Recent Topics
2019 J.D. Power VDS
by buster - 09/17/19 09:05 AM
Possible to add catch can?
by cwilliamsws6 - 09/17/19 09:02 AM
Update on GF-6
by buster - 09/17/19 08:40 AM
motul eco-lite 5w30
by avi1777 - 09/17/19 07:47 AM
Hyundai sonata 2.4l burning oil
by Grambo - 09/17/19 07:22 AM
Mazda CX5 2.5 oil question
by Tallman - 09/17/19 06:54 AM
Can I use 10W40 gtx HM in cold winter like -5F?
by Cheburashka - 09/17/19 06:43 AM
BMW Longlife-04: Evolving Performance Requirements
by Bjornviken - 09/17/19 06:40 AM
Do you use gas brand exclusively ?
by MetalSlug - 09/17/19 04:58 AM
Mobil 15w30
by Chadders99 - 09/17/19 02:20 AM
2018 VW Atlas 3.6 4 Motion Reliability?
by GZRider - 09/16/19 11:48 PM
Account and posts removal
by newbe46 - 09/16/19 10:00 PM
Yamaha EF2800i break-in
by Uregina09 - 09/16/19 09:43 PM
Adding TCW3 to Gas Tank?
by maverickfhs - 09/16/19 08:45 PM
Motul 75w90 1L 12 pack $13.25
by wkcars - 09/16/19 08:36 PM
2019 Ford Fusion vs used?
by FL-400S - 09/16/19 08:33 PM
What is the reasoning for 2-fuel tanks on a rv?
by RazorsEdge - 09/16/19 07:54 PM
Thoughts and opinions on family haulers
by ram_man - 09/16/19 07:53 PM
Newest Members
R0CKETMAN, Southbend9, Bigaledge32, emilio15, Kokopelli34179
69303 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
97 registered members (5W50Spooge, 330indy, Anduril, Alfred_B, A310, 2004tdigls, 4 invisible), 1,942 guests, and 20 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums67
Topics294,680
Posts5,064,448
Members69,303
Most Online3,532
Jul 30th, 2019
Donate to BITOG
Print Thread
Hop To
Page 1 of 2 1 2
Minimum octane for 2016 2.0 ecoboost? #5194393 08/23/19 07:06 AM
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 422
C
Corollaman Offline OP
OP Offline
C
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 422
2016 fusion 2.0 ecoboost. The manual says 87 octane minimum but I''ve been using 91 or higher. How sensitive are these engines to lower octane fuels?

Last edited by Corollaman; 08/23/19 07:06 AM.
Re: Minimum octane for 2016 2.0 ecoboost? [Re: Corollaman] #5194396 08/23/19 07:11 AM
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 22,781
D
Donald Offline
Offline
D
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 22,781
Go with the manual. All cars (or maybe almost) will have an anti-knock sensor these days.


2015 Subaru Forester 2.5 engine/CVT
2015 Ford F250 w/Powerstroke
2016 Subaru Crosstrek CVT (wife's)
Re: Minimum octane for 2016 2.0 ecoboost? [Re: Corollaman] #5194399 08/23/19 07:15 AM
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 13,569
M
Miller88 Offline
Offline
M
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 13,569
They will get better fuel mileage running higher octane fuel. In some cases enough more fuel mileage to pay for premium, in other cases not.


18 Forester 2.5I 6M
00 Jeep XJ
01 F-350 4x4 5M
Re: Minimum octane for 2016 2.0 ecoboost? [Re: Corollaman] #5194431 08/23/19 08:01 AM
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 281
G
geekster Offline
Offline
G
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 281
My brother has the same motor. He says, like Miller88, he gets way better mileage running high octane. FWIW


17 Nissan Frontier 4.0 QSUD 5w30
19 KIA Sorento 3.3 QSUD 5w30
16 KIA Forte 1.8 QSUD 5w30
Re: Minimum octane for 2016 2.0 ecoboost? [Re: Corollaman] #5194436 08/23/19 08:09 AM
Joined: Jun 2017
Posts: 284
J
jbutch Online Content
Online Content
J
Joined: Jun 2017
Posts: 284
Originally Posted by Corollaman
2016 fusion 2.0 ecoboost. The manual says 87 octane minimum but I''ve been using 91 or higher. How sensitive are these engines to lower octane fuels?


