home made octane boost - Page 2 - Ranger-Forums - The Ultimate Ford Ranger Resource


General Ford Ranger Discussion General discussion of the Ford Ranger that does not fit in any other sub-forum.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #26  
Old 08-26-2007
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: usa
Posts: 166
I understand the ability to advance timing, therefor "waiting" longer for the compression cycle to compress more. But if the motor was capable of doing this, why would ford have not just set it up like this from the factory. For that to make sense it would almost mean they "detuned" the engine. In my 67 I was having problems with the motor breaking up at close to 6600 rpms about 2/3 of the way down the quarter. No knocking or pinging....what I finally figured out was that it was silent preignitioning and would start doing it there due to heat buildup from the start. I upped my octane (more stable fuel) and it solved the problem. On the street I just back the timing off a little and run low octane. But this is a custom build high performance motor that requires the fuel to run right. Why would ford harm the performance by backing off the timing to run reg fuel?
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 08-26-2007
vindex1963's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: phoenix AZ
Posts: 3,026
Quote:
Originally Posted by mfp4073
why would ford have not just set it up like this from the factory.
I see that statement a lot in the different forums....a lot. They have to make vehicles that are acceptable to a wide range of people. With me running a 91 performance tune I really don't want to tow a trailer across the country or load it up with bricks for a construction site. Sure it could be done at the factory but it would limit the use of the truck. I want my truck to set 23mpg (and it does) and be able to climb the Arizona mountain grades while passing a majority of the other small trucks (and it does).


I know who will give me static about this but the gods at the factory have to comply with noise and emissions also. Sometimes they have to be generic and I can improve on it. If I could race the truck I bought and the one I have now there would be no competition. My truck now runs better, gets better mpg and is a LOT more fun.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 08-26-2007
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Ohio
Posts: 737
I don't pretend to be a chemist or a gasoline additive expert, so I don't dump anything into my gas that may harm my engine or catalytic converter. I don't want to inadvertently gum up the insides of my engine or carb with gunk. I don't want to overheat my valves. I don't want any chemical reactions to mixing various chemicals with gasoline.

So I'll be satisfied with the performance I get with the gas I get out of the pump at the station. No jet fuel for me.

Ever look at the nozzles of a oil furnace ?? The junk in the fuel oil wears out the nozzles in about a year or two, from just simple abrasive dirt.

Just pure clean gas for me, thank you.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 08-26-2007
timpat92855's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Lousiville, MS
Posts: 1,067
where i live i can get 93 octane, but my friends firebird with 10:1 compression ratio has problems with it, its not as high grade as most 93s are. He uses octane booster alltime, esp on track days, and never had a problem with anything not even when he was at 7000rpm from his 355 sb. I dont have to use it in my truck, no programmer yet. If u ever used fuel injector cleaner read on it next time, its basicly jet fuel.

As for homemade booster i dunno, i know when u add a bottle of rubbing achol to your tank it takes the water out of the gas, but dunno how it would do with the factor of raising its octane even when mixed with others, best thing to do is mix race gas or factory made booster then if something goes wrong u can point the finger at them and not at some interent formula...jus my 2 cents...
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 08-26-2007
vindex1963's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: phoenix AZ
Posts: 3,026
I am a little leery about using something home made. I'll use the Klotz Octane Booster for now and re-tune to 93. I was just curious if anyone ever made it at home.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 08-26-2007
Level I Supporter
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Durham, NC
Posts: 3,657
Quote:
Originally Posted by dj wayne
I don't pretend to be a chemist or a gasoline additive expert, so I don't dump anything into my gas that may harm my engine or catalytic converter. I don't want to inadvertently gum up the insides of my engine or carb with gunk. I don't want to overheat my valves. I don't want any chemical reactions to mixing various chemicals with gasoline.

So I'll be satisfied with the performance I get with the gas I get out of the pump at the station. No jet fuel for me.

Ever look at the nozzles of a oil furnace ?? The junk in the fuel oil wears out the nozzles in about a year or two, from just simple abrasive dirt.

Just pure clean gas for me, thank you.
Smart choice!!!!
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 08-26-2007
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: usa
Posts: 166
Again, I will say I dont know much about modern motors. I am just posting questions based on what I know. I can totally agree about the benifit of tuning for low end torque or high rpm horsepower. I do see WAY too often...usually on the import forums people talking about putting in high octane gas for a performance boost without doing any other modifications and talking about this great HP increase. I always cry BS to those folks because motors are tuned to a specific octane and a higher octane will not do anything. Up to this point I have never heard of an "octane tune" and am honestly curious to what it does. Anyone have any dyno numbers of stuff like this?
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 08-26-2007
vindex1963's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: phoenix AZ
Posts: 3,026
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 08-26-2007
vindex1963's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: phoenix AZ
Posts: 3,026
I bought my tunes from Fred here.

