Go Back   MustangForums.com > Ford Mustang Tech > 2005 - 2014 Mustangs > V6 S197 General Discussion > 3.7L V6 Technical Discussions
Sign in using an external account
Register Forgot Password?
Search


3.7L V6 Technical Discussions Any questions about the new engine, transmission, exhaust, tuners/CAI, or gearing can be asked here!

Welcome to Mustang Forums!
Welcome to Mustang Forums.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!


Bama 87 Performance Tune Loaded

Reply
 
 
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 04-07-2011, 07:24 PM   #41
Boy Howdy
 
Boy Howdy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Vehicle: Black 3.7 Performance Package...I named it Midnight Special.
Location: Missouri
Posts: 32
Default

I'd like to switch my fuel from 87 to 91 and see how mpg works out, but I am a little apprehensive about just suddenly switching fuels. It seems like mixing the different fuels in the tank would be bad for the car, right? So should I try to get as much 87 out before putting 91 in?

And doesn't 93 do more damage to the enginge over time than 87?

And one more thing, isn't it kind of odd that, in the heat of these new pony/muscle car wars, Ford would leave extra hp and mpg on the table? If you can get better hp and mpg by just purchasing aftermarket intakes, driveshafts, lighter wheels, etc., why wouldn't Ford just include these things stock or an add-on option? Take the intakes for example, why not offer the most efficient intake system for the car as an add-on from the factory? I understand that not everybody wants a hot rod, but when the company offers a perfomance package and those customers want the car to perform at its fullest, wouldn't it just make sense to allow the car to breathe properly?

I guess what I am getting at it is that I find it odd that aftermarket companies know how to make the car more efficient than the engineers whose sole purpose in re-designing the car was to out perform Camaro and Challenger. Why not just blow them out of the water?
This ad is not displayed to registered or logged-in members.
Register your free account today and become a member on Mustang Forums!
Boy Howdy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2011, 07:43 PM   #42
Mikado463
2nd Gear Member
 
Mikado463's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Vehicle: 2011 5.0 GT premium, brembo
Location: Pa
Posts: 178
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boy Howdy View Post
And doesn't 93 do more damage to the enginge over time than 87?
Who ever told you that ??????

The 'octane number' is merely rating as to the gasoline resistance to pre-detonation.


Quote:
I guess what I am getting at it is that I find it odd that aftermarket companies know how to make the car more efficient than the engineers whose sole purpose in re-designing the car was to out perform Camaro and Challenger. Why not just blow them out of the water?
Wow....you really are new to the world of automobilies ! I don't even know where to begin with you on this one other than to say.....you really have no clue.
__________________
Cheers,

Dave
Mikado463 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2011, 08:22 PM   #43
hogasswild
3rd Gear Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Vehicle: 2011 Mustang V6 Premium 6MT
Location: VA
Posts: 720
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hogasswild View Post
Okay, please bear in mind that I like to average at least five tanks of gas to kind of get a good baseline and have not gotten that many with the 93P tune. All these numbers are based on the same kind of driving, same road loop etc, so your numbers will vary. Also since I have noticed a big spike in mpgs just from going from 87 to 93 octane, I haven't tried a 87 tune yet. If you guys want me to, I will after I complete my sample for the 93P tune. I run a 360 mile commute twice a week which is how I am able to compile such large numbers lol. Based on a 75/25 highway/city mix of driving:

87 stock 26.1mpg
87 intake only 27.8mpg
93 stock 27.4mpg
93 intake only 29.1mpg
93P tune and intake 29.6mpg

So you can see a couple things here. Switching up octane from 87 to 93 alone gives you about 1.5mpg increase. Just adding an intake (I have a JLT) using either 87 or 93 octane gives you at least 1.5mpg increase and looks fairly consistent regardless of octane. The performance tune gives me another 0.5mpg, but like I said I consider that preliminary data. Give me a couple weeks and I'll be able to give you all a better number.

