What gas are you using?

[AvoidTheBoyd]

[/COLOR]Edit*
"The Raptor Supplement Manual for the gen 1's even stated the 6.2L produces 401hp on 87 and 411hp on premium."

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro[/QUOTE]

The G1 engine has nothing to do with this. My 5.4L in my 2010 FX4 stated the same. It was published with 2 sets of HP/TQ numbers, one for 87 and one for E85. There is a sensor in those trucks that detects the presence of ethanol and advances the timing to take advantage of that. Neither the G2 Raptor or the regular Ecoboost are E85 rated and do not have ethanol sensors in the fuel systems. Therefore the G2 will only see a power increase while increasing octane if the knock sensor was actively retarding the timing with the lower octane fuel. Which very well may be the case. I am not pushing 87, I am just skeptical if higher octane is always needed.

 

[ogdobber]

[/COLOR]Edit*
"The Raptor Supplement Manual for the gen 1's even stated the 6.2L produces 401hp on 87 and 411hp on premium."

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

The G1 engine has nothing to do with this. My 5.4L in my 2010 FX4 stated the same. It was published with 2 sets of HP/TQ numbers, one for 87 and one for E85. There is a sensor in those trucks that detects the presence of ethanol and advances the timing to take advantage of that. Neither the G2 Raptor or the regular Ecoboost are E85 rated and do not have ethanol sensors in the fuel systems. Therefore the G2 will only see a power increase while increasing octane if the knock sensor was actively retarding the timing with the lower octane fuel. Which very well may be the case. I am not pushing 87, I am just skeptical if higher octane is always needed.[/QUOTE]



Im not talking about the 5.4 and definitely not ethanol. Read again. 6.2 on 87 is 401 and on 91 its 411.
(Note 6.2 is not e85 compatible)
I dont have anything to back up on the 17 raptor, but im sure its similar to the 6.2 raptor and i guarantee there is a wider variance between 87 and premium


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[AvoidTheBoyd]

There is static compression ratio and effective compression ratio. Effective compression ratio is a calculation that takes into account the higher incoming air charge pressure generated by the turbo boost. This creates higher cylinder pressures and temperatures which can lead to pre-ignition. The piston still compresses the charge in the cylinder at a 10:1 ratio regardless.

The only explanation for 10 more horsepower is that the knock sensor was retarding the timing on 87 octane and Ford was OK with that. Which may be the same for the Gen 2. There is nothing in that fuel that can add 10 horsepower on an identical engine. The engine management system is the only thing that can give you 10 hp.

 

[ogdobber]

There is static compression ratio and effective compression ratio. Effective compression ratio is a calculation that takes into account the higher incoming air charge pressure generated by the turbo boost. This creates higher cylinder pressures and temperatures which can lead to pre-ignition. The piston still compresses the charge in the cylinder at a 10:1 ratio regardless.

---------- Post added at 03:52 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:43 PM ----------













The only explanation for 10 more horsepower is that the knock sensor was retarding the timing on 87 octane and Ford was OK with that. Which may be the same for the Gen 2. There is nothing in that fuel that can add 10 horsepower on an identical engine. The engine management system is the only thing that can give you 10 hp.

Nice google response. Except for the last part you added.
The turbo compresses the air, same as the piston does. Thats why its called "effective compression ratio" and even though the static may stay the same, the higher the boost, the higher the effective ratio is

Yes! Now you are getting it. Better fuel doesn't add power, it only creates the opportunity to make more power

The 6.2 makes the most power on 91, putting 100 octane wont do a bit of good unless you tune the ecu for the higher octane.
The 3.5tt im sure is the same. Do you think ford would tune it for 87 and leave power on the table? Definitely not

Btw fix your post. You quoted me with something you said


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[AvoidTheBoyd]

I'm pretty sure I have understood the concept all along this discussion. Sorry for the quote problem. Why don't you take a screenshot where I took my "google response" from if you want to be a DB? I was simply tring to clarify boost does not equal or change compression ratio. You were correct to point out effective compression ratio, but your phrasing was confusing. I thought I was staying civil, in a civil discussion.

 

[Wilson]

E-30 is the best bang for the buck

 

[shammer]

After reading all this I think I will go fill it up with diesel and call it a day...

 

[Yeti12]

Anything done to the raptor for the e30?

Any dyno numbers on 91/93 vs the e30?