EcoBoost Mileage Better with Premium?
#77
05-05-2011, 12:28 PM
Senior Member
#79
05-06-2011, 03:53 PM
I spoke with a local gas attendant the other day, he said that their gas has 10% (not up to 10%) Ethanol. I always set the pump on the lowest notch and let the fuel shutoff automatically. And, I attempt to use the same pump, at the same station every fill-up. It may not be completetly accurate but it makes me feel better. 
#80
05-07-2011, 04:53 PM
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Cabot, AR
Posts: 1,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#81
05-07-2011, 05:58 PM
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: north Texas
Posts: 335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Try Conoco, Chevron or Shell which are all easy to find in most TX cities. I run Conoco when in TX and I always gain 2 mpg over Shell in AR. If I use Valero in any of my vehicles; they knock, run sluggish and receive poor mileage. There are better brands of gasoline. I would run 3 tank fulls of a different brand and see what happens.
Good luck.
Good luck.
My first two tanks for my new ecoboost were Shell but for my third tank I used Exxon. The pump stated "up to 10% ethanol", where the Shell's around here say "10% ethanol". I don't know if I am getting better mpg this tank due to using Exxon which may have less ethanol, or that I have towed several heavy loads on the last tank and maybe its broke in a little.
BTW I normally run Shell gas, diesel and lubricants in my truck and tractors, so I am not knocking Shell.
#82
05-07-2011, 10:33 PM
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Cabot, AR
Posts: 1,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is a Shell, Conoco and a Conoco-Phillips in my neighborhood. But, I have been using my Shell card. I get $.05 off every gallon up to a certain amount. I get $.05 off every gallon of Super (in my '68 Ranchero and '94 Lightning) at the pump and another discount on the statement. I pay off the bill when it comes in. When I visit Dallas/Ft Worth I use Chevron. I stop outside Texarkana, AR on each leg of the trip and fill-up at the Flying J (Conoco) Truckstop. I have always gotten better mileage with Conoco 87 gas in my '01 F150 XLT SCab (5.4L), '02 Mustang GT, '05 Titan Crew Cab and my '07.5 STX 4.6 L (248 HP) SCab.
I recommended Shell, Chevron and Conoco because I know they are quality fuels and I get good mileage with them.
The same results occur when driving to IN. I stop at the Flying J Truckstop just south of Sikeston, MO. I have gotten better mileage headed North and South on my '01 XLT, '02 Stang, '05 Titan and '07.5 STX. This isn't a one time trip in each vehicle. My kids and siblings are in TX and my in-laws are in IN. There are a few trips a year to IN and TX in each of these vehicles. I can't explain it, I just know the results.
The following is by memory:
1. '01 XLT SCab, 5.4L, 3.55LS, tow pkg - Conoco 87, less than 5,000 miles on ODO, 21 mpg at 70 mph, Amarillo to Wichita Falls, TX
2. '02 Mustang GT, 5 spd, 3.25LS - Conoco 87, around 20,000 miles, 26 mpg at 70 mph, MS Gulf Coast to TX
3. '05 Titan Crew Cab, Airaid CAD, Magnaflow muffler, Tow Pkg - Conoco 87, around 20,000 miles, 19.1 mpg at 70 mph, Texarkana, AR to Little Rock
4. '07.5 STX SCab 4.6L, AFE CAI, AFE TB Spacer, 3" Flowmaster Catback, SuperChips Flashpaq, soft tonneau cover - Conoco 87, 21.1 mpg at 70 mph, AR to TX/TX to AR
Still have the receipt:
1. '07.5 STX SCab, modified Factory Intake, Holley Power Shot Air Filter, AFE TB Spacer, 3" Magnaflow Catback, SuperChips Flashpaq, soft tonneau cover, a full bed of firewood - Conoco 87, 42,000 miles, 21.1 mpg at 70 mph, MO to IN/IN to AR
Cruise Control was used on each trip. The best mileage to date in my '11 STX SCab, 5.0L, 3,55LS, tow pkg, 18's - 20.235 mpg on Shell 87 E10 (AR), combined driving - city/highway.
I recommended Shell, Chevron and Conoco because I know they are quality fuels and I get good mileage with them.
The same results occur when driving to IN. I stop at the Flying J Truckstop just south of Sikeston, MO. I have gotten better mileage headed North and South on my '01 XLT, '02 Stang, '05 Titan and '07.5 STX. This isn't a one time trip in each vehicle. My kids and siblings are in TX and my in-laws are in IN. There are a few trips a year to IN and TX in each of these vehicles. I can't explain it, I just know the results.
