Fuel Question

[Fred Larson]

For a stock, street driven 2022 GT, does 91 or 93 octane fuel make a noticeable difference? (i.e. is it worth using?). The price delta from 87 locally is 30 cents/gallon.

Sponsored

 

[NGOT8R]

If you’re just cruising and driving normally, then you could get away with saving money by running 87, but if you’re going to be pushing the engine hard then run 91 or 93 for extra protection against premature ignition.

Take a look here at this article and scroll down to the bottom to see the comparison results.

https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a28565486/honda-cr-v-vs-bmw-m5-ford-f-150-dodge-charger/

 

[Fred Larson]

Thanks for the link.

 

[young at heart]

I’ve never understood the rationale of buying a GT then not wanting to get the best performance possible out of it over trying to save a few bucks on fuel. I certainly understand budget constraints but it begs the question of why buy the GT to start with?

 

[Rev68]

How much do you drive? I won't use 150 gallons of fuel in a year, so even saving 30 cents a gallon, it's not worth it for the $35-$45 I might 'save' by not using premium. If you drive significantly more, it may be worth it to you.

 

[C-WOODS-70]

I have a 2022 and switching to 93 made no seat of the pants difference. (ran as much of the 87 out as possible before filling up with 93). Not saying it didn't make a little more HP's, just saying it wasn't noticeable.
However, after getting a 93 octane tune I can tell a difference at lower rpm's.

 

[Fred Larson]

I’ve never understood the rationale of buying a GT then not wanting to get the best performance possible out of it over trying to save a few bucks on fuel. I certainly understand budget constraints but it begs the question of why buy the GT to start with?

I understand and agree with your argument IF there is a performance improvement with 93, that is what I am trying to determine. The Car & Driver article linked to above is certainly inconclusive, at least as to some models. The cost is not really an issue, but why pay extra if there is no benefit? I might mention I traded a 2015 Mustang with the Cyclone V6 for my GT, and I find the incremental cost well worth it, even though it is bone stock. Certainly more performance now than I can use anywhere close to legally on the street (in Iowa you lose your license if more than 25 over).

 

[Balr14]

Like the Boar's Head commercial says "compromise elsewhere".

 

[Johnny Rockit]

For a stock, street driven 2022 GT, does 91 or 93 octane fuel make a noticeable difference? (i.e. is it worth using?). The price delta from 87 locally is 30 cents/gallon.

I have only used 93 and if you are worried about another thirty cents a gallon maybe it is time to sell and get a kia. No offense.

 

[ORRadtech]

Like the Boar's Head commercial says "compromise elsewhere".

If there's no noticeable difference, what is the compromise?

FWIW, I can absolutely feel a difference between the two in my EB.

 

[Fred Larson]

I have only used 93 and if you are worried about another thirty cents a gallon maybe it is time to sell and get a kia. No offense.

You obviously did not read my reply to young at heart.

 

[D Bergstrom]

First 1,000 miles or so that I had my 2020 GT I ran 87. I then ran another 1,000 or so miles with 91 in the tank to get ready to install the Ford Performance kit. I noticed no difference between 87 and 91, zip, zilch, nada, car ran exactly the same. (definitely felt a difference after installing the kit.) If you are just cruising around with the occasional aggressive drive, run 87, save the money. I feel you are not going to hurt the car, even Ford states you can run 87. If you are going to drive aggressively on a daily basis, suck it up and pay for premium.

Doug

 

[Johnny Rockit]

You obviously did not read my reply to young at heart.

I confess to that fact.

 

[Pistol_91]

If you wanna run 87 turd fuel. Run it. I've never ran anything under 93 in any of my cars except my truck. You won't notice any difference between the 2 fuels. The stock tune is made for 87. Your engine might be happier with 93 but that's really it

 

[FUN2RIDEFAST]

I would think that if fuel economy was a priority then a GT Mustang probably wasn't a good choice.

Sponsored