• Mustang Forums
  • 2005 - 2014 S-197 Mustang -General/Talk-
  • 2005 - 2009 Specific Tech

87 or 93 Octane

  • Thread starter Thread starter fjo
  • Start date Start date Apr 6, 2005
  • 1
  • 2
Next
1 of 2 Next Last
F

fjo

New Member
Mar 31, 2005
6
0
0
Eunice,LA
Apr 6, 2005
#1
  • Apr 6, 2005
  • #1
I know that the manuel and the 05 GT says 87 Octane. What does everyone else recommend? Will I gain anything by the higher octane? Will the performance be better, will the injecters stay cleaner, etc? Is it worth the extra 20 cents per gallon?
 
T

Tex81

New Member
Oct 5, 2004
50
0
0
Apr 6, 2005
#2
  • Apr 6, 2005
  • #2
Higher octane is useless without having your vehicle tuned. Enjoy the lower gas prices.
 
L

lostsoul

New Member
Mar 30, 2005
244
0
0
Apr 6, 2005
#3
  • Apr 6, 2005
  • #3
the new mm&FF in the 05 mustange witht he KB SC said that 91 does give a few hp..
 
S

Seagull

New Member
Mar 30, 2005
10
0
0
Saint Albert, Alberta, Canada. St Albert borders t
Apr 7, 2005
#4
  • Apr 7, 2005
  • #4
My manual also says that higher than 87 octane can damage the vehicle.

Cheers
 

mpentico

New Member
Dec 7, 2004
181
0
0
Apr 7, 2005
#5
  • Apr 7, 2005
  • #5
From what I've been told, the car is in a constant state of tuning itself.
If you use a higher octane gas, 89 or 93 the car will gradually bump the ignition timing up a bit.
Especially if you have your foot in it most of the time.

Not a problem, until you go back to 87... then let the knocking begin!

At least that is what I've been told.
 

96vert

Founding Member
Mar 6, 2002
356
0
16
Columbus, Ohio
Apr 7, 2005
#6
  • Apr 7, 2005
  • #6
That's probably true to a certain extent. If you have the cash and want to run 89 or 93 you can probably gain a few horses, but don't jump around between low and high octane.
 

cheezsnake

New Member
Apr 5, 2005
23
0
0
Apr 9, 2005
#7
  • Apr 9, 2005
  • #7
The octane rating of fuel is simply a measure of its resistance to pre-ignition, or knock. The higher the rating, the more resistant it is to pre-ignition. Unless you start increasing the cylinder head compression (where higher octane is needed to avoid knock), you probably aren't going to see much horsepower benefit from using higher octane gas.
 
C

Cobra1999

New Member
May 31, 1999
5
0
0
Middletown, De. USA
Apr 9, 2005
#8
  • Apr 9, 2005
  • #8
Save your money/price difference and spring for a dyno tune and hand held SCT tuner. That way you can have your cake and eat it too. Anyway, if you do any engine mods, you'll need a tune. With a hand held tuner, you can have the stock program, and two additional programs stored in the tuner. I swap back to the OEM tune prior to going to the dealer for work. I've got one set for 89 and one for 93. Right now with the gas prices as they are, I'm running 89. You may say that I'm not saving much, but with my daily commute of 100+ miles a day, it saves enough to take my wife out for a nice dinner every month.
 

crash

Founding Member
Aug 12, 1999
337
0
0
Dallas, Tulsa
Apr 9, 2005
#9
  • Apr 9, 2005
  • #9
Long post...

cheezsnake said:
The octane rating of fuel is simply a measure of its resistance to pre-ignition, or knock. The higher the rating, the more resistant it is to pre-ignition. Unless you start increasing the cylinder head compression (where higher octane is needed to avoid knock), you probably aren't going to see much horsepower benefit from using higher octane gas.
Click to expand...

This definition of octane is exactly correct. Octane is the ability do resist detonation or pre-ignition (Yes, two different but similar problems).

Detonation is spontaneously igniting the mix prior to the spark event (Due to high cylinder pressure). Pre-Ignition is carbon or some hot spot igniting the mix prior to the spark event (Most likely on high mileage engines). The "pinging" sound you hear is the two flame fronts colliding. Cylinder pressure is abnormally HIGHER and can cause damage. To keep it simple, the higher octane fuel burns slower.

Our cars and designed to run 87 octane, and you should see the best performance by using it... Faster burn, more power... No detonation, more timing... Again to keep it simple.

Now, I posted on this thread because I had already intended to ask you guys and girls if detonation has been experienced with the STOCK PCM calibration.

I had light detonation when going WFO (WOT to some). No detonation is acceptable to ME, as a Ford tech. Please understand that EEC V (Our computer) has adaptive strategies to retard timing and lean fuel curves based on the LOUD PEDAL and how you use it (I like to feel the power daily... LOL). Drive like your grandmother, and you drive the PCM to go lean and back off timing for economy. In addition, if detonation is sensed by the PCM, timing is retarded through the adaptive strategy. This does take a drive cycle or two... Not necessarily immediate.

