Bucking and snorting on acceleration

[Ray Knight]

Mine does it every time now. Warm or cold, any drive mode. Only 93 octane ever used. I'm thinking its very likely condensation built up. I'm drilling it.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

 

[Jayrod]

Mine does it every time now. Warm or cold, any drive mode. Only 93 octane ever used. I'm thinking its very likely condensation built up. I'm drilling it.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

let us know the results.

And again the truck should not buck or jerk on 87. 93 will increase the power but any of the rated fuels from 87-93 should not make the truck buck, jerk and miss.

 

[AndysLog]

i would i dont even own an ecoboost and i went and researched what quatch is saying and every bit of information he has posted in this thread is true. a simple google search and 15 minutes of your time will point you in the right direction.


he may not have all the answers but at least its an answer to point someone with issues in the right direction. all you other guys are just bitching because you dont like who is saying it i guess idk.

but the weep hole thing is a valid fix for a lot of eco guys, if you are shutting down that info because quatch told you, then you a dummy. literally the dude is trying to help and yall trolling the shit out of the thread.

 

[df4801]

Don't be sorry, just read the manual.

http://www.fordservicecontent.com/F...picHRef=G1738559&div=f&vFilteringEnabled=True

What Ford ACTUALLY says is:

"Your vehicle is designed to operate on regular unleaded gasoline with a minimum pump (R+M)/2 octane rating of 87 or regular unleaded gasoline blended with a maximum of 85% ethanol (E85)."

Ford continues to say:

"For best overall vehicle and engine performance, premium fuel with an octane rating of 91 or higher is recommended."

So there is clearly a difference that's beyond mere imagination.

It'll operate on 87 (OP's truck is indeed operational) but it won't get the best performance (OP's truck isn't performing optimally)

Nope. Its imagination.

If the vehicle runs as intended on 87 octane (meaning no knock, etc) then there is no added performance running 91.

If the vehicle is a higher compression engine or INTENDED to run on 91, then yes, it will have better performance with 91.

Mine runs great on 87. No hesitation, knock, or anything else. So I would see NO performance increase with 91. (i.e. my 0-60 times would be the same)

higher octane is kinda like a pedal commander. Makes you feel all manly but doesnt actually do much 0-60 wise.

 

[Ray Knight]

let us know the results.

And again the truck should not buck or jerk on 87. 93 will increase the power but any of the rated fuels from 87-93 should not make the truck buck, jerk and miss.

I'd think on 87 you would get some knock detection and timing would be cut back by the ecu. Thats normal for any modern turbo car. But i dont think this particular issue has anything to do with octane. Regardless, i only ever run premium fuel in turbo cars. I've built enough turbo engines to know good fuel is very important to proper performance.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

---------- Post added at 09:45 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:43 AM ----------

i would i dont even own an ecoboost and i went and researched what quatch is saying and every bit of information he has posted in this thread is true. a simple google search and 15 minutes of your time will point you in the right direction.


he may not have all the answers but at least its an answer to point someone with issues in the right direction. all you other guys are just bitching because you dont like who is saying it i guess idk.

but the weep hole thing is a valid fix for a lot of eco guys, if you are shutting down that info because quatch told you, then you a dummy. literally the dude is trying to help and yall trolling the shit out of the thread.

Yeah there is a ton of info on that weep hole. Even if thats not the thing causing this particular issue its a good idea to prevent future engine problems. I'm drilling mine today.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

---------- Post added at 09:54 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:45 AM ----------

Nope. Its imagination.

If the vehicle runs as intended on 87 octane (meaning no knock, etc) then there is no added performance running 91.

If the vehicle is a higher compression engine or INTENDED to run on 91, then yes, it will have better performance with 91.

Mine runs great on 87. No hesitation, knock, or anything else. So I would see NO performance increase with 91. (i.e. my 0-60 times would be the same)

higher octane is kinda like a pedal commander. Makes you feel all manly but doesnt actually do much 0-60 wise.

Modern ECUs are so good and so fast, you would not know if you are getting knock and your timing is cut. You would just make less power. Only way to know what is actually going on is properly data logging. Temperatures and humidity levels, engine loads and other factors will contribute to knock as well. Normal driving, not loading the engine, the compression is low enough it would likely not ever knock. But hook up a trailer, torque up a hill, get the turbo spooled up and things change. Its very likely to knock in those conditions and the ECU backs things down to safe levels. But you lose performance and effeciency. Thats the reality. So if you don't care about top performance, use 87. Its not going to hurt anything. If you want less chance of knock, you can use better fuel.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

 

[ogdobber]

Nope. Its imagination.



