Ford Performance tune gas mileage impact?

[Black_Stallion13]

Wondering if there are any details anywhere on how mpgs are affected with the Ford Performance tunes (I have a 2.3). If mpgs go down much at all I'm not interested as the non sas 2.3 gets pretty good mileage in my experience so far. If mpgs are maintained tho, I deff want to get it done ASAP!

Sponsored

 

[rtazz17]

I mean getting 17-20 is not great to start with. Bronco is by far not a vehicle for gas mileage shaped like a brick and 5k pounds. You want quicker,more responsive and better gas mileage? Lol,ok

 

[Butzy]

I don't see an issue trying to maintain or improve your mpgs regardless of whether you are driving a brick or an arrow. Ffs.

 

[Black_Stallion13]

I mean getting 17-20 is not great to start with. Bronco is by far not a vehicle for gas mileage shaped like a brick and 5k pounds. You want quicker,more responsive and better gas mileage? Lol,ok

Yeah and the Bronco also isn't a sports car... I get 25-26 mpgs on the freeway and about 20 city. Roughly 22 combined. Exactly why I didn't buy a sasquach or a trim with extra weight in steel bumpers, heavier tires, etc - it's my daily driver. Certainly wouldn't mind a little extra power but not worth it to me if I'm gonna lose 3-4 mpgs. I've never tuned a vehicle but yes my assumption is u have to give up something to get something but I'm just wondering if anything official has been published from the manufacturer/elsewhere on the topic.

 

[mcinfantry]

Yeah and the Bronco also isn't a sports car... I get 25-26 mpgs on the freeway and about 20 city. Roughly 22 combined. Exactly why I didn't buy a sasquach or a trim with extra weight in steel bumpers, heavier tires, etc - it's my daily driver. Certainly wouldn't mind a little extra power but not worth it to me if I'm gonna lose 3-4 mpgs. I've never tuned a vehicle but yes my assumption is u have to give up something to get something but I'm just wondering if anything official has been published from the manufacturer/elsewhere on the topic.

I’m reasonably sure that a gallon of fuel contains a certain amount of BTU, or ‘energy’ so to get more HP or TQ then you have to have more BTU’s available

the only way I know how to get that is by combusting more fuel.

there will be 500 people come forward with deletes, diesels and anecdotes about how I’m wrong, but if you could get more power on the same consumption I think it would already be there

 

[Black_Stallion13]

I’m reasonably sure that a gallon of fuel contains a certain amount of BTU, or ‘energy’ so to get more HP or TQ then you have to have more BTU’s available

the only way I know how to get that is by combusting more fuel.

there will be 500 people come forward with deletes, diesels and anecdotes about how I’m wrong, but if you could get more power on the same consumption I think it would already be there

That would be my guess as well, just wondering what the actual hit will look like to gain 30hp and 60 lb feet of torque (for the 2.3). To me, that's the key bit of info in deciding whether the tune is worth it or not and I don't see anything on the topic anywhere.

 

[mcinfantry]

That would be my guess as well, just wondering what the actual hit will look like to gain 30hp and 60 lb feet of torque (for the 2.3). To me, that's the key bit of info in deciding whether the tune is worth it or not and I don't see anything on the topic anywhere.

i too have a 2.3 (on the way) and I’ll live with 1mpg loss or so
Not 3-4, although I’d think if you didn’t stay in the throttle it should not be very bad

 

[Lowcountry Bronco]

Try the Ranger and Mustang forums, the Ford 2.3 tune has been out for them for awhile. Yes, different vehicles but at least something to see how big the impact overall is.

 

[Snacktime]

Every tuned vehicle I have had has gotten better mileage on the freeway. Would I say it was cost effective, no... Around town and my foot, definitely worse.

 

[AZ_Liberty]

Yeah and the Bronco also isn't a sports car... I get 25-26 mpgs on the freeway and about 20 city. Roughly 22 combined. Exactly why I didn't buy a sasquach

For the record, my Mustang GT gets 25-26 on the freeway, and 21 in town.

I'll be damn happy if my Bronco gets the same.

 

[Cactus_Pete]

Wondering if there are any details anywhere on how mpgs are affected with the Ford Performance tunes (I have a 2.3). If mpgs go down much at all I'm not interested as the non sas 2.3 gets pretty good mileage in my experience so far. If mpgs are maintained tho, I deff want to get it done ASAP!

For sure! I’m averaging 25 mpg in my stock Big Bend in the Columbia river gorge where there’s no such thing as flat roads and no wind! driving 35k miles/yr that kind of mpg make using a 4 door bronco doable as a daily driver

 

[JerryC]

I’m reasonably sure that a gallon of fuel contains a certain amount of BTU, or ‘energy’ so to get more HP or TQ then you have to have more BTU’s available

the only way I know how to get that is by combusting more fuel.

there will be 500 people come forward with deletes, diesels and anecdotes about how I’m wrong, but if you could get more power on the same consumption I think it would already be there

That is only true if the engine is 100 % efficient in its current state. Also consider that a tune can be more than just engine tuning.

The great thing about computer control is that the state of the engine and transmission tuning is no longer static. Even peripherals can be controlled, such alternator, fans, AC, etc that are a source of parasitic power loss.

MPG gains can made by changing air/fuel ratios for example. Variable valve tuning and boost profiles can also make large differences in power when requested and when not needed can return to a more fuel efficient profile.

Tuning shift points for automatics can produce gains in performance and efficiency.

 

[mcinfantry]

That is only true if the engine is 100 % efficient in its current state. Also consider that a tune can be more than just engine tuning.

The great thing about computer control is that the state of the engine and transmission tuning is no longer static. Even peripherals can be controlled, such alternator, fans, AC, etc that are a source of parasitic power loss.

MPG gains can made by changing air/fuel ratios for example. Variable valve tuning and boost profiles can also make large differences in power when requested and when not needed can return to a more fuel efficient profile.

Tuning shift points for automatics can produce gains in performance and efficiency.

And if that’s how it did cafe penalties would be addressed as such

there’s nothing ‘free’

 

[Yeti-X]

Jerry C is actually very correct in his statement if you have ever looked at the engine graphs for timing, injector pulse width, air/fuel ratio From the factory they are typically running rich and timing set to be able to warranty a vehicle. That being said if the efficiency increases and more power is delivered people tend to use it on the skinny pedal and mpgs are reduced but If you make it more efficient and don’t change your driving style fuel mileage will be improved

 

[JerryC]

And if that’s how it did cafe penalties would be addressed as such

there’s nothing ‘free’

Or more development time is put in to find more power and/or efficiency.

The cynic in me would say that this was planned from the start. Leave some meat on the bone in the factory tune so that the "performance" tune can be sold later.

It's a common practice in the computer business and all modern vehicles are run by computers.

Sponsored