? Most certainly not, as I've ran it several times.
millhouse is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-2017, 01:56 PM   #4760
Darkane
Member
 

Drives: 2016 GT350 Base
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Alberta
Posts: 634
Thanks: 34
Thanked: 215 Times in 149 Posts
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
iTrader Score: 0 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by millhouse View Post
And again, who said anything about not being able to afford premium fuel?



Yep...you get it. If I decide to go to the strip or track, I'll put 93 octane in a few days prior. Otherwise, it's like buying extra cable channels that you'll never watch.



I've never understood driving a cheap economy car over a mustang for your daily driver. I bought my mustang to drive...and drive I do. I enjoy every second of it. I actually feel sorry for those that feel the need to save the mustang for non rainy weekends. These aren't collectors cars, nor will they ever be. I'm not saving my car for fear of depreciation.

I put on between 17k and 19k per year and have a lifetime average right at 20mpg. Can I afford premium fuel? Certainly. Will I notice a difference if I use it? Most certainly not, as I've ran it several times.
That's totally fair, especially if you don't require additional utility or awd etc.

Drive it, that's what it was built for.
Darkane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-2017, 01:57 PM   #4761
Taneras
Member
 

Drives: 2015 Auto 3.55 GT
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Ascension Parish, LA
Posts: 993
Thanks: 77
Thanked: 148 Times in 94 Posts
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
iTrader Score: 0 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by millhouse View Post
Who said anything about not being able to "afford" 93 octane?

A few thing for you to consider...

1) 87 is the recommended fuel per the manual.
2) The power difference is less than 10hp. It's small enough that you cannot feel the difference on the street.
3) With a price delta of 0.50 per gallon, I save $450 per year on fuel. Thy my friend is enough to cover most of my insurance.
4) 93 octane will not make your 5.0 run any smoother, cleaner or better. It will not provide any benefit or protection outside of squeaking out the last 10hp Ford enables by adding a small bump in timing.

If someone approached you and told you how to save $450 a year by changing something in your life that is unnoticeable, something that will have no affect on anything you do....would you ignore and mock them?

Or you could think of it this way...What if when you bought your mustang Ford said...hey, for an extra $40/month...we can give you an extra 10hp. The kicker is, this $40/month lasts the life of the vehicle. How much is that 10hp worth? To me, it's sure as hell not worth $40/month for the next 10+ years.



Work a whole lot better at what? If you can't feel the difference between 87 and 93, you sure as hell won't be able to notice a difference between 87 and 91.
I'm not surprised Ford recommends the lower hp fuel on the car they're contractually obligated to warranty. The power difference between 87 and 93 is around 8-10rwhp, a bit more in the mid range. 91 is a lot closer, its probably 3-4rwhp off at peak power.

Assuming you're getting roughly what the 5.0's "Combined" (19 mpg) mpg rating is, in order to save $450 a year saving 50 cents a gallon you'd need to drive almost 18,000 miles a year. Is that about right? That's about 35% above the average. Assuming no fuel economy difference your average driver is looking at $340. It's hard to test in the city, but I have tested this on long trips, and I get between 1.1 and 1.4 more mpg with 93 than I do 87. Going off local prices (1.90 for 87 and 2.40 for 93), rounding down to 1 mpg, and assuming roughly the same gains in the city, the price difference between 93 and 87 octane driving 13,000 miles in a year (average) is drops down to $260 a year or about $21 a month.

No doubt the horsepower difference is minimal, but so is the cost.

I'll pay ~260 a year for 8-10 peak rwhp and a tad more in the mid range. But I can understand why some people wouldn't want to. It's all down to personal preference.

To those saying he's too cheap to buy 87, stop being insecure that someone is choosing something different than you. He has his reasons. His reasons might not matter to you, so what. Buy whichever you want. I think a case could be made for either choice.
Taneras is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-2017, 02:02 PM   #4762
Taneras
Member
 

Drives: 2015 Auto 3.55 GT
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Ascension Parish, LA
Posts: 993
Thanks: 77
Thanked: 148 Times in 94 Posts
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
iTrader Score: 0 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by millhouse View Post
I bought my mustang to drive...and drive I do. I enjoy every second of it. I actually feel sorry for those that feel the need to save the mustang for non rainy weekends. These aren't collectors cars, nor will they ever be. I'm not saving my car for fear of depreciation.
Most people do that to keep the paint in pristine condition not because they're worried about resell, but because they love their car and want it looking as new as possible.