With that said, and knowing I only have 2K miles on mine and want to have NO problems, I tested 89 octane. No more detonation, so I feel more confident with WOT. What I think is, based on the way I personally drive (Mostly in a legal manner), I ended up allowing the PCM to lean the fuel curves, so when I powerslide into a turn, I noticed the pinging noise. Mostly under heavy load (100 %), and tires hooking though. If the tires get blown away, there was no perceivable detonation (The system goes RICH when you mash the LOUD PEDAL).

Knowing Ford, IF this becomes a wider spread problem ("X" number of cars detonating), they release a revised PCM calibration or software version upgrade. I am not saying this is the case, just stating what I have seen while working with these systems in the dealership. No cause for alarm.

So I am asking if anyone notices any detonation first, and also reiterating the fact that you will want to use 87 octane if no issues occur, for best performance and lower fuel cost. You should NEVER need 91 or 93 octane unless you recalibrate or add a supercharger or turbocharger. At that point, custom tuning is required anyway.
 
N

nik73

New Member
Nov 21, 2004
8
0
0
Apr 9, 2005
#10
  • Apr 9, 2005
  • #10
To crash, I haven't read the article, but ther've been a lot of references to a MM and FF article that claimed a hp increase with the stock computer with 91 octane. as 91 is not available locally i started using 93 is there any risk of damaging the motor?
 

crash

Founding Member
Aug 12, 1999
337
0
0
Dallas, Tulsa
Apr 9, 2005
#11
  • Apr 9, 2005
  • #11
Sorry, I meant to answer that question in my post.

No, engine damage is not likely, with a stock car. Higher octane is safer when you advance timing with a device like the X-Calbrator or Predator. You WILL need the additional octane to support the performance mods. NOT doing so CAN damage the engine.

Adding octane to a stock PCM will allow the adaptive strategy to advance timing and add fuel to make more power. The added octane itself is not responsible for the gains.

EXAMPLE- If you use the stock calibration and install a code where timing and fuel curves are FIXED (Not the case here), you will see less power because the fuel burns slower. Since the PCM adapts or "learns" if you will, then driving it hard will inherently increase performance because it WILL advance timing. If detonation is sensed, it will retard timing.

To summarize, you want to run the lowest octane that is safe for optimum performance. In your case, I would just go to 89 octane as I did. 93 is not needed until you bolt on a power adder or recalibrate the PCM with SCT or Diablo.

A good way to think about it is... "What octane fuel will SUPPORT my mods?". The answer? Follow the recommendations of the manufacturer of that particular mod. Reducing parasitic losses with underdrive pulleys would not require a new tune or higher octane, but a blower, turbo, or even a CAI or removing the HC trap DOES!
 
L

lostsoul

New Member
Mar 30, 2005
244
0
0
Apr 9, 2005
#12
  • Apr 9, 2005
  • #12
crash... where you been all this time?? you got to hit the SC posts... they are making me question prochagers..hahah.. ohhh btw.. any new info or where we can get it at a discount? =-)
 

cheezsnake

New Member
Apr 5, 2005
23
0
0
Apr 9, 2005
#13
  • Apr 9, 2005
  • #13
crash,

Thanks for the detailed explanation. Very good information!
 
C

covertaxn

New Member
Nov 22, 2004
19
0
0
Reno, NV
Apr 10, 2005
#14
  • Apr 10, 2005
  • #14
I ran a tank of super and noticed no difference. Will stick with 87 until tuned.
 
F

fjo

New Member
Mar 31, 2005
6
0
0
Eunice,LA
Apr 10, 2005
#15
  • Apr 10, 2005
  • #15
Thanks to everyone for there input. So it sounds like to me that 87 octane would be the recommened fuel maybe even 89 octane. But as long as no superchargers or anything of that fashion is added there is no need for 93 octane. But whatever I decide 87 or 89, that is the one I need to stick to and not keep changing between the two, right? Thanks again, it is very helpful to have an experience person (Crash) on board these forums.
 

1st and goal

New Member
Apr 1, 2005
18
0
0
Seacoast NH
Apr 10, 2005
#16
  • Apr 10, 2005
  • #16
crash said:
A good way to think about it is... "What octane fuel will SUPPORT my mods?". The answer? Follow the recommendations of the manufacturer of that particular mod. Reducing parasitic losses with underdrive pulleys would not require a new tune or higher octane, but a blower, turbo, or even a CAI or removing the HC trap DOES!
Click to expand...

What is an HC trap?

