New tune version 4.0 available!

[XR650R]

Going over the specs, is this a good tune for people running regular (87 octane) fuel?
which tune affects MPG in a positive way (running regular)?

You'll want to run premium with any tune. The stock car can run 87, but it won't have as much power.

 

[ProDigit]

You'll want to run premium with any tune. The stock car can run 87, but it won't have as much power.

For me, it has plenty of power to get around town.

87 in a car made for high octane. Wow I'm done. I just can't.

87 is the recommended fuel for the Fiesta (according to the manual), but perhaps you know better than Ford?

I'm just trying to find ways to get around town more economically, while when needed, fuel up with 91 or 93 octane fuel.
However, since 90% of my driving is street use as a daily driver, I hope to save a penny with 87, and was just wondering if there was a tune for better mpg available.

I don't think the idea deserves the trolling comment.

 

[danbfree]

Going over the specs, is this a good tune for people running regular (87 octane) fuel?
which tune affects MPG in a positive way (running regular)?

OK, I'll bite and assume you're OK getting even less power than Ford's already neutered factory tune and more carbon build up and just say that if you want fuel economy, reliability and, oh ya, the power that it's rated for, you simply run premium... also, just about all tunes are the same on the freeway anyway, the difference comes when you put your foot down. So if anything, even my high performance tune has helped freeway mileage a little by simply being more optimized and not needing to put my foot into as much... Sorry for being facetious, but this is all truth: Premium gets better mileage and cleaner engine, tunes actually help mileage by being more optimized and not requiring as much throttle for day to day driving too.

 

[danbfree]

For me, it has plenty of power to get around town.



87 is the recommended fuel for the Fiesta (according to the manual), but perhaps you know better than Ford?

I'm just trying to find ways to get around town more economically, while when needed, fuel up with 91 or 93 octane fuel.
However, since 90% of my driving is street use as a daily driver, I hope to save a penny with 87, and was just wondering if there was a tune for better mpg available.

I don't think the idea deserves the trolling comment.

NO, you need to read again and watch how you speak to people here who know what they are talking about. 93 IS the *recommended* fuel, 87 is the minimum acceptable to not damage the engine. It will not tun as lean or hot as optimal so you will get more carbon build up and poorer mileage. You bought the wrong car if you are unwilling to give it the gas it needs to perform right. Are you the guy that was trying to say the same "87 recommended" thing on FB and ignored me? so instead you just keep fishing for the answer that you'd prefer here?

 

[Ford ST]

93 for the specified power output is recommended by Ford. The car can run 87 safely but will make less power. It clearly says in the manual for Max performance use 93 octane.

Sent from my LG-LS997 using Tapatalk

 

[danbfree]

93 for the specified power output is recommended by Ford. The car can run 87 safely but will make less power. It clearly says in the manual for Max performance use 93 octane.

Sure, safely as in it won't implode with knock now, but it will get poorer mileage and lower power in the short term... if you run it all the time you WILL end up with carbon buildup far faster than driving with premium too...

 

[ProDigit]

I still have to see if I'll need one.
The temps haven't yet exceeded 85F on my daily commute. Even the 1.4 liter Cruze did well up to about 100F.
This car has a lower gear ratio, 200cc more, and the turbo kicking in 1000rpm later.
I don't think, even with heat soak, that i'll be lacking any power with 87 for commuting.
The majority of the time, I'm not racing it, just daily commuting.

The performance of the 1.6 liter is sufficient, up until where the boost takes over (then it's plenty).

 

[Ford ST]

Sure, safely as in it won't implode with knock now, but it will get poorer mileage and lower power in the short term... if you run it all the time you WILL end up with carbon buildup far faster than driving with premium...

Dude I fully agree with you. I only run 93.

Sent from my LG-LS997 using Tapatalk

 

[danbfree]

Dude I fully agree with you. I only run 93.

Sorry, I noticed my tone afterward, I was just trying to add to your point!

 

[Ford ST]

Sorry, I noticed my tone afterward, I was just trying to add to your point!

Cool.