http://rogueperformance.com/RogueCustomTuning.html
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 08-26-2007
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: usa
Posts: 166
I swear I am not trying to play devils advocate here, but after reading through those pages most of what I am seeing is sales advertisements. I was more looking at independent dyno numbers by users who have the paperwork where we can see the hp and tq curves. There are all sorts of stuff on the internet from header wraps to those tornado intake inserts to electric fan turbochargers.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/SAVE-...QQcmdZViewItem

http://www.electricsupercharger.com/index.html

these companies claim performance too, but I have never seen anything to back them up.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 08-26-2007
Level I Supporter
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Durham, NC
Posts: 3,657
Quote:
Originally Posted by mfp4073
I swear I am not trying to play devils advocate here, but after reading through those pages most of what I am seeing is sales advertisements. I was more looking at independent dyno numbers by users who have the paperwork where we can see the hp and tq curves. There are all sorts of stuff on the internet from header wraps to those tornado intake inserts to electric fan turbochargers.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/SAVE-...QQcmdZViewItem

http://www.electricsupercharger.com/index.html

these companies claim performance too, but I have never seen anything to back them up.

You continue to be on the right track!!!!

Check this out, these are truly independent tests of some of the more popular "performance mods". As you can see, there is nothing to very little improvement in performance, definately different than the "sales advertisements" as you have stated!!

http://www.jackphelps.com/ranger/ran...ifications.htm
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 08-26-2007
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Mesa, Arizona
Posts: 886
This fuel is used mainly in quads, personal planes, and racing cars. Its at the air port so I dunno if its actually low lead avvation fuel. My friend runs it in his 63 falcon which makes stupid amounts of power, so I run it in my car. Dont own a ranger anymore


Quote:
Originally Posted by greygooseranger
I would be careful about using this fuel in your truck, 110 octane (around here anyway) is LOW LEAD aviation fuel, if you are running a fuel that contains lead, that could seriously f*ck up your truck...
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 08-26-2007
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: usa
Posts: 166
the most impressive thing I see there is the tq curve for the 93 octane.



the 10 increase is not as significate as the total space under the curve. The tq curve comes in REALLY fast compared to the stock curve. That is mainly where you are feeling the difference. at 2500rpms you are looking at almost a 20 ftpound gain
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 08-26-2007
vindex1963's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: phoenix AZ
Posts: 3,026
I can't argue my point anymore. You and Takeda discuss it amongst yourselves, you two seem to think the same. If you compare an SCT X-Caliber2 to the tornado you really have no Idea what you're talking about and I think now you're just trying to extend the debate.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 08-26-2007
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: usa
Posts: 166
thats cool with me. I have at no point ment any kind of offence and have simply been asking questions to better understand. I was comparing them by saying that just because a seller claims benifits that does not mean they actually exist and we both agree the tornado is a scam. Was simply asking if anyone had data to support their claims. The graph I posted above shows good gains in tq. I personally would not gain much from that with the offset of the price of gas so it would be of little value to me. But if it would get that on standard grade gas I would shell the money out in a heartbeat.
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 08-27-2007
Level I Supporter
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Durham, NC
Posts: 3,657
Quote:
Originally Posted by vindex1963
I can't argue my point anymore. You and Takeda discuss it amongst yourselves, you two seem to think the same. If you compare an SCT X-Caliber2 to the tornado you really have no Idea what you're talking about and I think now you're just trying to extend the debate.
I've shown independent test data, where is yours?????

It is hard to argue against FACTS, so I understand when you say you can't argue your point any more!!!
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 08-27-2007
vindex1963's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: phoenix AZ
Posts: 3,026
Quote:
Originally Posted by Takeda
I've shown independent test data, where is yours?????

It is hard to argue against FACTS, so I understand when you say you can't argue your point any more!!!
Here are the results YOU posted on the tuner. Thanks for the help. I guess I was right all along.
Here is the site YOU listed http://www.jackphelps.com/ranger/ran...ifications.htm



RESULTS. WOW! Initial reaction is very good; throttle response seems better, and the truck keeps pulling when it once ran out of steam. A trip to the dyno verified the results, with the 93 octane performance program gaining me 9 HP and an additional 10.6 ft/lbs of torque. For more info and a look at the dyno graphs, click here. Almost as an afterthought, I had Doug create an 87 octane torque program for me. Out of curiosity, I filled with a tank of 87 and made another trip to the dyno to test it out. Results were equally impressive, with gains of 2.6 HP and 9.7 ft/lbs torque on 87 octane fuel. To see results and graphs of that test, click here. How has it affected my fuel economy? I don't know yet--I'm still driving like an idiot, enjoying the new-found performance. When I calm down a bit I'll post the results.