The following is by memory:
1. '01 XLT SCab, 5.4L, 3.55LS, tow pkg - Conoco 87, less than 5,000 miles on ODO, 21 mpg at 70 mph, Amarillo to Wichita Falls, TX
2. '02 Mustang GT, 5 spd, 3.25LS - Conoco 87, around 20,000 miles, 26 mpg at 70 mph, MS Gulf Coast to TX
3. '05 Titan Crew Cab, Airaid CAD, Magnaflow muffler, Tow Pkg - Conoco 87, around 20,000 miles, 19.1 mpg at 70 mph, Texarkana, AR to Little Rock
4. '07.5 STX SCab 4.6L, AFE CAI, AFE TB Spacer, 3" Flowmaster Catback, SuperChips Flashpaq, soft tonneau cover - Conoco 87, 21.1 mpg at 70 mph, AR to TX/TX to AR
Still have the receipt:
1. '07.5 STX SCab, modified Factory Intake, Holley Power Shot Air Filter, AFE TB Spacer, 3" Magnaflow Catback, SuperChips Flashpaq, soft tonneau cover, a full bed of firewood - Conoco 87, 42,000 miles, 21.1 mpg at 70 mph, MO to IN/IN to AR
Cruise Control was used on each trip. The best mileage to date in my '11 STX SCab, 5.0L, 3,55LS, tow pkg, 18's - 20.235 mpg on Shell 87 E10 (AR), combined driving - city/highway.
Last edited by Blue07STX; 05-07-2011 at 10:55 PM.
#83
06-22-2011, 12:15 PM
Senior Member
#84
06-22-2011, 03:44 PM
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: TX
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes. After running premium for several tanks, I found that no substantial fuel economy increase exists (around .2 mpg difference). Also, there was no noticible power increase with the 93 octane. However, I did notice that the engine ran slightly smoother and was a little more responsive running premium, although I don't think the extra cost is justified.
I have switched back to 87 and run either Chevron or Exxon brand fuel, and usually average out at 15.5mpg in my normal city commute... 20.5 or so on the highway.
A side note: I towed my bay boat back from the coast (285 miles), and the ecoboost did awesome on 87 octane in 102 degree heat. I forgot the thing was back there half the time, and I averaged 14.3mpg while towing with a pretty good tail wind.
I have switched back to 87 and run either Chevron or Exxon brand fuel, and usually average out at 15.5mpg in my normal city commute... 20.5 or so on the highway.
A side note: I towed my bay boat back from the coast (285 miles), and the ecoboost did awesome on 87 octane in 102 degree heat. I forgot the thing was back there half the time, and I averaged 14.3mpg while towing with a pretty good tail wind.
#85
06-23-2011, 09:09 AM
#86
06-23-2011, 06:11 PM
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have switched back to 87 and run either Chevron or Exxon brand fuel, and usually average out at 15.5mpg in my normal city commute... 20.5 or so on the highway.
A side note: I towed my bay boat back from the coast (285 miles), and the ecoboost did awesome on 87 octane in 102 degree heat. I forgot the thing was back there half the time, and I averaged 14.3mpg while towing with a pretty good tail wind.
A side note: I towed my bay boat back from the coast (285 miles), and the ecoboost did awesome on 87 octane in 102 degree heat. I forgot the thing was back there half the time, and I averaged 14.3mpg while towing with a pretty good tail wind.
BTW, mines the Platinum with 3.73 and just over 5K miles. Everybody enjoy your EB's; I sure as hell am enjoying mine!
#87
06-24-2011, 03:45 PM
There should not be much of a difference in economy from brand to brand, as all brands are supplied by the same suppliers/refineries (mainly corpus christi/houston for san antonio area)...The difference comes with the detergents additives that shouldnt have any effect on the performance of the gasoline itself.
Years ago the differences in brands were great, but due to stringent government standards and open market practices, really all gas is good and pretty much the same... That said, I'd look more at the station itself. My geologist buddy of mine does alot of work with the underground storage tanks at pump stations, and he says that many tanks are poorly designed, installed, and maintained. Bad tanks can produce excess condensation (water), deposits, and outside contamination, thus, hindering the properties of the gas.
Just my 2 cents
Years ago the differences in brands were great, but due to stringent government standards and open market practices, really all gas is good and pretty much the same... That said, I'd look more at the station itself. My geologist buddy of mine does alot of work with the underground storage tanks at pump stations, and he says that many tanks are poorly designed, installed, and maintained. Bad tanks can produce excess condensation (water), deposits, and outside contamination, thus, hindering the properties of the gas.
Just my 2 cents
#88
06-25-2011, 02:52 PM
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: TX
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Very true. Pretty much all stations here in San Antonio (including top tier) contain up to 10% ethanol. Kinda sucks.