What fuel do you run in your EcoBoost pickup? (not HO)

Grit dog wrote:
Not having driven Eco boosts much (the topic of discussion here) I cant say what the performance difference is on premium gas.
But, other vehicles make a notable performance difference if designed to run on premium compared to pulling timing to run on regular.
Not like OMG 100hp, just added a blower to it difference but real seat of the pants difference.

Yeah, my wife's Infiniti and friend's GMC 6.2L are this way, and both are designed and tuned to run on premium as the preferred fuel. You can tell a different performance wise if you don't run premium, but they can run fine on regular for the most part although my friends 6.2L will start to knock during the summer months when the weather gets hot even unloaded.

My old Ecoboost on the other hand was designed and tuned to run on regular fuel as its preferred fuel, but you could not tell that much of a difference if you added premium. There was a difference, but it wasn't really significant or nearly as much as the difference my 5 Star custom tunes made. But those added over 50hp and 100 lb-ft.

Not having driven Eco boosts much (the topic of discussion here) I cant say what the performance difference is on premium gas.
But, other vehicles make a notable performance difference if designed to run on premium compared to pulling timing to run on regular.
Not like OMG 100hp, just added a blower to it difference but real seat of the pants difference.

Late to the party here but I run premium in my Explorer Sport. I have no idea if it really makes a difference but it "feels" better when driving it when I do it.

Husband runs mid-grade in his F-150 most of the time. We don't tow much with either vehicle though.

Side note: Premium here in CO is 91....altitude etc.

BarabooBob wrote:
I will continue to used 87 even at higher elevations.

This should be an important take-away for anyone running an EB. Use minimum of 87, even at altitude.

With NA engines, you can run a lower octane (85 in Colorado) at high elevation, as the lower air density effectively make your engine "part throttle".

With forced induction, the intake air pressure is relatively constant (within the turbo's parameters). In fact, at high elevation the turbo works harder (higher pressure ratio), which means high intake air temp. More important to never run lower than 87, even in Tibet...

Lantley wrote:
You guys are too brand loyal to see anything but your own ideas.

Hertz let me choose between the Ford and a Ram. I went with the Ford just because I am more familiar with the cab layout. I can just imagine what some people would blame on brand bias if I had chosen the Ram.




"I think my issue is I am expecting the OP to....."

You just hit the nail on the head.
Since you are dissatisfied with my testing I will give you a full refund. . . . . There, done. I hope that you don't feel ripped off any longer.

As I have said several times, mail me a large check and I will test anyway you want me too until the money runs out. Keep in mind that renting a race track to safely and legally do the "wide open full throttle driving" will get pricey. So far there is no check in my mailbox.


Thanks to the guys above that understand real life.

Isn't the OP comparing an F250 running pump diesel to an F150 running 87 octane during everyday use? How is this not a real comparison with real parameters? I make this real world comparison with my three vehicles every day. From this real comparison with real parameters, my truck is the last thing I want to drive for everyday use.

Lantley wrote:
I think my issue is I am expecting the OP to perform a real comparison with real parameters vs. I'm going to try this truck for a week or two and let you know how they compare. In my mind a worthwhile comparison would have to have some wide open full throttle driving. It would include the trucks caring the same load up and down the same steep hills.
But I don't believe the comparison will be apples to apples. Nor will it be very stringent in terms of the same course or even the same demands.
In the end you will have more of an opinion than a comparison.
Again it's the play on words thing, but I was looking forward to a more factual/analytical comparison vs. an opinion that contains no real comparable data.
In the end the OP is right his comparison, his rules, his conclusion.
If it works for him that's all that really matters.

Why would you EXPECT him to do anything?
Who freakin cares anyway? Fella didn't go rent a differnet truck so he could compare. He rented a truck becasue his is in the shop and decided to report the mileage he got with it and his OPINION on how it towed compared the the other truck. Becasue probably thought it would please the court since everyone always asks the same inane questions like "Will ____truck pull ____?" Or "What kind of mileage can I expect towing with ___ truck?"

BarabooBob wrote:
I use 87 whether towing or not. I plan on being above 7000 ft a lot later this summer. I will continue to used 87 even at higher elevations.

That's good, becasue the higher altitude you run at, the less octane required in naturally aspirated engines, apples to apples.
And while your turbo engine won't get asphyxiated like a NA engine, it certainly is t getting more air, so you're good.

I think my issue is I am expecting the OP to perform a real comparison with real parameters vs. I'm going to try this truck for a week or two and let you know how they compare. In my mind a worthwhile comparison would have to have some wide open full throttle driving. It would include the trucks caring the same load up and down the same steep hills.
But I don't believe the comparison will be apples to apples. Nor will it be very stringent in terms of the same course or even the same demands.
In the end you will have more of an opinion than a comparison.
Again it's the play on words thing, but I was looking forward to a more factual/analytical comparison vs. an opinion that contains no real comparable data.
In the end the OP is right his comparison, his rules, his conclusion.
If it works for him that's all that really matters.

Lantley wrote:
You guys are too brand loyal to see anything but your own ideas.
If your comparing 2 trucks it seems like a basic criteria is to have both trucks at full factory specs. with factory recommendations. Doing anything less compromises the comparison, plain and simple you may not agree but those are my thoughts. I don't need to own the truck to have that opinion because those thoughts apply to any comparison. WE could be talking Dodge, Chevy or Ford.
Secondly I agreed with another comment that the load being pulled in the comparison did not have a large frontal area vs. a typical RV load. The poster (not me) went on to question the millage results. Do I need to own a certain truck to make that observation?
But I agree with you. You are entitled to draw any conclusion you like, If you feel my comments are off base and not valid because I don't own the truck in question, you are certainly entitled to your opinion.

Too brand loyal? I drive a Ram CTD, my work and back car is a BMW diesel, and my wife drives and Infiniti. How is that brand loyal?

We are trying to tell you that based on our experience of running both, using premium in the Ecoboost will not have any significance in the comparison especially if he never needs to go wide open throttle towing his load. That is the only time you will even feel the very slight difference between using the two fuels.

Mileage wise, I record every fill up in all my vehicles even when I had my Ecoboost. I would track fuel brand and octane, and I never saw any significant difference from running a few months worth of premium versus regular octane.

But I encourage you to go buy an Ecoboost truck to find out for yourself. Maybe then you will believe what we are saying.