For those with TP tunes, a question..
Member
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
From: Colorado
Tex...you're right...
[QUOTE=TexEdition]Interesting.. However I think most folks who purchase tunes, custom or canned, realize that while they'll spend more per gallon they're willing to do that for the performance gains. And again most who want tunes, to improve performance, are gonna USE that performance - as in laying the right foot down more often than not.
As far as vendors want to sell their goods.. well, of course. But I'd highly recommend to anyone to do some research before making any sort of modification to their vehicle. Such research would reveal that the Flashpaq, and other canned tunes, are intended for use with stock vehicles. They can't compensate or adjust for who the hell knows what you've done to your engine.
My experience with mods to my '05 4.6L Screw are like this:
Completly stock I got 17.4 mpg highway.I put on a Borla cat-back and my highway mpg went up to 19.2. I then put on a 3" AF1 intake kit and my highway mileage remained 19.2. I've since installed custom tunes from Troyer and on both the 87 performance and 93 performance tunes I've averaged 18.8mpg highway. It would better but I pass on the two-lane roads like I never dared to before the tunes. I calculate mileage the old-fashioned way, fill up, drive, fill up and do the math. So my experience is that the best thing to do for increased mileage is to install a quality straight through exhaust.
Tex: I agree, I purchased my tuner for the same reason and to have the extra umf when I tow a 16' trailer loaded! I was trying to address someones comment regarding use of E85 and the fact that they were using the 93octane tuning while using E85 because of the 105octane rating of E85...IMO...not the smartest thing to do, simply because the flame rate of Ethanol is much lower than gasoline (putting it simply), which results in less energy produced, which is why more E85 is needed to do the same job as good ole 87octane.
BTW: my '06 stock 5.4L gets ~18.4 hiway mpg on the stock tune. I'll be adding a 3" si/so this weekend (Top Speed kit/Magnaflow knockoff w/mandrel bends, fully polished from cat back) so hopefully that'll put me over 20mpg...we'll see!
As far as vendors want to sell their goods.. well, of course. But I'd highly recommend to anyone to do some research before making any sort of modification to their vehicle. Such research would reveal that the Flashpaq, and other canned tunes, are intended for use with stock vehicles. They can't compensate or adjust for who the hell knows what you've done to your engine.
My experience with mods to my '05 4.6L Screw are like this:
Completly stock I got 17.4 mpg highway.I put on a Borla cat-back and my highway mpg went up to 19.2. I then put on a 3" AF1 intake kit and my highway mileage remained 19.2. I've since installed custom tunes from Troyer and on both the 87 performance and 93 performance tunes I've averaged 18.8mpg highway. It would better but I pass on the two-lane roads like I never dared to before the tunes. I calculate mileage the old-fashioned way, fill up, drive, fill up and do the math. So my experience is that the best thing to do for increased mileage is to install a quality straight through exhaust.
Tex: I agree, I purchased my tuner for the same reason and to have the extra umf when I tow a 16' trailer loaded! I was trying to address someones comment regarding use of E85 and the fact that they were using the 93octane tuning while using E85 because of the 105octane rating of E85...IMO...not the smartest thing to do, simply because the flame rate of Ethanol is much lower than gasoline (putting it simply), which results in less energy produced, which is why more E85 is needed to do the same job as good ole 87octane.
BTW: my '06 stock 5.4L gets ~18.4 hiway mpg on the stock tune. I'll be adding a 3" si/so this weekend (Top Speed kit/Magnaflow knockoff w/mandrel bends, fully polished from cat back) so hopefully that'll put me over 20mpg...we'll see!
Last edited by moltman; Jan 11, 2008 at 03:06 AM.
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,184
Likes: 0
From: Austin
Originally Posted by jpdadeo
TP custom tunes are the way to go; that's the bottom line 
I'd not trade my Troyer tuning for anything.. 87 or 93, it's a completely different truck compared to stock and I have no worries that I'm cooking my engine or hammering my transmission.
Honestly, I think all that Troyer does, really, is open up what these things are capable of, removes the restrictions that Ford builds in to please grampaws, the elderly, the old school farmers and such. Nothing wrong with that, those guys buy a lot of trucks. There's just more performance in these powertrains than Ford enables from the factory, and Troyer, and others, are able to liberate it.
Former Sponsor
Joined: Mar 1998
Posts: 13,385
Likes: 4
From: Virginia
I have a couple of comments, first for TexEdition..