I'm sure others may get different numbers because they drive differently, but these are my numbers based on almost 13,000 miles of data. I trust the numbers because I can count on the route I take to have consistent traffic and I set my cruise control at the same speeds for each particular stretch of road. The only real difference would be weather (temps, wind, humidity). Also, please bear in mind I have a six speed manual with 3.31 gears, so I imagine those with the 2.73 automatic will have more impressive numbers than me. However, I'm very happy with the numbers I'm getting.
Well it's one tank early, but after my 4th tank of 93 using the performance tune, I got 31.02mpg. Crazy but true. My average so far is right about 29.7mpg. So we'll see what that next tanks reveals, but it's becoming clear that the performance tune is at least 0.5mpg better than 93 with a JLT intake.

I will begrudgingly try the 87 tune as requested lol.
hogasswild is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2011, 10:35 PM   #44
Boy Howdy
 
Boy Howdy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Vehicle: Black 3.7 Performance Package...I named it Midnight Special.
Location: Missouri
Posts: 32
Default

Sorry that you had to waste your time on that last post Dave. However, I am appreciative of your explanation of the octane number.

Clearly I don't know what I am talking about, and I should have made that apparent on my first post. I am merely just asking questions to learn.
Boy Howdy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2011, 10:38 PM   #45
pdonket
4th Gear Member
 
pdonket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Vehicle: 2011 5.0
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1,846
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikado463 View Post
Who ever told you that ??????

The 'octane number' is merely rating as to the gasoline resistance to pre-detonation.




Wow....you really are new to the world of automobilies ! I don't even know where to begin with you on this one other than to say.....you really have no clue.
You should SERIOUSLY work on your people skills.
__________________


My View on the Economy: www.cgeconomics.com
pdonket is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2011, 11:04 AM   #46
sketchy00
2nd Gear Member
 
sketchy00's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Vehicle: 2011 Mustang v6 Premium
Location: Washington
Posts: 192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hogasswild View Post
Well it's one tank early, but after my 4th tank of 93 using the performance tune, I got 31.02mpg. Crazy but true. My average so far is right about 29.7mpg. So we'll see what that next tanks reveals, but it's becoming clear that the performance tune is at least 0.5mpg better than 93 with a JLT intake.

I will begrudgingly try the 87 tune as requested lol.
We'll be expecting your next test to be biofuel. Hah hah! Picture Hoggasswild shoving foodscraps in his gastank. LoL

Actually, I'd enjoy your MPG comparison on a 93P versus 93S tunes. I'm suspecting the Street tune might just get a tad less mpgs, but you seem to have a pretty consistent way to test, and it just might be my newfound lead foot.

Having gone through a few tanks the last few weeks, one on the 91S, and the other on 91P, I might have to go against the grain of the conventional thought out here on the boards. The 91S for me is the more noticable tune. It is WAY more fun tune to drive, and when you go from the 91S to the 91P, you really feel what IS NOT there. The 91S really addresses the low end, and sounds much more aggressive as well (coming out of Borla Touring axlebacks)
__________________
- Sketchy
2011 Mustang V6 Premium Pony Pkg
Kona Blue, M/T 3.55 rear. Glass Roof. ProCharger Supercharger, Borla Touring Axleback. ShaftMasters Aluminum drive shaft. 3M paint protection film. Factory strut tower brace. JLT oil catch can, Overpriced factory engine cover.
sketchy00 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2011, 12:42 PM   #47
Joenpb
2nd Gear Member
 
Joenpb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Vehicle: 2011 Ford Mustang
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 263
Default

I think you'll find that if you add a CAI you'll get all the bottom end performance & more of a street tune with the performance & race tunes, along with better mid-high rpm (power band) performance.

I've now loaded the 91R tune & believe I prefer it, the WOT growl & pull in 3rd gear on the hwy has sold me. I do believe the MPG is about the same as the performance tune, but I'll be interested in hogasswild's numbers comparing both.

