new 2014 mustang v6 low 17mpg help!! - Page 2 - Mustang Evolution

Go Back   Mustang Evolution > 4 Cylinder | V6 | Classic Mustangs || Tech and Talk > 2011-2014 V6 Mustang



Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about them here!
Old 02-27-2014, 12:01 AM   #36
Registered Member
Regular
 
Sebas395's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 40
Quote:
Originally Posted by JSchu22 View Post
If that's true then I believe it's a right foot problem.

Hahahaha yeah!
Sebas395 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 02-27-2014, 09:53 PM   #37
Registered Member
Regular
 
UltArc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Region: Ohio
Posts: 1,782
Where you live will have an affect.

Temperature has a huge affect. My indicaee
__________________
2012 Mustang EPA: 19/29
2012 AeroStang: 40/46

My sponsor, Tokkyo Nutrition, offers 50% off your entire order with the code "PowerHouse"
UltArc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2014, 09:58 PM   #38
Registered Member
Regular
 
UltArc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Region: Ohio
Posts: 1,782
Where you live will have an affect.

Temperature has a huge affect. My indicated mileage is about 75% of its average- Mustang is only seeing 30 mpg and Insight is only seeing 60 mpg. Cold ground, engine heat wasted to warm, cold transmission, bearings, tires, denser air, it goes on. Also, we have winter fuel- less BTUs. 1 gallon of lowered BTUs is the same volume, but less energy.

If you take short trips, that will hurt much worse. Grille block will help the bay warm up faster. To my knowledge I am the only person on here who drives for fuel economy lol

Aiming for pole at GGP this April!
__________________
2012 Mustang EPA: 19/29
2012 AeroStang: 40/46

My sponsor, Tokkyo Nutrition, offers 50% off your entire order with the code "PowerHouse"
UltArc is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 02-27-2014, 11:21 PM   #39
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: 00
Region: Other
Posts: 1,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltArc View Post
Where you live will have an affect.

Temperature has a huge affect. My indicated mileage is about 75% of its average- Mustang is only seeing 30 mpg and Insight is only seeing 60 mpg. Cold ground, engine heat wasted to warm, cold transmission, bearings, tires, denser air, it goes on. Also, we have winter fuel- less BTUs. 1 gallon of lowered BTUs is the same volume, but less energy.

If you take short trips, that will hurt much worse. Grille block will help the bay warm up faster. To my knowledge I am the only person on here who drives for fuel economy lol

Aiming for pole at GGP this April!
Im with you on the fuel economy. My best is 32mpg at 65mpg. Thats filling up at a gas station a block from the interstate and doing all highway.
Bigshow14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2014, 11:31 AM   #40
Registered Member
Regular
 
dacm99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Deland
Region: Florida
Posts: 135
I have to comment here. To all whom swear that they see an increase in HP and MPG with using 91 or 93, I have my doubts. Your octane rating is used for compresion ratios inside the engine. If you use a tuner and change to a 91 or 93 octane your literally changing the mix ratio in the engine resulting in different compresion ratios. You gain nothing running a high octane fuel on an engine tuned at a lower compression ratio without running a tune.

My nickel.
dacm99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2014, 11:35 AM   #41
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Miami
Region: Florida
Posts: 342
Quote:
Originally Posted by dacm99 View Post
I have to comment here. To all whom swear that they see an increase in HP and MPG with using 91 or 93, I have my doubts. Your octane rating is used for compresion ratios inside the engine. If you use a tuner and change to a 91 or 93 octane your literally changing the mix ratio in the engine resulting in different compresion ratios. You gain nothing running a high octane fuel on an engine tuned at a lower compression ratio without running a tune.

My nickel.
Your comment is worthless without prove!
Ranger052 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2014, 11:43 AM   #42
Registered Member
Regular
 
dacm99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Deland
Region: Florida
Posts: 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ranger052 View Post
Your comment is worthless without prove!
https://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/t...ion_ratio.html

Better explanation of the air fuel mixture. Oh and my family ran a speed shop for 30 years rebuilding sprint and stock car engines.

Now that's a dime.
dacm99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2014, 11:45 AM   #43
Registered Member
Regular
 
dacm99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Deland
Region: Florida
Posts: 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ranger052 View Post
Your comment is worthless without prove!

The compression ratio of an internal-combustion engine or external combustion engine is a value that represents the ratio of the volume of its combustion chamber from its largest capacity to its smallest capacity. It is a fundamental specification for many common combustion engines.

In a piston engine it is the ratio between the volume of the cylinder and combustion chamber when the piston is at the bottom of its stroke, and the volume of the combustion chamber when the piston is at the top of its stroke.[1]

Picture a cylinder and its combustion chamber with the piston at the bottom of its stroke containing 1000 cc of air (900 cc in the cylinder plus 100 cc in the combustion chamber). When the piston has moved up to the top of its stroke inside the cylinder, and the remaining volume inside the head or combustion chamber has been reduced to 100 cc, then the compression ratio would be proportionally described as 1000:100, or with fractional reduction, a 10:1 compression ratio.

