7.3 twin turbo Godzilla

ShinerBock wrote:

Bionic Man wrote:


Not going to go into the fuel type argument other than to say the current 6.2 only recommends premium, not requires. It is in the article you referenced.

And the argument of the 3.5 using more air/more power than the 6.2 isn't accurate either. The only place the 6.2 lacked power of the EB was up the passes. And while a lot is made of the Ike runs, all 3 or 4 steep grades where the EB has an advantage on my trips amount to less than 20 miles. So there shouldn't be THAT much of a difference in fuel economy. It would balance out in the rest of the trip, and certainly after fill ups. But it never did/does. The worst MPG I've experienced was towing the boat from Grand Junction Colorado to Bullfrog UT. Not high elevation, no long hills, grades that any V8 could maintain speed at returned MPG of 7.07 MPG. The tank before was 7.82. The tank after was 7.95. Also, when towing my Ranger (3000ish pounds), I was 10.68 MPG in that stretch. 12.44 the tank before, and 10.59 the tank after. The 6.2 pulling the Malibu never pulled less than 8.83 MPG. And towing the little boat I don't think it ever got less than 12 MPG.

I just filled the Ex from our trip home over the weekend. 8.47 MPG towing 72 MPH from Sterling CO to Denver CO (part of the loop that FLT does for their MPG tests). Yes there was some wind and rain, but the truck pulling the 5er still pulled down 10.75 MPG.

My buddy just bought a PowerBoost, and is towing a 26' trailer. He gets 5 - 7 MPG towing (no idea how fast, but he is a retired county sheriff, and never seems to be in a hurry).

The moral of the story is you won't convince me that, overall, while towing, the EcoBoost gets comparable MPG. Solo might be different, but that isn't what we are arguing. And if Ford ever considered giving the same treatment to the 7.3, people would be DREAMING about getting 7 MPG. It would more likely be considerably less.

That is not what we have seen in our fleet although this is in comparison to the Ford 5.0L and GM 5.3L. As I said, the 6.2L does require a premium to achieve its advertised numbers according to GM (LINK), is a different animal since it actually gets better fuel economy than the Ford 5.0L and GM 5.3L.

How much of that is due to it being tuned using premium fuel I have no idea. I would love to see a test using regular fuel in both(which is what the standard Ecoboost is tuned for). The high output 3.5L Ecoboost found in the Raptor and Lincoln's with larger turbo's and more fueling does require premium fuel and is not very fuel-efficient.

From the 2021 Silverado owner's manual, page 283:
"Recommended Fuel (6.2LV8 Engine)Premium unleaded gasoline meeting ASTM specification D4814 with a posted octane rating of 93—(R+M)/2—is highly recommended for best performance and fuel economy. Unleaded gasoline with an octane rated as low as 87 can be used. Using unleaded gasoline rated below 93 octane, however, will lead to reduced acceleration and fuel economy. If knocking occurs, use a gasoline rated at 93 octane as soon as possible, otherwise, the engine could be damaged."

That is much stronger wording than Ford uses. 2021 F150 owner's manual, page 223:
"For best overall vehicle and engine
performance, premium fuel with an octane
rating of 91 or higher is recommended. The
performance gained by using premium fuel
is most noticeable in hot weather as well
as other conditions, for example when
towing a trailer. See Towing a Trailer
(page 375).
Do not be concerned if the engine
sometimes knocks lightly"

Also, note that Ford defines premium as 91 octane where GM says 93.

I have seen many more remarks from 6.2 owners than Ford owners saying that they have premium to control knocking, even though I don't see many 6.2 engines on the road. Also, what do you do when you have filled your 6.2 with regular for just driving to work and you get a sudden urge to take your boat to the lake but you know that might lead to the destructive knocking that the manual describes? That doesn't sound like a good position to be in.