If the vehicle runs as intended on 87 octane (meaning no knock, etc) then there is no added performance running 91.



If the vehicle is a higher compression engine or INTENDED to run on 91, then yes, it will have better performance with 91.



Mine runs great on 87. No hesitation, knock, or anything else. So I would see NO performance increase with 91. (i.e. my 0-60 times would be the same)



higher octane is kinda like a pedal commander. Makes you feel all manly but doesnt actually do much 0-60 wise.

The raptor is INTENDED to run on 91 but will run on 87. They have to make it run on 87, maybe thats all you could get? Or people are too cheap or ignorant to run 91. But they aren't going to cripple the tune when more power is avail on a better fuel.
You do get knock on 87 and the computer is quick to pull out timing. If you always run 87 then you likely never hear the knock because it doesn't instantly reset. But fill it with 91 then when empty fill with 87 and immediately mash the throttle and you will hear, albeit just for an instant.
4 octane is not a whole lot of difference but on 91 vs 87 i guarantee more power, better fuel economy and long term engine reliability



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[FatBuoy]

So, here's what I gather from all of the input, and what's next.

- Lower octane will potentially dial back performance, but not create the issue I am experiencing.

- The weephole thing is real, but shouldn't be impacting me at 1,000 miles

- Sasquatch is real and catches way too much shit. Again, everyone is too quick to pounce. If I jump off a cliff, the Sasquatch haters may very well too.

- I'm taking the PC off and going to the dealership for diagnosis

 

[jabroni619]

Nope. Its imagination.

If the vehicle runs as intended on 87 octane (meaning no knock, etc) then there is no added performance running 91.

If the vehicle is a higher compression engine or INTENDED to run on 91, then yes, it will have better performance with 91.

Mine runs great on 87. No hesitation, knock, or anything else. So I would see NO performance increase with 91. (i.e. my 0-60 times would be the same)

higher octane is kinda like a pedal commander. Makes you feel all manly but doesnt actually do much 0-60 wise.

You were wrong about what ford said, you're also wrong about how engines work. There's a thing called knock retard, when there's knock, which the sensors will detect far earlier than you can, it retards the timing until there is no knock (if it can) this reduces performance. So just because there is no knock doesn't mean there isn't performance being left on the table.

The engine IS intended to run on premium. I provided you a link and even quoted it for you to make it easier. What part are you confused about exactly? Or is this one of those scenarios that happen all to often on forums where you know you were mistaken but insist to walk the path of ignorance because you don't want to admit you were mistaken?

 

[Bullishone]

You were wrong about what ford said, you're also wrong about how engines work. There's a thing called knock retard, when there's knock, which the sensors will detect far earlier than you can, it retards the timing until there is no knock (if it can) this reduces performance. So just because there is no knock doesn't mean there isn't performance being left on the table.

The engine IS intended to run on premium. I provided you a link and even quoted it for you to make it easier. What part are you confused about exactly? Or is this one of those scenarios that happen all to often on forums where you know you were mistaken but insist to walk the path of ignorance because you don't want to admit you were mistaken?

I've been saying the same thing since this truck came out. 91+ only.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

 

[crash457]

i would i dont even own an ecoboost and i went and researched what quatch is saying and every bit of information he has posted in this thread is true. a simple google search and 15 minutes of your time will point you in the right direction.


he may not have all the answers but at least its an answer to point someone with issues in the right direction. all you other guys are just bitching because you dont like who is saying it i guess idk.

but the weep hole thing is a valid fix for a lot of eco guys, if you are shutting down that info because quatch told you, then you a dummy. literally the dude is trying to help and yall trolling the shit out of the thread.

Sasquatch is an ******. The weephole fix for condensation is related to ecoboost engines prior to '15. In pre '15 models the IC is unobstructed (even by the front plate mount) and was subjected to overcooling the charge air under some circumstances, resulting in condensation. In the '15 and newer models the IC is more obstructed (on purpose) and uses electronic fans and the active grill shutters to control the ambient temperature of the IC. This is to avoid overcooling the IC and keeping condensation from forming. While the internet is full of know cases of '10-'14 EB that have the condensation issue, I have yet to see a single issue for a '15 and newer EB. Sasquatch is nothing more than a troll who offers nothing of value to anyone.

So if you think he's so great maybe you should respond to his OKCupid ad and you to can hook up and play with each other's weepholes.