Sent from my LG-LS997 using Tapatalk

 

[danbfree]

I still have to see if I'll need one.
The temps haven't yet exceeded 85F on my daily commute. Even the 1.4 liter Cruze did well up to about 100F.
This car has a lower gear ratio, 200cc more, and the turbo kicking in 1000rpm later.
I don't think, even with heat soak, that i'll be lacking any power with 87 for commuting.
The majority of the time, I'm not racing it, just daily commuting.

The performance of the 1.6 liter is sufficient, up until where the boost takes over (then it's plenty).

Man, I still think you should just run premium, especially in any heat above 80 it will help with fuel economy by not being as easy to pre-ignite as well... What octane do you have available where you are? 87,89,91? But using premium you will get the low-end torque it should so you don't have to give it even more throttle, which obviously sucks more gas...

 

[Tanner@FingerTuning]

For me, it has plenty of power to get around town.



87 is the recommended fuel for the Fiesta (according to the manual), but perhaps you know better than Ford?

I'm just trying to find ways to get around town more economically, while when needed, fuel up with 91 or 93 octane fuel.
However, since 90% of my driving is street use as a daily driver, I hope to save a penny with 87, and was just wondering if there was a tune for better mpg available.

I don't think the idea deserves the trolling comment.

If you're running one of our tunes definitely do not run 87 octane. For a 91 octane tune run minimum 91 octane, and for a 93 octane tune run a minimum of 93.

 

[XR650R]

Mountune says to run 91 or better with the MP215, So I'm stuck buying premium. Never put regular in it, anyway. I got a turbo because I want all the power. There are more economical cars if you want mileage. The 1.0 is the ticket for that.

 

[ProDigit]

If you're running one of our tunes definitely do not run 87 octane. For a 91 octane tune run minimum 91 octane, and for a 93 octane tune run a minimum of 93.

Answers my question.

-----

Concerning knock, this engine protects against knock. It's drive by wire, so when you press the pedal to the metal, the ECU is going to delay the ignition or something, so performance will be lower; but there won't be any knock.

 

[redmoe]

Just to clarify the manual states 91 or better View attachment 17738

 

[redmoe]

The engine has to detect knock to correct for it. A sudden detonation event may not be detected in time for the ecu to pull timing. With a stock tune and regular daily driving it would have to be very bad fuel or some serious hotspots to cause a destructive event. It’s still not a good practice to rely on the ecu to correct for the fuel. Running 91 or better is cheap insurance.

 

[ProDigit]

.. Or, running 10 gal of regular 87, with a gallon or two of E85. I've been contemplating this for the summer.
Should be cheaper than mid grade 91, (but with lower MPG too).

 

[Tanner@FingerTuning]

Answers my question.

-----

Concerning knock, this engine protects against knock. It's drive by wire, so when you press the pedal to the metal, the ECU is going to delay the ignition or something, so performance will be lower; but there won't be any knock.

There will definitely be knock, the ECU pulling timing is in response to it hearing knock in the first place. While 87 octane can be ran on the OEM tune a 91 octane tune has a different/higher base of timing and boost etc...which would result in a much more aggressive occurrence of detonation when running 87 octane that would be unsafe.

Timing is pulled in a step like fashion when knock is detected, it will pull a certain amount of ignition timing and if knock is still occurring it will pull another increment of timing on and on. This means a large amount of knock could take several iterations of ignition timing decrements where knock is still happening.

 

[danbfree]

.. Or, running 10 gal of regular 87, with a gallon or two of E85. I've been contemplating this for the summer.
Should be cheaper than mid grade 91, (but with lower MPG too).

You're right, with all that trading back and forth of pro's and cons and the minor hassle of using two fuels every fillup you should just run 91, if that's your mid-grade... I wouldn't run anything lower for long-term use, with DI engines it can create carbon buildup even more easily on low octane.

 

[danbfree]

Mountune says to run 91 or better with the MP215, So I'm stuck buying premium. Never put regular in it, anyway. I got a turbo because I want all the power. There are more economical cars if you want mileage. The 1.0 is the ticket for that.

Says the guy who did a symposer delete without even a resonator or muffler delete? Sounds like trying to make it really quiet, which is the opposite of all this performance talk you speak of, LOL...