Factory tune is set for 87, so it is safe to run regular gas. However some tunes sometimes get better mileage/performance with higher octane. It really depends on the engine and ECU.


2015 Forester XT @ 92000km
Current fill: Mobil ESP Formula 5w-30 with Fram Ultra XG7317
Re: Minimum octane for 2016 2.0 ecoboost? [Re: Corollaman] #5194440 08/23/19 08:15 AM
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 13,975
R
Rand Offline
Offline
R
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 13,975
With my 2019 jeep cherokee trailhawk --bigger AT tires, no airdam, higher ride. Trailhawk is easily 2-3mpg lower than other cherokee models.
It has the 2.0T the owners manual recommends 91+ but requires 87.

I got 28.5mpg with 93 octane going from akron to Cincinnati(265 miles iirc), filled up with 87 octane
Drove city for a few days lots of lights full A/C it was very hot.

When I computed mileage for the entire trip including the first part(600miles total) my average was 28.9.. so the mileage didnt suffer much with 87.

It is abit peppier with 93octane esp when its very hot out. in the winter not nearly as much difference.

Also here there is a HUGE premium for .. premium gas.. usually 60cents/gallon
currently 87 is 2.22 and 93 is 2.82 (or 27% more) no way I'm getting even 10% more mpg with 93

That being said.. I do use 93 when towing in hot weather.


2019 Jeep Cherokee Trailhawk 2.0T
Re: Minimum octane for 2016 2.0 ecoboost? [Re: Corollaman] #5194446 08/23/19 08:20 AM
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 13,467
A
ARCOgraphite Online Content
Online Content
A
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 13,467
I mix a littlle higher octane in my Jetta with the 87.. It makes it easier to drive with the stick. But it has no real issue running 87.

And that's is a 1-1/2 tonne car with a 1.4T.

My issue is getting "fresh" high octane fuel in my neck of the woods. It's not consistent at all and pouring in a load of "bilge water" will make it run much worse or kill it, Bad gasoline is Not Covered by Factory warranty. Remember that.

Try it and see if you can feel and measure the diff. Give it a chance to change the tune maybe 40 miles of mixed driving.


2019 VW Jetta S 6MT OCI#1 5885mi-Castrol Edge Prof? VW508+VW Service Filter; '17 Subaru Crosstrek CVT OC#7 52665mi-Castrol GTX Magnatec 5W20 + SOA Filter
Re: Minimum octane for 2016 2.0 ecoboost? [Re: Corollaman] #5194472 08/23/19 09:04 AM
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 6,275
B
billt460 Offline
Offline
B
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 6,275
Originally Posted by Corollaman
2016 fusion 2.0 ecoboost. The manual says 87 octane minimum but I''ve been using 91 or higher. How sensitive are these engines to lower octane fuels?

I would keep using what you have been, (91 or higher). I have never understood the logic of paying well into 4 digits more for a turbocharged, high performance engine, then turn right around and try to save a few bucks a fill up on cheaper, lower octane fuel.

It's the same with the 5.7 Chrysler HEMI. Yes, they'll run OK on 87. But you will not get the best performance or fuel mileage on that low octane fuel. I use nothing but 91 octane in mine. It delivers great mileage and performance as a result. Today you can get away with using cheap gas in a lot of these cars, because the vehicles on board computer will automatically detune most all of these engines and prevent harm. But at the same time it prevents the engine from performing to it's maximum...... Which is what you paid extra for in the first place.

It's absurd logic. There are hundreds of places to save money today. This should not be one of them.

Re: Minimum octane for 2016 2.0 ecoboost? [Re: billt460] #5194488 08/23/19 09:37 AM
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 2,373
H
hallstevenson Offline
Offline
H
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 2,373
Originally Posted by billt460
I have never understood the logic of paying well into 4 digits more for a turbocharged, high performance engine, then turn right around and try to save a few bucks a fill up on cheaper, lower octane fuel.

One reason might be because Ford designed it to use 87 octane fuel.

