if ford wanted highter than 87 it would be required not recommended
did u miss my point. 87 is bottom of the line. if u get any type of bad gas, u might have problems. u shouldnt run 87. bottom line. be cheap and do what u want.
if ford wanted highter than 87 it would be required not recommended
did u miss my point. 87 is bottom of the line. if u get any type of bad gas, u might have problems. u shouldnt run 87. bottom line. be cheap and do what u want.
Come on, Shadow. There are plenty of cars out that that REQUIRE 91+ octane, to include puny 1.8T Passats and Jettas. Ford would have required 91 if it needed to, but the computer is designed to compensate. To say that "bad gas" that is advertised as 87 would then screw up your car because the octane would drop below recommended levels is silly.
You have been very pro Ford on here, and you have talked about running the car as it is designed. So, be consistent. The car was designed to put in 87 - 93 octane, with only an HP sacrifice if you run less than 91.
designed to run 91. promise u. with knock sensors for the less smart in the world. This guy beat the shit out of his car. with an air box lid open and a loose exhaust. so he beat on it after he picked up trying the new trans out. low oct, lean from air box and exhaust not tight.
You don't know that for a fact, nor do you know that he beat on the car. Even with an airbox lid partially open, a "loose exhaust" and 87 octane, the #8 should not have gone on a stock motor.
What I want to know is whether there is more here than we are being told.
Mike
designed to run 91. promise u. with knock sensors for the less smart in the world. This guy beat the shit out of his car. with an air box lid open and a loose exhaust. so he beat on it after he picked up trying the new trans out. low oct, lean from air box and exhaust not tight.
did u miss my point. 87 is bottom of the line. if u get any type of bad gas, u might have problems. u shouldnt run 87. bottom line. be cheap and do what u want.
designed to run 91. promise u. with knock sensors for the less smart in the world. This guy beat the shit out of his car.
p.s. as far as i know most dealer ships fill our cars with 87 when we buy them, mine did. if it was that much of a problem shouldn't we all sue Ford for new motors, that initial fuel could have jump started the problem. this is sarcasm of course
You want find a stock 5.0 factory tune that will run lean,that is BS.For a any tuner to post information like this is called DYNO F$$KING where I come from.
You are wrong!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I seen it with my own eyes. If the flywheel is removed from the eng and then replaced with out crank relearn then the ecu does no know where crank tdc is and can cause a lean at WOT...
Get real,I am talking about a factory tune,factory car that has not been worked on by ford tech that does know shit doing a repair.Give Jon Lund a call about this and he will tell you the same thing that I am saying.You are wrong!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I seen it with my own eyes. If the flywheel is removed from the eng and then replaced with out crank relearn then the ecu does no know where crank tdc is and can cause a lean at WOT...
Get real,I am talking about a factory tune,factory car that has not been worked on by ford tech that does know shit doing a repair.
I have been reading this thread hoping to find out more from the OP, but in the meantime I have been thinking about what is and isn't "abuse". There is a lot about burnouts in this thread. I have had sports cars before, but this is my first car even capable of a real burnout. I have always understood that it would typically be considered abuse to hold a stock engine near redline for periods counted in longer than seconds, if nothing else the heat builds up very quickly. On the other hand, I would think that any sports car engine should be able to approach redline frequently, for short bursts, without issue. If not, then the redline is too high.
But I was curious whether and how bad a burnout is on the engine or how it can contribute to an engine failure. I haven't done them on this car because tires, clutches and transmissions are expensive enough, never mind the engine So I did a little web research and came across this column. He is talking about dragsters, but the principles probably apply more broadly. Just thought I'd share the link.
Tech Talk #79- Are Burnouts Abusing Your Engine? « Reher-Morrison Official Blog
I am not trying to say anything about the OP with this. Just thought it was interesting.
You are wrong!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I seen it with my own eyes. If the flywheel is removed from the eng and then replaced with out crank relearn then the ecu does no know where crank tdc is and can cause a lean at WOT...
Hopefully the OP gives us an update today, if not I'll probably just close this thread.
I agree 100% with every thing you posted and what should be done by a ford tech during a trans and flywheel repair,but I am not WRONG saying a showroom new 5.0 motor will not run lean with the factory tune installed at the factory.Do not take my word,call Jon Lund.Definitely right. Any time the transmission is out, a crank relearn must be done. The work order from having my transmission replaced has a crank relearn on it.
With the sophistication of the new PCM's if something isn't repaired properly, you can certainly cause damage to an engine.
There was a case over at TMS not too long ago of a stock car going in for a transmission replacement and immediately going back after the car was returned for a popped motor. This car as well had the #8 piston fail.
People get hung up on that #8 though. It's the hottest slug in the engine, so it's only natural that it would go first if something wasn't running correctly.
I agree 100% with every thing you posted and what should be done by a ford tech during a trans and flywheel repair,but I am not WRONG saying a showroom new 5.0 motor will not run lean with the factory tune installed at the factory.Do not take my word,call Jon Lund.