• Sign Up! To view all forums and unlock additional cool features

    Welcome to the #1 Explorer ST Forum and Explorer ST community dedicated to Explorer ST owners and enthusiasts. Register for an account, it's free and it's easy, so don't hesitate to join the Explorer ST Forum today!


Fuel octane?

LokiWolf

Active Member
Messages
580
Reactions
315
Points
182
Location
Henrico, VA
#22
If you have the document, print the bit about the fuel? Your answer was not definitive.
Hahahaha! I have a degree in chemistry. My answer is not definitive. That is hilarious.

I cannot. That would be in direct violation of the use agreement. I am sure you can find it out there if you look deep enough. Understanding it is a whole other ball of wax.

The J1349 Standard for Premium Fuel is 92 Octane.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 

TMac

1000 Post Club
Messages
1,695
Reactions
1,454
Points
262
Location
Knoxville, TN
#23
What is your obsession with fuel?
If you've seen his other posts, he's not happy with his ST in general. He can't find or afford premium fuel, so now everything is Ford's fault. My guess is he's looking for anything substantial to try to get a buyback.
 

Messages
106
Reactions
39
Points
27
Location
Merritt Island, FL, USA
#24
We can buy No-E fuel here in Florida, they say for boats....haha
Have to go to marinas and things like that. Buc-ee's in Daytona and St Augustine have 8 pumps of Hi No-E
 

Messages
84
Reactions
19
Points
7
Location
Sechelt, BC, Canada
#25
1. You are right, I think the ST is a pos, but ultimately, I paid for it and its mine. As per affording premium fuel, I paid cash for the car and yes, I do regret it. Ad hominem attacks on me are peurile and the sign of a tiny mind. Blame the buyer? How many of these have been bought back by Ford?
2. Ford promises performance based on a standard that is not readily available to the consumer, not only the actual information of the standard but also the fuel its based on is elusive. If it is 92 octane, that is not available in large parts of the US and also not in Canada. My town its 91 maximum. You might as well make the standard based on magic beans.
3. I am not obsessed, just curious.
4. Hahahahaha! I have a Business degree.
5. If that engine is supposed to run on 92 octane but you run it on a lower grade, are you relying on a knock sensor to keep it healthy? That's a pretty tenuous grip on reliability.
6. Car companies never lie or mislead...Volkswagen was a paragon of virtue, until it wasn't.
 

UNBROKEN

4000 Post Club
Messages
4,229
Reactions
4,933
Points
352
Location
Houston, TX, USA
#27
1. You are right, I think the ST is a pos, but ultimately, I paid for it and its mine. As per affording premium fuel, I paid cash for the car and yes, I do regret it. Ad hominem attacks on me are peurile and the sign of a tiny mind. Blame the buyer? How many of these have been bought back by Ford?
2. Ford promises performance based on a standard that is not readily available to the consumer, not only the actual information of the standard but also the fuel its based on is elusive. If it is 92 octane, that is not available in large parts of the US and also not in Canada. My town its 91 maximum. You might as well make the standard based on magic beans.
3. I am not obsessed, just curious.
4. Hahahahaha! I have a Business degree.
5. If that engine is supposed to run on 92 octane but you run it on a lower grade, are you relying on a knock sensor to keep it healthy? That's a pretty tenuous grip on reliability.
6. Car companies never lie or mislead...Volkswagen was a paragon of virtue, until it wasn't.
1-6...you didn’t do your due diligence and now are here to do nothing but cry about it. The power difference between 91 and 92 is again...single digits. You will NEVER feel it...ever.
Suck it up, buttercup. Just go drive the damn thing and enjoy it.
 

LokiWolf

Active Member
Messages
580
Reactions
315
Points
182
Location
Henrico, VA
#28
We can buy No-E fuel here in Florida, they say for boats....haha
Have to go to marinas and things like that. Buc-ee's in Daytona and St Augustine have 8 pumps of Hi No-E
And not the best to put in your ST from a performance point. On stock tuning the best fuel you can find most places to put in the ST is 93(E10).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 

Messages
84
Reactions
19
Points
7
Location
Sechelt, BC, Canada
#29
Very helpful, thank you. If none of this concerns you, why are you replying to my thread? Go back to painting your taillights black and don't overtax your intellect.
 