Re: Minimum octane for 2016 2.0 ecoboost? [Re: Corollaman] #5194500 08/23/19 09:59 AM
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,515
T
TiredTrucker Offline
Offline
T
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,515
My wife's 2017 Chevy Equinox is not turbo, but it does have a 11.2:1 compression ratio. Regular works, but there is a noticeable improvement by using E85 100 octane in it. I cannot speak specifically to what Ford does, but GM does modulate timing in their engines in response to knock events,,, retarding timing to prevent knock. Even in their 6.2 Ecotec, they say it can use regular, but recommend premium to maximize engine performance. It would seem logical that Ford does something similar with their engines.

With the move to higher compression ratios in both NA and certainly in Forced Induction engines, it seems that higher octane levels are going to be in play if one wants to garner the most from these newer engines.

I know that in using E85 100 octane that MPG is not be that great, but on a cost per mile compared to Premium, E85 is the clear winner. So I get the performance of a high octane fuel along with a lower cost per mile.


Freedom is not about having the choice to do what you want, but the choice to do what you ought.
Re: Minimum octane for 2016 2.0 ecoboost? [Re: Corollaman] #5194505 08/23/19 10:04 AM
Joined: Nov 2014
Posts: 133
D
DavidJones Offline
Offline
D
Joined: Nov 2014
Posts: 133
Run the 87. The more expensive stuff will do nothing for you but lighten your wallet.


My garage.....2012 Toyota Highlander (wife's), 2016 Ford 2.7EB F150(mine), 1969 Pontiac GTO, 2005 Double cab Tundra(son), 2015 Honda Accord EX(son).
Re: Minimum octane for 2016 2.0 ecoboost? [Re: DavidJones] #5194509 08/23/19 10:10 AM
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,515
T
TiredTrucker Offline
Offline
T
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,515
Originally Posted by DavidJones
Run the 87. The more expensive stuff will do nothing for you but lighten your wallet.


That would be true in days gone by. But I am not convinced that it plays to the dynamics of modern forced induction engines.


Freedom is not about having the choice to do what you want, but the choice to do what you ought.
Re: Minimum octane for 2016 2.0 ecoboost? [Re: Corollaman] #5194528 08/23/19 10:35 AM
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,830
L
LoneRanger Offline
Offline
L
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,830
My new F150 with the 2.7 ecoboost recently ran worse on a tank mid grade 89 than it has been 87. Just filled up with 18 gal of 87 (23 gal tank) and it's back to normal again. Owner manual says 87 is okay.

Over on F150forum.com there was a recent poll and 58% of respondents reported using 87 in their ecoboost. 323 respondents total, 188 said 87. 13 said midgrade (89), premium (91 & 93) was 122.



2019 Ford F-150 ................................(Factory fill)
2019 GMC Terrain .............................(ACDelco dexos2)
2016 Moto Guzzi Stelvio <for sale>...(eni 10W60)
Re: Minimum octane for 2016 2.0 ecoboost? [Re: Corollaman] #5194530 08/23/19 10:36 AM
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 206
T
Tdog02 Offline
Offline
T
Joined: Aug 2014
Posts: 206
Higher octane will allow the computer to advance the timing. Two things happen then... 1) advanced timing equals more power 2) less chance of pre-detonation.

High octane will help when the engine is under load or ambient temps are at their highest. Manufacturers know that if they put a premium designation on fuel it will hurt sales. So your vehicle will run on 87 and most will never know the difference. You have a high performance 2.0 turbo from Ford. You choose what fuel you run, but 91 or 93 will be better. Forced induction will always benefit from higher octane. My flame resistant suit is now on.


09 Venza 2.7 104k 5w-30 Magnatec
16 F150 2.7TT 52k 5w-30 Magnatec
Re: Minimum octane for 2016 2.0 ecoboost? [Re: Corollaman] #5194545 08/23/19 10:50 AM
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 687
N
NO2 Offline
Offline
N
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 687
The mileage difference typically comes because many premium fuels do not contain ethanol and have a higher energy content. In any case, paying $0.50 extra per gallon for premium, somewhere between 15-20% extra, will never, ever make up for the difference, which is around 3% in mileage improvement. Stick with 87.

Page 1 of 2 1 2
Previous Thread
Index
Next Thread

BOB IS THE OIL GUY® Powered by UBB.threads™