Premium Fuel

Electrified

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 13, 2021
Messages
390
Reaction score
479
Location
Richmond, TX
Current Rides
2022 392 XR, 2015 Ford F250 4-Door, 4-Wheel Drive, 6.7l Powerstroke
So I read for the first time that these thirsty beasts take premium fuel? I had not heard or read that but I am going to have to start a savings account for gas on this thing. I know they are gas hogs but premium fuel really ups the ante. Our Expedition with the Ecoboost "recommends" premium fuel but does not require it and runs fine on regular unleaded.
 
Last edited:
Yup - premium required. At least we have 93 highly available here in TX. Some folks are stuck running 91 and say it just doesn't run like it does with 93...
 
Definitely not a poor man's game to run this thing. Can it be run on 87 or 89 on those rare occasions where 91 or better is not available?
 
I would definitely recommend against it. It will cause pre-ignition that will knock like the neighbors kid wanting in to use your bathroom. The pre-ignition could potentially mess up the computer's timing and then it'll run like crap even with premium fuel - and those repairs are most definitely ones FCA will deny warranty on.
 
I would definitely recommend against it. It will cause pre-ignition that will knock like the neighbors kid wanting in to use your bathroom. The pre-ignition could potentially mess up the computer's timing and then it'll run like crap even with premium fuel - and those repairs are most definitely ones FCA will deny warranty on.
Thanks for the information.
 
Thanks for the information.
Higher compression cylinder requires higher stability in fuel.
I guess as the saying goes, if you’re worried about the fuel cost, don’t buy it.
The simple math, if you’re burning 30 gals/week, it will cost less than $1k year in premium vs. regular.

I will say, my MPGs are about the same as my JK. Avg 15 mpg on a daily basis with a mix of highway, town and trails.
 
Higher compression cylinder requires higher stability in fuel.
I guess as the saying goes, if you’re worried about the fuel cost, don’t buy it.
The simple math, if you’re burning 30 gals/week, it will cost less than $1k year in premium vs. regular.

I will say, my MPGs are about the same as my JK. Avg 15 mpg on a daily basis with a mix of highway, town and trails.
Fuel costs were not really a big concern but the premium gas was something I did not account for. It is what it is and I will account for it now.
 
Fuel costs were not really a big concern but the premium gas was something I did not account for. It is what it is and I will account for it now.
Check insurance cost as well.
Mine is normal. My SRT however, nearly tripled.
I’m thinking insurance companies haven’t caught on to the “performance” yet. 🤷🏻‍♂️
 
I have accounted for the insurance, knowing that if it is not high now, it will be when they catch on!
 
Where I live in PA, some gas stations only have 92, others have 93. And knowing most of the revenue from the high gas tax goes towards roads and repairs on the state's 25,000 bridges makes me feel a little better even my pocket still hurts.
 
Yup! That's Pennsylvania all right! My family is still back there and it pains me any time I visit and gas is litterally 50% higher than here.
 
Just my take but if I spend $75k or $90k on a great vehicle that by many standards could be a bona-fide collectible very soon, I will take care of it. I won't ruin the engine and skimp out on the fuel. My 392 Wrangler replaced a six year old Honda Pilot (with a V6), and my insurance actually WENT DOWN with my new 392. They definitely haven't caught on yet. Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
 
The 91 vs 93 isn’t critical. This is often influenced by altitude as well. As long as you run 91 minimum, you’ll be good. Lower the octane, and the pinging song starts, valve fluttering, etc. long term, or high loads, you have the potential to get some damaged valves and a little more.
Even the remote gas station 100 miles from nothing, typically has regular and premium. Very few vehicles recommend mid-grade.
 
Not so sureThe lower octane unleaded fuel would cause the motor to paint since the ECU should adjust the timing to account for the lower grade fuel. However, performance would be decreased for sure.
 
Not so sureThe lower octane unleaded fuel would cause the motor to paint since the ECU should adjust the timing to account for the lower grade fuel. However, performance would be decreased for sure.
Our Expedition accepts the lower octane fuel with no issues. A 3.5 Ecoboost is not a 6.4 Hemi though!
 
Not so sureThe lower octane unleaded fuel would cause the motor to paint since the ECU should adjust the timing to account for the lower grade fuel. However, performance would be decreased for sure.
My GC SRT had the same motor, same design.
It pinged and valves fluttered with mid grade at sea level and at altitude (up to 13,5k).
Took about 1 tank to get through the mix of 91 & 89.
But, if you think it’s not different, try it out.
 
I run 87…. These threads are interesting. higher octane retards ignition For high compression. 10.something is not very high compression. The 3.6 is in the 11.something, it doesn’t require 91. E85 is equivalent to 105 or so octane, why not run that…

run what works for you…. that Is 87 for me…
 
Back
Top