Too bad you can´t get it to run on 7th gear. On the other hand it´s really interesting that with 93 the motor wakes up. I read all the time that most of the people that buys ecoboost fills them with 87 stating that´s what the manual says and ignore that the manual also says to run premium for better performance. Like you say, if you are just burning fuel 87 is ok, be sure to use top tier gas thou.To answer a few more questions, our XLT is 2 wheel drive and doesn't have paddle shifters. Which means there's no way to lock it into 7th gear which is the 1:1 ratio where it needs to be dynoed in. Oh well. But I will say it's fast. I've been using 87 Octane because we are just burning through it on our road trip. But I can tell a difference between 87 and 93. With 93 it's a monster. With 87 it's quick, but not a monster.
Must've been modded, I remember SVO's were running mid-low 15's. They were only a couple of lbs lighter than the 5.0's, My brother had an 88 LX Notchback, was running mid-high 14's all day with just a flowmaster and filter lolI remember back in the early 90s when Ford had the SVO mustang with a turbo 2.3 in it. I had the 5.0 in mine and my buddy had the SVO. I'm telling you even back than my 5.0 had a hard time keeping up with that 2.3. Amazing memories.
Always sir. We finally landed in Salem, NH today. Averaged 27 mph according to the computer but in reality averaged 25.5 using a calculator. Still amazingToo bad you can´t get it to run on 7th gear. On the other hand it´s really interesting that with 93 the motor wakes up. I read all the time that most of the people that buys ecoboost fills them with 87 stating that´s what the manual says and ignore that the manual also says to run premium for better performance. Like you say, if you are just burning fuel 87 is ok, be sure to use top tier gas thou.
Averaged 27 mph? Must have taken a looong time.Always sir. We finally landed in Salem, NH today. Averaged 27 mph according to the computer but in reality averaged 25.5 using a calculator. Still amazing
JAJAJAJAJAAveraged 27 mph? Must have taken a looong time.
Peter
...
Also, it is pretty widely known Ford underrates the EcoBoost engines but the rated horsepower is always on 91 octane for Ford EcoBoost engines in ANY application. Check your user manual for confirmation. They also recommend premium fuel when towing - even for F-150, etc.
...
Thanks for the correction! Agree - my 2.7 F-150 is definitely more "alive" especially in summer months on 93. You can tell it pulls timing a bit on 87 in the heat, and it tends to shudder a little under high load/high boost/low RPM scenarios on low octane fuel in the heat.Careful. On the F150, the rated hp is on 87 octane, except for the Raptor/ High Output 3.5 engines that were rated on 93 octane premium. Don't believe me? Go look again at the ratings on the F150's. (They do this so its clear their engines do not require premium to be competitive with other manufacturer offerings that only require 87 octane.
And Ford typically rates all other ecoboost engines on 93 octane premium - not 91.
That being said, my 2.7 F150 does wake up (more) on premium and can be confirmed through monitoring. No doubt the 2.3 in our explorer is the same, but its not my daily driver so I have not played with it that much...
My son had the 4.6l 3 valve with a tuner and was able to get stupid numbers the dyno with it. He was able to keep up with my charger 392 until about 100. Then I was able to pass him quickly. Those 3 valve engines tuned are a monster. Getting back to the 2.3l explorer engine. It's amazing. Night and day between running 87 and 93 octane. My 2019 explorer Sport was the same way. 87 octane made it feel sluggish. 93 woke her up.I'll add my 2 cents: I bought a 21 XLT with the 2.3. I was concerned that it would lack but it does not. It is smooth, and always has more then adequate power. The 10 spd. is great, it rarely hunts, when it does I have select shift and can kick it down easily. I really could not be happier with the 2.3 and I am sure that with regular maint. it will last me a long time. Its performance is better then the 2.0 EB in our Escape which was highly rated and better then my previous 2.0 EB Fusion. I am not "foreign" to performance cars. I've been a shade tree mechanic my whole life.. I was a hot-rodder /drag racer when I was young and I also currently own a Mustang GT ( 4.6 3valve) so yes, I"ve driven cars faster then my 2.3 Explorer. I do use only 93 octane in my 2.3 ( also in my 2.0 Escape). Mustang has a 93 tune as well.
I wouldnt say they would get crazy power, my friend's 05 GT made around 20~whp with just a dyno tune. Made around 290whp with bolt on's and tune, not too far off from what my 01 Cobra was making at the time.My son had the 4.6l 3 valve with a tuner and was able to get stupid numbers the dyno with it. He was able to keep up with my charger 392 until about 100. Then I was able to pass him quickly. Those 3 valve engines tuned are a monster. Getting back to the 2.3l explorer engine. It's amazing. Night and day between running 87 and 93 octane. My 2019 explorer Sport was the same way. 87 octane made it feel sluggish. 93 woke her up.
My sons car was putting down 365 on the d6no with no cats and a tune. I was amazed at how it kept up with our 392. Those 3 valves have a ton of potential.I wouldnt say they would get crazy power, my friend's 05 GT made around 20~whp with just a dyno tune. Made around 290whp with bolt on's and tune, not too far off from what my 01 Cobra was making at the time.
Interesting note tho, your 392 should be able to walk it easily. Sounds like a healthy GT and great driver.
The 10 spd makes enough of a difference that my 3.0EB gets better gas mileage than the 3.7 that preceded it. Not MUCH better, but better nonetheless.The 10 speed makes a world of difference in using the power of the 2.3L. My 2019 Sport was strapped with the old 6 speed and was no where near as quick as this one is. Trust me.
Thats not a 3 valve at all... Thats a Coyote 5.0, 4 valve, a completely different engine.My sons car was putting down 365 on the d6no with no cats and a tune. I was amazed at how it kept up with our 392. Those 3 valves have a ton of potential.
I wouldnt say they would get crazy power, my friend's 05 GT made around 20~whp with just a dyno tune. Made around 290whp with bolt on's and tune, not too far off from what my 01 Cobra was making at the time.
Interesting note tho, your 392 should be able to walk it easily. Sounds like a healthy GT and great driver.
Not sure what you have done on your STI but unless its running on E85/Meth or different turbo, I would say yes. Scatpacks on avg are trapping 110+ stock in the 1/4 mile. You'll have better chances with a COBB tune but ill still give the 392 the edge.Would it walk my STI though? I know I can walk regular RTs fairly easily not sure a 392. It would be close I guess and I am giving up roughly 3.8 liters, basically another v6.