The 87 octane tuning already makes so much of a difference on the 5.4 3V's especially, that it's not appropriate to expect that much MORE difference all over again when switching to our premium gas tunes on the 3-valve engines - not with our Troyer Performance custom tuning, as we gain more power on 87 octane than anyone - as we do on premium. For example, the average gain on 87 octane from tuning alone on a bone-stock truck is usually in the 25 RWHP range - now when we tune it for 93, the gains vary more as the fuel quality seems to vary more with premium, especially these days - but usually you pick up anywhere from another 10 to another 18 RWHP - the point being, it not going to be DOUBLE what we gained on 87 octane like it is when we tune the older 5.4 2-valve F-150's (the 1997-2003 models), for example. In those 1997-203 5.4 2V F-150's, we typically gain 12-15 RWHP on 87, and 30+ RWHP on premium, for example - but the 5.4 3V's are different.
For moltman - the cost delta you are quoting is more than DOUBLE the national average of 20 cents per gallon between regular and premium, and is not in any way representative of what the vast majority of people (like 99.9%) across America have to pay - so while your numbers can be valid for YOU, they are not valid for almost anyone else. You are claiming a cost delta of roughly 42 cents per gallon between regular and premium, where the national average is less than half that amount, roughly 20 cents per gallon - and that average includes places where it's higher like yours is, as well as places where it's lower, like ours is. The point being that cannot be used as any kind of general example, or even an example for TedEdition, as he does not have a 42 cent per gallon cost delta between regular and premium - almost nobody in America does, that is rare in the extreme.
Yes, there are a few places that delta is higher, certain places in California and Colorado, and a few other very rare exceptions - but the national average is 20 cents per gallon - and at that rate, it does not take much to offset the cost of running premium gas with the fuel mileage gain most people get. In fact, the higher that gas prices go, the more sense it makes to use premium gas with the mileage gain (this is assuming you keep your foot out of the firewall), as the cost delta between regular and premium remains the same, an average of 20 cents per gallon - if gas goes to $5 a gallon, the cost delta remains the same - back when gas went up to over $4 a gallon a year and a half ago briefly, the cost delta was STILL an average of 20 cents per gallon. So for many people, they can run our premium gas tuning and not pay any more for gas than running on their stock tuning (or even our 87 octane tuning in some cases) as the more spark we can run in the motor, that actually lowers the load on the engine, and that is the basic mechanism that provides the potential for fuel mileage gain - this of course depends on fuel quality and how we drive, of course.
Oh, and by the way - I say what I say from facts, not out of some desire to sell people a bill of goods - while we do sell off the shelf tuners, most people buy our custom tuning as it's the best that can be had for this platform, and *everyone* who calls us about tuning for these vehicles (or any others that are affected by CAI's significantly leaning out the A/F's) are warned about it when they do business with us here at Troyer Performance, so they will *know*.
This is just some quick FYI for you, that's all - thanks to everyone for their comments and to moltman for his cost analysis data, it's all very interesting - just pay attention to the actual cost per gallon delta **in your own area**.
Last - TexEdition, your general observations make perfect sense, I would say - yes, you feel the extra power in the seat of the pants from premium, it's just not going to be DOUBLE what our 87 octane tune did all over again - how I wish it were, we'd look like real hero's then!
The bottom line is, if the 87 octane tune is delivering enough performance for you, that's fine - to everyone I would also say to do the math, as with a 1.8 MPG gain, usually that is going to offset the cost delta between regular and premium (and then some) and allow people to get the most possible performance, which is what a lot of us want - but there are those who feel just like you, that our Troyer Performance 87 octane tuning is good enough so they use that, as it already gives a very nice improvement in performance - excellent observations & comments & data guys, thanks!
The 87 octane tuning already makes so much of a difference on the 5.4 3V's especially, that it's not appropriate to expect that much MORE difference all over again when switching to our premium gas tunes on the 3-valve engines - not with our Troyer Performance custom tuning, as we gain more power on 87 octane than anyone - as we do on premium. For example, the average gain on 87 octane from tuning alone on a bone-stock truck is usually in the 25 RWHP range - now when we tune it for 93, the gains vary more as the fuel quality seems to vary more with premium, especially these days - but usually you pick up anywhere from another 10 to another 18 RWHP - the point being, it not going to be DOUBLE what we gained on 87 octane like it is when we tune the older 5.4 2-valve F-150's (the 1997-2003 models), for example. In those 1997-203 5.4 2V F-150's, we typically gain 12-15 RWHP on 87, and 30+ RWHP on premium, for example - but the 5.4 3V's are different.