PS - I see you've already added an Airraid CAI.

Last edited by Joenpb; 04-10-2011 at 12:45 PM.
Joenpb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2011, 02:07 PM   #48
sketchy00
2nd Gear Member
 
sketchy00's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Vehicle: 2011 Mustang v6 Premium
Location: Washington
Posts: 192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joenpb View Post
I think you'll find that if you add a CAI you'll get all the bottom end performance & more of a street tune with the performance & race tunes, along with better mid-high rpm (power band) performance.

I've now loaded the 91R tune & believe I prefer it, the WOT growl & pull in 3rd gear on the hwy has sold me. I do believe the MPG is about the same as the performance tune, but I'll be interested in hogasswild's numbers comparing both.

PS - I see you've already added an Airraid CAI.
I wish Chris from AM would release HP and TQ curve profiles for their 3 respective tunes (at whatever octane). (Hint hint, Chris, if you are reading) I actually really tried to convince myself I was going to like the Perf tune more than the street tune, but it just wasn't the case.

Yeah, fully understanding intake benefits can be tricky, because the draw will be a function of load and rpms (just listening to a CAI can tell you a lot about how its working). I'm limited to just the annecdotal observation of sitting behind the steering wheel and throttle, and the feel, and the sound. Anything beyond that, I don't have the means to interpret it correctly.

Yep, have and appreciate the Airaid CAI. Although, I will say that the shielding on the front doesn't not block out all water if it is raining heavily. Best to invest in their pre-filter sock.
__________________
- Sketchy
2011 Mustang V6 Premium Pony Pkg
Kona Blue, M/T 3.55 rear. Glass Roof. ProCharger Supercharger, Borla Touring Axleback. ShaftMasters Aluminum drive shaft. 3M paint protection film. Factory strut tower brace. JLT oil catch can, Overpriced factory engine cover.
sketchy00 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-11-2011, 12:25 PM   #49
hogasswild
3rd Gear Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Vehicle: 2011 Mustang V6 Premium 6MT
Location: VA
Posts: 720
Default

So I finished my fifth tank on 93p, averaging 29.72 mpg overall. I'm going to switch to the 93s tune as requested. It may take me a little longer this time since I'll be on business travel using a rental car.
hogasswild is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-14-2011, 08:33 AM   #50
stangs-R-me
 
stangs-R-me's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Vehicle: 2011 V6 M/T MCA Coupe
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 37
Default

Hogass ... are you running E10 gas (10% ethanol) or are these numbers with G100 (ethanol free) gas ??

If on E10, this is VERY IMPRESSIVE !!

I've got a similar commute (400/wk @ 80/20 H/C) and in 20,365.8 miles I've driven since May of last year I've burned 680.177 gallons of 91 octane G100 which calculates out to be 29.94 MPG o/a. Best on one tank was 33.97 MPG, and typically get between 30-32 on my weekly commute.

My car is completely stock ... M/T & 2.73's.

With the results you all are getting, I really should scrape the money together and get a tuner. Did not think a CAI could really improve MPG's either until I read this thread.

Doug
__________________
My Stangs ...
1969 Calypso Coral 351W 4V 4-Spd Deluxe GT Hardtop (owned since '81)
2011 Kona Blue 3.7L V6 6-Spd MT Prem Coupe, MCA pkg & HID's (ordered 2/18 arrived 5/21)
past rides:
2004 Comp Orange 3.9L V6 5-Spd Prem Coupe (0-126k miles)
1998 Chrome Yellow 3.8L V6 5-Spd Coupe (0-131k miles)
1994 Bright Blue 3.8L V6 5-Spd Coupe (0-89k miles)
1979 Fairmont Futura w/ '85 HO 5.0L, built AOD, FMS 3.27 T-Lok, Quad Shks, 10-Hole LX Rims, SVO Seats&Console (a Stang w/real back seat & trunk)
stangs-R-me is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2011, 06:43 PM   #51
Ralph289
 
