Does the 2.7L Ecoboost require premium gas?

[Space Cat]

I only run 93 in my Raptor. I spent $70K on the truck, why cheap out on the gas.
Check out this Car and Driver article. The F-150 Limited they tested has the Raptor engine. Premium fuel makes a difference in performance.

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

Exactomundo. Premium fuel ups the ante. The computers are ready and waiting to make the proper adjustments.

Sponsored

 

[guzie]

Title.

Since this motor is turbo'd, should I be running this ? on premium fuel?

Ford automatically adjusts timing and other things so that it can safely run anything from 87-93. You will benefit from 93. Motor hp and torque ratings are based on premium fuel. Our 2019 Mustang GT has 12:1 compression and is still capable of running on 87 with Ford detuning strategy. The question is why neuter your power output and force the ecu to detune for 3-4 dollars a tank? We run strictly premium with the GT and our turbo vehicles. Just the best power and safest for the motor in the long run. The motor running on lesser grade fuel creates Knock events that the ecu senses and detunes for. I for one don’t want it to knock in the first place. Knock is bad. I dont want it even for a microsecond triggering a detune.

 

[guzie]

If the horse power and torque ratings do not include the caveat "With 91+ octane" you should be good on 89.

They do. All are rated with the best fuel. It’s even that way on our NA 2.0 in our ecosport which is far from a sports car. There is a general statement that maximum power ratings are based on premium fuel.

 

[stampede1]

Question for those in the know about this kind of stuff... even if premium grade fuel is not required on the 2.7L engine, does the engine perform any better with higher grade fuel than it does with standard?

Not according to any website I researched regarding non-custom engines or manufacturer requirements. Consensus is a it is a waste of money.

 

[NayNay]

Speaking of fuel, do we think the tank will be capless? My 2009 F-150 is capless. Did they keep this?

Yes they did

 

[GoldenKnight]

This is from Car and Driver, there seems to be enough evidence to suggest there's a clear difference in performance when going from regular to premium in the EcoBoost platform. All the stated HP and torque #s from Ford are also while using premium fuel. So while it's not required, I'd suggest it for the small price difference. Maybe $300-400 a year at most.

Using the same vehicle, different fuels.

 

[PSUTE]

This is from Car and Driver, there seems to be enough evidence to suggest there's a clear difference in performance when going from regular to premium in the EcoBoost platform. All the stated HP and torque #s from Ford are also while using premium fuel. So while it's not required, I'd suggest it for the small price difference. Maybe $300-400 a year at most.

Using the same vehicle, different fuels.

Wonder what the difference would be with real gas, not ethanol...

 

[WuNgUn]

The thing with the Ecoboost engines is, they're adaptive as to what fuel you use. If you run premium, the engine will tube itself for a little more power....
And guaranteed, the power figures Ford has published for the Bronco were achieved on premium fuel!

 

[WuNgUn]

Wonder what the difference would be with real gas, not ethanol...

With turbo motors, you can make TONS of power on ethanol. E85 if I remember correctly, is like 120 octane...?
A factory Ecoboost motor wouldn't take advantage of that... I'm talking aftermarket tuners.
Dunno if anyone still uses that fuel.its not widely available in Canada.
Problem with ethanol is, you gotta pump a 1/3 more of it thru the motor to make "equivalent" gasoline power... It just doesn't have the energy content that gasoline does.

 

[JT58Bronc]

I ran my past 2018 Mustang GT on regular- the manual states that "regular" is fine although you will see a reduction in performance. With 460 HP on tap, I was perfectly fine with "only 400" or so HP running regular. The car was blistering fast period- even on regular. The problem is it would ping. It also had the piston slap problem and the ticking and I end up not keeping the car very long. I also had a 2017 Fiesta ST that the manual stated the same thing. I ran 89 it it for a while and it ran fine although when I switched to 93 I noticed a substantial performance difference. After that I ran only 93 although it got close to 40 MPG so the cost difference was not that much.

I hope either engine will run fine on 87. With all the 2.3's and 2.7's they put in the trucks I don't see all those work trucks and contractors filling up with 93.

 

[XirallicBolts]

I love being near home because Costco is the only place I can find 93 octane. I absolutely feel a difference vs 87 or even 91 on my 3.5, even prior to tuning.

For my 3.5, Ford recommends 91 for best performance or when towing.

Fuel economy gains on 91 are present but not quite enough to offset the extra 70¢/gallon. The performance makes up for it though.

 

[SevenT]

Just for comparison, if not done yet. My wife drives a 2.0L ecoboost Fusion and the manual recommends 87 octane or higher. I run nothing less than 87 in it here in CO. It will push you back in the seat when that turbo spools. I look forward to the twin turbo on the 2.7L.

 

[Stitches1974]

And guaranteed, the power figures Ford has published for the Bronco were achieved on premium fuel!

Yep!

For the 2.3:

And the 2.7:

 

[The Bronze]

[QUOTE="Laminar, post: 198669, member: 3608]


Ford's spark management is very sophisticated and constantly monitors for the indicators of knock on a per-cylinder basis, then advances or retards timing on individual cylinders to maximize power production. Running a lower octane fuel results in earlier knock, so power will be pulled. You are 100% fine and 100% safe running 87 octane, but you will not be making as much peak power/torque.
[/QUOTE]

Ford is one of the few manufacturers which allow the PCM to ADD timing of it determines your octane ratio is high enough. A couple degrees of timing is something you will feel in your butt dyno. My SHO loved the 90 octane (our best) vs 87. Mine will run the good stuff all the time, since the learned octane takes some time to determine

 

[t3n2and4]

Then there will be a by-pass youtube video on a week from the first one rolling off the assembly line I bet.

There was a comment I can’t find to link where people plugged a nightlight into the 110V outlet and that forced the start/stop to disengage. Picked up from the Ranger forums apparently.

Sponsored