A high compression ratio is desirable because it allows an engine to extract more mechanical energy from a given mass of air-fuel mixture due to its higher thermal efficiency. High ratios place the available oxygen and fuel molecules into a reduced space along with the adiabatic heat of compression–causing better mixing and evaporation of the fuel droplets. Thus they allow increased power at the moment of ignition and the extraction of more useful work from that power by expanding the hot gas to a greater degree.

Higher compression ratios will however make gasoline engines subject to engine knocking if lower octane rated fuel is used, also known as detonation. This can reduce efficiency or damage the engine if knock sensors are not present to ****** the timing. However, knock sensors have been a requirement of the OBD-II specification used in 1996 Model Year Vehicles and newer.

Diesel engines on the other hand operate on the principle of compression ignition, so that a fuel which resists autoignition will cause late ignition which will also lead to engine knock.
dacm99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2014, 11:57 AM   #44
Evolution's Finest
Supporter
 
ronnie948's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Daytona Beach
Region: Florida
Posts: 3,960
It says in the manual to use only 87 octane

I have read a while ago how much better and what better MPG I could get with running 93 and the story was that the cars computer would boost the timing and create more power. Well, I did run three tanks of Shell 93 Octane and guess what.
I felt no difference
Mile per Gallon remained the same as the 87 octane provided
Each fill-up just costs more
I grant you that I do still have the stock tune, I have always averaged 23 to 25 MPG around town /highway combo.
I much rather pay for 87 octane then 93 octane. My car always runs great and it never pings or spark knocks on the 87 octane.
I do not drive to save gas but drive to enjoy my Mustang. I have once got 34MPG but on the interstate at a very steady 70 MPH. (Cruise Control On) It did go down to 30 when traffic got heavy and I had to foot it and keep varying the speed because traffic was not steady. At least it was less expensive 87 octane I was using.
Ronnie
__________________
2012-candy red- V-6 MCA, Automatic Trans. CFM Valve cover breather. MMD blackTail light trim.Magnaflow axle back street mufflers, JLT oil catch can.MMD hood struts.
Airaid Cold Air intake. red caliper covers, 3.7L performance engine cover, Flat black hood spears.Boss 302 strut brace, CDC rear panel, Trunk Cargo net,--Dash carpet cover,
Viser stickers to cover ugly yellow warning crap,Aluminum driveshafft and Swarr Bar.
ronnie948 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2014, 12:07 PM   #45
Staff

Regular
Staff
 
Strange Mud's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Small Town
Region: Connecticut
Posts: 5,020
When I went from reg to premium my mpg went up slightly (avg 1.2 or so) done with math. I went as far as figuring $ per mile and it was a break even. I have kept it up although my butt dyno still ain't convinced. I am another that is somewhat dissapointed with the mpg I get 22-24. I admit to keeping it at least 2k rpm most of the time. I have the 3.31's I even was a bit dissapointed when I put on my 245-45 19's Neros that I bought off GTStyles (thx man) I was hoping for more than the a bit less than 1 mpg increase over my summer only tires.

look another nickel!

+1 on the fun per $ a base model V6 Mustang provides.
__________________
2012 V6 with suspension, shifting, stopping and sound mods.
Strange Mud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2014, 12:43 PM   #46
Registered Member
Regular
 
GrabberMeBlue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Somewhere
Region: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,710
Quote:
Originally Posted by dacm99 View Post
I have to comment here. To all whom swear that they see an increase in HP and MPG with using 91 or 93, I have my doubts. Your octane rating is used for compresion ratios inside the engine. If you use a tuner and change to a 91 or 93 octane your literally changing the mix ratio in the engine resulting in different compresion ratios. You gain nothing running a high octane fuel on an engine tuned at a lower compression ratio without running a tune.

My nickel.

Huh? Compression ratio is the volume of the combustion chamber. Tuning and octane ratings of fuel have nothing to do with combustion chamber volume. Boring and or stroking a motor will change compression ratio, but even that is dependent on the parts used.
__________________
2012 Grabber Blue V6 Convertible
1995 Red Trans Am Convertible
1979 Gold Trans Am
GrabberMeBlue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2014, 01:02 PM   #47
Registered Member
Regular
 
dacm99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Deland
Region: Florida
Posts: 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrabberMeBlue View Post
Huh? Compression ratio is the volume of the combustion chamber. Tuning and octane ratings of fuel have nothing to do with combustion chamber volume. Boring and or stroking a motor will change compression ratio, but even that is dependent on the parts used.
Yes, you're correct. And if you have a higher compresion ratio you need higher octane fuel (detonation), which is why multiple fuel ratings are avalable to consumers. From the factory our V6 Mustang only requires an 87 octane for maximum efficency. Hence my argument that using 93 octane has no benefit.
dacm99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2014, 01:43 PM   #48
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Duncan, Ok
Region: Oklahoma
Posts: 93
You saying a tune is necessary to receive a difference in fuel mileage with higher octane fuels is completely wrong. These cars without a tune know what octane is being ran through them and make the adjustments themselves for the timing.
Colby2013 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2014, 01:43 PM   #49
Staff