For moltman - the cost delta you are quoting is more than DOUBLE the national average of 20 cents per gallon between regular and premium, and is not in any way representative of what the vast majority of people (like 99.9%) across America have to pay - so while your numbers can be valid for YOU, they are not valid for almost anyone else. You are claiming a cost delta of roughly 42 cents per gallon between regular and premium, where the national average is less than half that amount, roughly 20 cents per gallon - and that average includes places where it's higher like yours is, as well as places where it's lower, like ours is. The point being that cannot be used as any kind of general example, or even an example for TedEdition, as he does not have a 42 cent per gallon cost delta between regular and premium - almost nobody in America does, that is rare in the extreme.
Yes, there are a few places that delta is higher, certain places in California and Colorado, and a few other very rare exceptions - but the national average is 20 cents per gallon - and at that rate, it does not take much to offset the cost of running premium gas with the fuel mileage gain most people get. In fact, the higher that gas prices go, the more sense it makes to use premium gas with the mileage gain (this is assuming you keep your foot out of the firewall), as the cost delta between regular and premium remains the same, an average of 20 cents per gallon - if gas goes to $5 a gallon, the cost delta remains the same - back when gas went up to over $4 a gallon a year and a half ago briefly, the cost delta was STILL an average of 20 cents per gallon. So for many people, they can run our premium gas tuning and not pay any more for gas than running on their stock tuning (or even our 87 octane tuning in some cases) as the more spark we can run in the motor, that actually lowers the load on the engine, and that is the basic mechanism that provides the potential for fuel mileage gain - this of course depends on fuel quality and how we drive, of course.
Oh, and by the way - I say what I say from facts, not out of some desire to sell people a bill of goods - while we do sell off the shelf tuners, most people buy our custom tuning as it's the best that can be had for this platform, and *everyone* who calls us about tuning for these vehicles (or any others that are affected by CAI's significantly leaning out the A/F's) are warned about it when they do business with us here at Troyer Performance, so they will *know*.
This is just some quick FYI for you, that's all - thanks to everyone for their comments and to moltman for his cost analysis data, it's all very interesting - just pay attention to the actual cost per gallon delta **in your own area**.
Last - TexEdition, your general observations make perfect sense, I would say - yes, you feel the extra power in the seat of the pants from premium, it's just not going to be DOUBLE what our 87 octane tune did all over again - how I wish it were, we'd look like real hero's then!
The bottom line is, if the 87 octane tune is delivering enough performance for you, that's fine - to everyone I would also say to do the math, as with a 1.8 MPG gain, usually that is going to offset the cost delta between regular and premium (and then some) and allow people to get the most possible performance, which is what a lot of us want - but there are those who feel just like you, that our Troyer Performance 87 octane tuning is good enough so they use that, as it already gives a very nice improvement in performance - excellent observations & comments & data guys, thanks!
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,184
Likes: 0
From: Austin
Just another .02.. lol
After going back to the 87 perf. tune for about 100 miles or so, switched to show a friend how easy it was to change the tune, I went back to the 93 perf. a couple of days ago and I have to say that I'm gonna stay on the 93 until it comes time to do some towing.
Bear in mind that I've only had the tunes since Oct. (about 2k miles) and hadn't tried going back and forth until now.
After trying out both 87 and 93 perf tunes twice now, yeah, the 93 is the way to go.
I'm gonna need new rubber soon either way though!!
After going back to the 87 perf. tune for about 100 miles or so, switched to show a friend how easy it was to change the tune, I went back to the 93 perf. a couple of days ago and I have to say that I'm gonna stay on the 93 until it comes time to do some towing.
Bear in mind that I've only had the tunes since Oct. (about 2k miles) and hadn't tried going back and forth until now.
After trying out both 87 and 93 perf tunes twice now, yeah, the 93 is the way to go.
I'm gonna need new rubber soon either way though!!
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,052
Likes: 0
[QUOTE=moltman]
You can say that again. Most of the time I get worse fuel economy than when it was stock. I keep doing things to it and it seems to worsen the fuel economy. lol But I lay into it a LOT more now that I have the mods because now it will actually go somewhere.
Originally Posted by TexEdition
Interesting.. And again most who want tunes, to improve performance, are gonna USE that performance - as in laying the right foot down more often than not.