Speaking as someone who wishes he could save his car for the weekend, and deeply cares about his paint, rain really throws you a curve ball. There's a lot of extra attention that goes into cleaning a car that's gone through the rain and even then you'll still get micro-scratches.

Maybe my next car will be a garage queen
Taneras is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-2017, 02:02 PM   #4763
HISSMAN
Large Member
 
HISSMAN's Avatar
 

Drives: 2016 Oxford White GT/PP Premium
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: West Virginia
Posts: 2,322
Thanks: 571
Thanked: 1,015 Times in 618 Posts
Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
iTrader Score: 2 reviews
The truth of the matter is that people pay more for mods that equate to no horsepower.
__________________
2016 GT Premium W/PP and Recaro Seats
Twitter: @jeffery_hoops_2 Instagram :jeff_hoops_two
HISSMAN is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-2017, 02:21 PM   #4764
millhouse
Member
 
millhouse's Avatar
 

Drives: 2016 Ruby Red GT PP
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Simpsonville SC
Posts: 1,084
Thanks: 2
Thanked: 375 Times in 247 Posts
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
iTrader Score: 0 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkane View Post
That's totally fair, especially if you don't require additional utility or awd etc.

Drive it, that's what it was built for.
Totally understand a winter beater...I lived in Michigan most of my life.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taneras View Post
I'm not surprised Ford recommends the lower hp fuel on the car they're contractually obligated to warranty. The power difference between 87 and 93 is around 8-10rwhp, a bit more in the mid range. 91 is a lot closer, its probably 3-4rwhp off at peak power.

Assuming you're getting roughly what the 5.0's "Combined" (19 mpg) mpg rating is, in order to save $450 a year saving 50 cents a gallon you'd need to drive almost 18,000 miles a year. Is that about right? That's about 35% above the average. Assuming no fuel economy difference your average driver is looking at $340. It's hard to test in the city, but I have tested this on long trips, and I get between 1.1 and 1.4 more mpg with 93 than I do 87. Going off local prices (1.90 for 87 and 2.40 for 93), rounding down to 1 mpg, and assuming roughly the same gains in the city, the price difference between 93 and 87 octane driving 13,000 miles in a year (average) is drops down to $260 a year or about $21 a month.

No doubt the horsepower difference is minimal, but so is the cost.

I'll pay ~260 a year for 8-10 peak rwhp and a tad more in the mid range. But I can understand why some people wouldn't want to. It's all down to personal preference.

To those saying he's too cheap to buy 87, stop being insecure that someone is choosing something different than you. He has his reasons. His reasons might not matter to you, so what. Buy whichever you want. I think a case could be made for either choice.
I won't fault someone for paying the extra for premium. I simply chose not to spend the extra, as it is not noticeable on my daily drives. I think people still think that by putting premium fuel in their cars that the engine will last longer, or that premium fuel burns cleaner....which just isn't true.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taneras View Post
Most people do that to keep the paint in pristine condition not because they're worried about resell, but because they love their car and want it looking as new as possible.

Speaking as someone who wishes he could save his car for the weekend, and deeply cares about his paint, rain really throws you a curve ball. There's a lot of extra attention that goes into cleaning a car that's gone through the rain and even then you'll still get micro-scratches.

Maybe my next car will be a garage queen
I'm sorry, I just don't understand it. I won't fault people...but lets be real here...these aren't custom built hot rods, they are mass produced pony cars. Have you ever been to someones where they put clear plastic covers on their furniture? You can still sit on them, but you'll never truly appreciate them for what they are.