Regular
Staff
 
Strange Mud's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Small Town
Region: Connecticut
Posts: 5,020
Stock tune for me, thinking about this when I get my toy out of storage in the spring I'll try the experiment again.
__________________
2012 V6 with suspension, shifting, stopping and sound mods.
Strange Mud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2014, 02:54 PM   #50
Registered Member
Regular
 
FastFord13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Montreal
Region: Canada
Posts: 4,259
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colby2013 View Post
You saying a tune is necessary to receive a difference in fuel mileage with higher octane fuels is completely wrong. These cars without a tune know what octane is being ran through them and make the adjustments themselves for the timing.
They WILL also produce more power with high octane fuel (93). The computer will advance timing when it detects higher octane fuel. Whether you "feel" it or not it will produce more power. I'll post the link again explaining this. These new engined are not from yesturyears where higher octane has no real gains. Tuning will obviously have more of an effect. http://v6mustangperformance.com/news...ine-explained/

2013 V6, Candy apple metallic.
Gt500 spoiler, Gt500 stripes,2010 Gt premium wheels, Pirelli tires,painted side mirrors covers,upper and lower black billet grille,pony projection lights,boss 302 strut tower brace,barton shifter bracket,Airaid Cai,bama tuned,bbk shorty headers,Roush AB.
FastFord13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2014, 07:39 PM   #51
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Duncan, Ok
Region: Oklahoma
Posts: 93
Quote:
Originally Posted by FastFord13 View Post
They WILL also produce more power with high octane fuel (93). The computer will advance timing when it detects higher octane fuel. Whether you "feel" it or not it will produce more power. I'll post the link again explaining this. These new engined are not from yesturyears where higher octane has no real gains. Tuning will obviously have more of an effect. Ford Mustang 3.7L V6 Engine Explained | A 3.7L V6 Mustang Owner Resource for Modifications and Repairs

2013 V6, Candy apple metallic.
Gt500 spoiler, Gt500 stripes,2010 Gt premium wheels, Pirelli tires,painted side mirrors covers,upper and lower black billet grille,pony projection lights,boss 302 strut tower brace,barton shifter bracket,Airaid Cai,bama tuned,bbk shorty headers,Roush AB.
This ^

In some of my datalogging with Lund the guy I was working with told me that even though all I have available to me is 91 octane fuel that I was still being given a 93 tune to run because even though I had a tune, the car itself was making the timing adjustment so no damage was going to be caused.
Colby2013 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2014, 07:48 PM   #52
Registered Member
Regular
 
JRockDetroit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Detroit
Region: Michigan
Posts: 72
MY V6 now has about 800 miles on it. I can get 31 on the highway. Until about 500 miles, I couldn't get above 27. Give it time if its still new.
JRockDetroit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2014, 07:03 PM   #53
Registered Member
Regular
 
TedG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Florida/Ohio
Region: Florida
Posts: 227
My '14 V6 averages about 17 around town and I get 30-31 on a flat highway. It's not the greatest, but I didn't buy the car with MPG as the priority.

You can't help but smile when the CAI's deep thrush sound builds and the tune kicks in.

For me, that's worth the extra bucks for gas.

If I was real concerned about MPG, I would have gotten a Fiesta.

But that's just me.
TedG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2014, 08:24 AM   #54
Registered Member
Regular
 
Mike2014V6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Ephrata pa
Posts: 156
I have a 2014 v6 with 4000 miles on it and driving a mix of highway and town I am still avg 15.7mpg. I do have some mods and a tune at 93 but it has never been above 17mpg from the day I got it. The problem here is its a 3.7 with 315hp stock. Driven in perfect conditions with 0 aggressive driving, the EPA may be possible. I had an 09 v6 that I would get 22 avg. The 09' is a 4.0 and the 14' is a smaller engine and a lot more hp...only makes sense. (I drive both cars the same style). Got to pay to play kids.
Mike2014V6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-03-2014, 08:14 PM   #55
Registered Member
Regular
 
UltArc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Region: Ohio
Posts: 1,782
305 HP.

The EPA estimates are a joke, if driven the right way.
__________________
2012 Mustang EPA: 19/29
2012 AeroStang: 40/46

My sponsor, Tokkyo Nutrition, offers 50% off your entire order with the code "PowerHouse"
UltArc is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Lower Navigation
Go Back   Mustang Evolution > 4 Cylinder | V6 | Classic Mustangs || Tech and Talk > 2011-2014 V6 Mustang

Tags
2014 mustang

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How to: 4.2L V6 Mustang Engine Swap Danger Dude Pre-2005 V6 Mustang 85 11-14-2015 08:51 PM
Exhausts For 2014 Mustang V6 MV1685 2011-2014 V6 Mustang 12 06-13-2014 02:33 PM
1998 Mustang V6 Swap to a V8 Doughd24 Pre-2005 V6 Mustang 11 02-03-2014 10:51 AM

» Like Us On Facebook



01:59 PM


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0

MustangEvolution.com is in no way associated with or endorsed by Ford Motor Company.