Ruger, seriously... Explain how I got such vastly different fuel economies on the two different fuel types, then?
No, I didn't read those articles, because none of them were about the Raptor. "Any test without the benefit of calibrated test equipment and a closed course isn't a test at all." And if all that fancy equipment and nice course isn't used in conjunction with the vehicle being discussed, isn't it just as useless?
Did I use the pump to determine how much fuel I was using? Yes. Is it "scientifically" accurate? Probably not, but since I'm paying for whatever the amount on the pump says, what else matters?
Did I use my odometer to determine miles driven? Yes. Is that 100% accurate? Probably not, but its not like fuel type has any bearing on the vehicles odometer. 50 miles on the dash will be 50 miles regardless if it was 87 or 91. So, again, what does that matter?
Despite the inaccuracies in the measurements of my "ametueristic" tests, I'm still willing to bet, had they been measured with proper scientifically calibrated instruments by professionals the difference in their results and mine would still be less than .5 mpg for each. That still leaves 3-4 mpg between 87 and 91 unaccounted for.
Did I test on a closed course in similar atmospheric conditions? Of course not. I tested it in the course of my typical daily driving, because that's all that matters. I don't buy a thousand gallons of gas a year to drive on a closed course. This is also why I say 3-4 tanks per variety to test. After 1200-1500 miles on a single variety one can be relatively assured that the contents of the tank are of a single variety (not blended with the remainder of previous tanks). It also assures that the vehicle will see a wider variety of conditions (weather, road work, a few minutes sitting idle here and there, etc) one is likely to normally encounter with each fuel type.
My "typical" daily drive is 80 some miles of mostly highway driving, anywhere from 55-70mph in 10-15 mile stretches. My "tests" were conducted how I drive, because that's how 99% of the miles on my truck are going to be put there. I tested my truck under real world conditions, being driven in my normal style, over routes that I normally drive. What else matters?
I never did any real tests for in town stop and go driving at 40mph or less. I have to figure that 87 & 91 would be closer to each other in those circumstances. Maybe that's how you tested and maybe that's why there is less than a difference. I don't know.
All in all I'm well aware of the difference between my test and a scientific one, but that "reliable data" really isn't reliable outside of the lab since we tend to spend most of our time driving in conditions that vastly differ from the controlled environment in which your "ideal" tests were performed.
As for your, "snark"...
... Blow it out your scientifically tested tail pipe! I never got nasty or attacked anyone in any of my posts. (Note, disagreeing and posting a counter argument in a discussion is not an attack.) You don't want to use 91? Fine, don't. I don't care what you do, but don't try to tell me I'm full of shit when I can show you an odometer reading, fuel amount, and fuel price for every ounce of gas I've put in my raptor from the word go. I know what my real world obtained data says.
Have a good evening.