As for garage queens....my only one will be a self built factory five cobra replica with a 427 side oiler. And still, I'll drive it to work on a regular basis (weather permitting). That's as close to a garage queen as I'll get.
millhouse is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-2017, 02:57 PM   #4765
Taneras
Member
 

Drives: 2015 Auto 3.55 GT
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Ascension Parish, LA
Posts: 993
Thanks: 77
Thanked: 148 Times in 94 Posts
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
iTrader Score: 0 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by millhouse View Post
I'm sorry, I just don't understand it. I won't fault people...but lets be real here...these aren't custom built hot rods, they are mass produced pony cars. Have you ever been to someones where they put clear plastic covers on their furniture? You can still sit on them, but you'll never truly appreciate them for what they are.
I think a better comparison is refusing to sit on a couch in dirty/sweaty clothes, but not having an issue sitting on a couch if you're wearing clean clothes.
Taneras is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-2017, 03:01 PM   #4766
millhouse
Member
 
millhouse's Avatar
 

Drives: 2016 Ruby Red GT PP
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Simpsonville SC
Posts: 1,084
Thanks: 2
Thanked: 375 Times in 247 Posts
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
iTrader Score: 0 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taneras View Post
I think a better comparison is refusing to sit on a couch in dirty/sweaty clothes, but not having an issue sitting on a couch if you're wearing clean clothes.
How about this anology.

I can chose to live in a climate controlled bubble and not experience life. I wouldn't risk getting dirty or sick, but I also wouldn't experience all life had to offer.

OR

I can choose to live life to the fullest. No need to worry about getting dirty or sick. If it happens, I'll clean myself or heal.
millhouse is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-2017, 03:10 PM   #4767
Taneras
Member
 

Drives: 2015 Auto 3.55 GT
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Ascension Parish, LA
Posts: 993
Thanks: 77
Thanked: 148 Times in 94 Posts
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
iTrader Score: 0 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by millhouse View Post
How about this anology.

I can chose to live in a climate controlled bubble and not experience life. I wouldn't risk getting dirty or sick, but I also wouldn't experience all life had to offer.

OR

I can choose to live life to the fullest. No need to worry about getting dirty or sick. If it happens, I'll clean myself or heal.
I'll pick the middle ground. I'm not covering my furniture, but I'm also not putting my muddy boots up on my coffee table.

EDIT: Also, wouldn't living life to the fullest include getting more hp out of your car by using 93 octane?
Taneras is offline   Reply With Quote
Users thanking this:
Old 07-04-2017, 03:12 PM   #4768
millhouse
Member
 
millhouse's Avatar
 

Drives: 2016 Ruby Red GT PP
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Simpsonville SC
Posts: 1,084
Thanks: 2
Thanked: 375 Times in 247 Posts
Mentioned: 8 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
iTrader Score: 0 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taneras View Post
I'll pick the middle ground. I'm not covering my furniture, but I'm also not putting my muddy boots up on my coffee table.

EDIT: Also, wouldn't living life to the fullest include getting more hp out of your car by using 93 octane?
Touche' lol.
millhouse is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-04-2017, 03:36 PM   #4769
Ace
Member
 
Ace's Avatar
 
Name: Steve
Drives: Audi TT 2.0 TFSI
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,117
Thanks: 18
Thanked: 740 Times in 294 Posts
Mentioned: 26 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
iTrader Score: 0 reviews
A new EU prototype spotted, seems like we will get some of the new rims.

But where are the promised tribar DRLs?
Attached Images
 
__________________
Ace is offline   Reply With Quote
Users thanking this:
Old 07-04-2017, 03:40 PM   #4770
jimmbbo
Member
 
jimmbbo's Avatar
 

Drives: 2011 GT Sterling Gray
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 17
Thanks: 4
Thanked: 4 Times in 3 Posts
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Garage
iTrader Score: 0 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ace View Post
A new EU prototype spotted
What's with the Europeans banning red tail light lenses? There's simply something wrong with clear tail lights... They need to be RED!!
jimmbbo is offline   Reply With Quote
Users thanking this:
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
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

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
2018 Mustang refresh? amk91 Mustang S550 General Forums 923 08-01-2017 05:43 PM
2018 Mustang Refresh More Spy Shots... Topnotch Mustang S550 General Forums 60 10-17-2016 05:10 PM
2018 Mustang Refresh (Prototype) First Look! Jarstang Mustang S550 General Forums 675 10-14-2016 06:20 AM
2018 refresh spy photos link dingobreath Australia 8 10-01-2016 04:01 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:53 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.2.4 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd. Runs best on HiVelocity Hosting.Navbar with Avatar by Motorradforum

Garage vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.