Worth the money? Absolutely. As far as I can tell, this is about the best bang for your performance buck that you'll find for your 3.0 Ranger. Owners of truck with auto trannies will realize even more benefits, as the new programs will firm up and optimize your shift points. If you want the same performance for a little less money you might want to opt for the single-program chip. Kudos to Doug for a job well done!
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 08-27-2007
Level I Supporter
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Durham, NC
Posts: 3,657
Quote:
Originally Posted by vindex1963
Here are the results YOU posted on the tuner. Thanks for the help. I guess I was right all along.
Here is the site YOU listed http://www.jackphelps.com/ranger/ran...ifications.htm



RESULTS. WOW! Initial reaction is very good; throttle response seems better, and the truck keeps pulling when it once ran out of steam. A trip to the dyno verified the results, with the 93 octane performance program gaining me 9 HP and an additional 10.6 ft/lbs of torque. For more info and a look at the dyno graphs, click here. Almost as an afterthought, I had Doug create an 87 octane torque program for me. Out of curiosity, I filled with a tank of 87 and made another trip to the dyno to test it out. Results were equally impressive, with gains of 2.6 HP and 9.7 ft/lbs torque on 87 octane fuel. To see results and graphs of that test, click here. How has it affected my fuel economy? I don't know yet--I'm still driving like an idiot, enjoying the new-found performance. When I calm down a bit I'll post the results.

Worth the money? Absolutely. As far as I can tell, this is about the best bang for your performance buck that you'll find for your 3.0 Ranger. Owners of truck with auto trannies will realize even more benefits, as the new programs will firm up and optimize your shift points. If you want the same performance for a little less money you might want to opt for the single-program chip. Kudos to Doug for a job well done!

Looks like you missed the K&N air filter, airbox mod, and header results!!!!!!

Please re-read!!!!!!!

The dyno results on these mods don't correlate well with your SOP dyno!!!
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 08-27-2007
greygooseranger's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: SE Michigan
Posts: 3,293
Quote:
Originally Posted by IR0NS1N
This fuel is used mainly in quads, personal planes, and racing cars. Its at the air port so I dunno if its actually low lead avvation fuel. My friend runs it in his 63 falcon which makes stupid amounts of power, so I run it in my car. Dont own a ranger anymore
Thomas, a 63 falcon was made to run that kind of fuel. Actually years ago (as you probably know) gas had lead in it, it was a lubricant (among other things) Quads and dirt bikes can be easily set up to run this fuel, but your cobalt (or a ranger) can not. I wouldn't continue to use that fuel in your vehicle, but thats just my opinion....
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 08-27-2007
vindex1963's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: phoenix AZ
Posts: 3,026
Quote:
Originally Posted by Takeda
Looks like you missed the K&N air filter, airbox mod, and header results!!!!!!

Please re-read!!!!!!!

The dyno results on these mods don't correlate well with your SOP dyno!!!
I don't have headers and they were testing an exhaust system and my air box mod is compleatly different. Sorry...keep fishing you might get me one day.

It's all listed in my web site.

Please re-read!!!!!!
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 08-27-2007
Level I Supporter
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Durham, NC
Posts: 3,657
Quote:
Originally Posted by vindex1963
I don't have headers and they were testing an exhaust system and my air box mod is compleatly different. Sorry...keep fishing you might get me one day.

It's all listed in my web site.

Please re-read!!!!!!
What I'm trying to get you to realize is the intake mods (and the K&N air filter you installed) didn't buy you a thing in performance!!!

If you had done the vacuum test I suggested you could have figured it out
yourself!!!

But, if it makes you feel better that you have improved your performance,
you go ahead and think that, it's a free country, and you thinking that doesn't hurt anybody!!!!
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 08-27-2007
vindex1963's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: phoenix AZ
Posts: 3,026
Why do you use !!!!!!! so much?
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 08-27-2007
vindex1963's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: phoenix AZ
Posts: 3,026
Quote:
Originally Posted by Takeda
If you had done the vacuum test I suggested you could have figured it out
yourself!!!
But, if it makes you feel better that you have improved your performance,
you go ahead and think that, it's a free country, and you thinking that doesn't hurt anybody!!!!
Like I told you a LONG time ago it's not that I don't believe you I just don't care.....you do that to people. Ever wonder why you're unpopular here? I have complained about you wanting you to back off...I guess I need to do that again. Any mods reading?
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 08-27-2007
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: usa
Posts: 166
@vindex

Did you see an increase or decrease in mileage out of the different tunes?
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 08-27-2007
vindex1963's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: phoenix AZ
Posts: 3,026
An increase, with advanced timing comes MPG.

I drove to Flagstaff from Phoenix and back Saturday. My MPG round trip was 23.72 and the truck pulled the steep grades without even breaking a sweat.
More power...less gas with 31" tires and 3.73 gears.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
NOS Octane boost spec_ops57 4.0L OHV & SOHC V6 Tech 22 04-19-2006 08:30 PM
Ranger Home made Coil Spacers? rmk00700 New Ideas 12 03-18-2006 09:01 AM
Home made BL gap guards ? Ranger1 General Ford Ranger Discussion 10 02-17-2006 09:31 AM
Home sweet home... buckgnarly General Ford Ranger Discussion 25 08-22-2005 07:23 PM
Home Made Airintake? Skyjacker_44 New Ideas 16 11-22-2004 11:58 AM


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 Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:58 AM.


We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.