New to the board, this part is painful to write but GM gives me no choice....
Converted Camaro guy looking to order an 05 GT

Marc
 
V

vetwhat

New Member
Aug 29, 2004
40
0
0
Apr 10, 2005
#17
  • Apr 10, 2005
  • #17
crash, that was very enlightening.
question for you. I have a 2004 ranger with 4.0 SOHC that has started to ping very badly. I tried 89 octane and it helps but why would I have to suddenly change from 87 fuel? I could believe in the winter/summer blend thing if it weren't so sudden. I have only made 1 "mod", a K&N air filter.
I had a '99 ranger 3.0 that did the same thing. Coasting downhill & not touching the gas pedal it sounded like it was going to throw a rod!!

I convinced my wife another ranger would be better than a GMC/chevy truck when we bought the '04. Now I'm really started to question FORD's current quality ( other issues with both trucks).

Can you figure this out ???
 

crash

Founding Member
Aug 12, 1999
337
0
0
Dallas, Tulsa
Apr 10, 2005
#18
  • Apr 10, 2005
  • #18
The first question... I specialize in supercharging Fords, so yes, I have spent time in the blower forums. In addition, I am a member of all the truck sites along with about 10 others... LOL!

Yes I DO have a line on blowers and turbos and they are very competively priced. I can also provide you information you need to make an informed decision, meaning the BEST bang for the buck.

FJO is right. 87 IS DEFINITELY the recommended fuel. That is exactly what I needed all here to understand. Don't change unless you need to. Besides, it is cheaper... You will know if you need 93, because the gas guage WILL say "Premium Unleaded Fuel ONLY" (IE Cobra and Lightning), or if you add a new calibration or a blower.

1st and goal- The HC trap is like an air filter between the MAF and the throttle body. Part of the OBD II (ON BOARD DIAGNOSTICS Rev. II) governmental "Clean Air" requirements. Any evaporative emissions are now controlled. It is an emission component that prevents fuel vapors from finding it's way out through the inlet duct. A coiled up corrugated filter like element.

Technically it is a restriction, and '05 owners remove it when they add a K&N or CAI. It requires a new tune when you change these parts. The PCM code is tougher to break than ever, due to FLY BY WIRE, and there is NO service port for a chip.

This means a CAI (Cold air induction) and removal of the trap will flow more air, but will drive the PCM lean (Not good)... And requires a new calibration.

vetwhat - During a season change, fuel in the station tanks changes. In this transition, you can get Summer gas before the hot Summer days hit, and this can cause the detonation. If this is a persistant problem, go up one level in octane until the atmospheric conditions
match the fuel needs. Then change back.

FOR COMPARISON ONLY- In the old days (EEC IV), there was an octane bar in the PCM harness that the dealer tech could remove to retard timing (Removal gave you a set 4-6 degree retard), but performance waned (We saw a loss of 40 HP). On the 4.0 example, this should be temporary. We do not want to sacrifice performancel this defeats the purpose. Just remember, the PCM on the GT requires a new code when modifying (Altering the efficiency). We now use the SCT programming and the IAT sensor to do this.
 
L

lostsoul

New Member
Mar 30, 2005
244
0
0
Apr 11, 2005
#19
  • Apr 11, 2005
  • #19
" Yes I DO have a line on blowers and turbos and they are very competively priced. I can also provide you information you need to make an informed decision, meaning the BEST bang for the buck.
" ====You rock Crash. Please e-mail me with the best deal for the procharger since you got me started on it .. haha.. tedwork@sbcglobal.net... thanks again
 

cheezsnake

New Member
Apr 5, 2005
23
0
0
Apr 11, 2005
#20
  • Apr 11, 2005
  • #20
Quick question ... so you make a few mods that require a new tune / calibration. Where do you take it? Your dealer? Any service shop? I'm assuming that most, if not all, of the engine and exhaust mods I've seen discussed on these forums are going to void the warranty on the car?
 
  • 1
  • 2
Next
1 of 2 Next Last
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
Fox '87 GT can't get to stay running
  • spilly
  • Mar 29, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
27
Views
830
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jun 20, 2026
spilly
S
T
Service Fluid Recommendations for 2015 Paxton Supercharged GT
  • ThotTrap
  • Aug 25, 2025
  • 2015 - 2023 (S550) Mustang -General/Talk
Replies
0
Views
137
2015 - 2023 (S550) Mustang -General/Talk Aug 25, 2025
ThotTrap
T
Resolved 93 Mustang 5.0 - Cranks but does not start
  • dan50
  • Jul 18, 2026
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
6
Views
141
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Jul 18, 2026
dan50
L
2004 Mustang GT issues after bolt-ons added
  • Leo090
  • Nov 1, 2024
  • SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech
  • 2
Replies
21
Views
1K
SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech Jan 24, 2025
Leo090
L
Engine Engine Bay crazy hot!
  • R82148V
  • Aug 28, 2023
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
15
Views
6K
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Aug 30, 2023
Mustang5L5
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 2005 - 2014 S-197 Mustang -General/Talk-
  • 2005 - 2009 Specific Tech
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?