LokiWolf

Active Member
Messages
580
Reactions
315
Points
182
Location
Henrico, VA
#30
Very helpful, thank you. If none of this concerns you, why are you replying to my thread? Go back to painting your taillights black and don't overtax your intellect.
This isn’t your thread…that is the other one…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 

UNBROKEN

4000 Post Club
Messages
4,229
Reactions
4,933
Points
352
Location
Houston, TX, USA
#31
Very helpful, thank you. If none of this concerns you, why are you replying to my thread? Go back to painting your taillights black and don't overtax your intellect.
This is StormtrooperST’s thread...not a great time to blast someone about intellect and posting on “your” thread. lol
 

Messages
399
Reactions
233
Points
37
Location
Ontario, Canada
#32
Easy answer:

50% 91 octane + 50% 93 octane = 100% 92 octane or 100% fun driving your ST.
 

Messages
84
Reactions
19
Points
7
Location
Sechelt, BC, Canada
#33
Ooh a mob. The point is (sorry Stormtrooper, your thread) there is some confusion about fuel.

So, do you have anything to add to the discussion on fuel?

Its still not reasonable to trumpet a standard that a large percentage of your customers can't attain, so in the absence of any information to the contrary, I call foul; its borderline fraud to advertise a HP number that is unobtainable. An organization that was upfront and proud of its products would know this. After all, most of us bought these cars for their performance or at least the perception of same, but their claims are largely based on claptrap.
 

UNBROKEN

4000 Post Club
Messages
4,229
Reactions
4,933
Points
352
Location
Houston, TX, USA
#34
That would appear to be your opinion and only your opinion. You’re complaining about (for the 3rd time) a difference in HP you cannot feel while driving. It really makes no sense to be this upset about something so insignificant.
Ford clearly states the standard used for testing and says it makes X power with X fuel. The only person that didn’t do their job here is you.
 

Messages
84
Reactions
19
Points
7
Location
Sechelt, BC, Canada
#35
So whose opinion do you think I should be writing about? Yes, of course its mine. aren't you stating your opinion?

Still no useful contribution.

You are assuming that the average buyer should fully understand the ramifications of the marketing claptrap that Ford prints? Gee, I wonder why we have consumer protection laws and associations? Obviously in your world they are not needed because its all the buyer's fault?

I'm still curious to know if the standard that we are discussing is with "pure" 92 octane gasoline or a 92 octane blend including ethanol? Ethanol has significantly lower BTUs than gasoline, I wonder how that effects the results? Maybe our expert with the chemistry degree can explain?
 

Messages
106
Reactions
39
Points
27
Location
Merritt Island, FL, USA
#37
BTW, if the issue is HP output, move to Denver and see what the HP output is.

Individual results may vary due to any number of variables, like crappy gas

Just sayin'
 

UNBROKEN

4000 Post Club
Messages
4,229
Reactions
4,933
Points
352
Location
Houston, TX, USA
#38
BTW, if the issue is HP output, move to Denver and see what the HP output is.

Individual results may vary due to any number of variables, like crappy gas

Just sayin'
You mean my sea level power won’t be the same at 5000’ elevation? For shame! Ford lied to me...that’s fraud!
 

LokiWolf

Active Member
Messages
580
Reactions
315
Points
182
Location
Henrico, VA
#40
I'm still curious to know if the standard that we are discussing is with "pure" 92 octane gasoline or a 92 octane blend including ethanol? Ethanol has significantly lower BTUs than gasoline, I wonder how that effects the results? Maybe our expert with the chemistry degree can explain?
You are trying to make points you DON'T understand. Please stop.

The 92 Octane Fuel they use for the standard J1349 power testing is neither gas nor Ethanol actually. BTU's are pointless in this conversation. BTU's of a fuel have no effect on its power potential, if the fuel can flow faster. Ethanol is capable of FAR more power in these motors than gas if the Pump could keep up, that is why E50(Tuned) is the peak power point with the Stock Pump(It can't flow fast enough for full potential E85). Power = work/time. Why is Ethanol capable of more power, Octane rating and it's resistance to pre-detonation and it has some secondary physical advantages because of cooling.

The reason the J1349 is now used, is to prevent this EXACT conversation. It is a standard that most manufacturers use. Most are conservative on their reporting of this number, because of the inconsistency of fuel available. Do you think EVERY ST coming off the lot make exactly 400HP at the crank on 92 Octane Gas? No. There is a percentage of error, and give. Most publish on the low side.
 



Top