Ralph289's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Vehicle: 1968 Ford Mustang
Location: Florida
Posts: 25
Default

Great job Hogasswild !
Would love to know results of a 87s tune if you can, I think many others would too.
THANKS
__________________
2011 Silver Ingot MCA v6 Auto with Stone, 87s Bama Tune, Dynomax Cat-Back Exhaust, k&n drop in filter. LOVE IT THIS MUSTANG !!!
Ralph289 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2011, 08:46 PM   #52
Upsh1ft
2nd Gear Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Vehicle: 2012, Mustang, V6 Premium
Location: Quebec
Posts: 207
Default

Hey guys, this thread has inspired me, so far i'm averaging 11L/100km with mostly city driving and a moderately heavy foot at times. I've been using nothing but Shell Bronze(87) in the tank for the past 2000 km. The issue is the Bronze has 10% ethanol. So I will tank up with some shell V-power (super high quality 91 octane, pure gas no ethanol) and see if I can get an improvement over a few tanks. I'm hoping a drop to 9 so I can recoup the tremendous costs of canadian 91 octane lol.
__________________
2012 Mustang V6 Premium /w Pony Pkg.
6MT, 3.31 rear end, 235/50ZR18 Pirelli P-Zero Neros
Race Red Exterior, Black Side Tape Stripe
Black Cloth Interior(3/4 Upgraded to Leather)
Interior Upgrade Package /w Comfort Package
BAMA 91H tune, Airaid CAI
Borla ATAK Cat-Back(Holy sh*t)
Ord: 12/29/10 | Built: 04/01/11 | Owned: 04/12/11
Upsh1ft is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2011, 09:51 PM   #53
hogasswild
3rd Gear Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Vehicle: 2011 Mustang V6 Premium 6MT
Location: VA
Posts: 720
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stangs-R-me View Post
Hogass ... are you running E10 gas (10% ethanol) or are these numbers with G100 (ethanol free) gas ??
Unfortunately all on E10 gas. I would love to try pure gas but the only place I know of is a small gas station that caters to the boating community and isn't convenient for me to get to.
hogasswild is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2011, 07:59 AM   #54
stangs-R-me
 
stangs-R-me's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Vehicle: 2011 V6 M/T MCA Coupe
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 37
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hogasswild View Post
Unfortunately all on E10 gas. I would love to try pure gas but the only place I know of is a small gas station that caters to the boating community and isn't convenient for me to get to.
Thats great ... just shows then how impressive your numbers really are and that even better is obtainable on G100 if it can be found !!

Doug
__________________
My Stangs ...
1969 Calypso Coral 351W 4V 4-Spd Deluxe GT Hardtop (owned since '81)
2011 Kona Blue 3.7L V6 6-Spd MT Prem Coupe, MCA pkg & HID's (ordered 2/18 arrived 5/21)
past rides:
2004 Comp Orange 3.9L V6 5-Spd Prem Coupe (0-126k miles)
1998 Chrome Yellow 3.8L V6 5-Spd Coupe (0-131k miles)
1994 Bright Blue 3.8L V6 5-Spd Coupe (0-89k miles)
1979 Fairmont Futura w/ '85 HO 5.0L, built AOD, FMS 3.27 T-Lok, Quad Shks, 10-Hole LX Rims, SVO Seats&Console (a Stang w/real back seat & trunk)
stangs-R-me is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2012, 10:05 PM   #55
Peaches91
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Vehicle: 2007, Mustang, GT
Location: Canada
Posts: 1
Default General Questions

Hello gents. Just picked myself up a 07 GT, and looking for some inforamtion.

Im Kinda new to the Bama, and brenspeed chips, would anyone be so kind as to explain the difference between the two, and possibly the difference between the settings?

The previous owner hooked my up with the latest updates, however i feel i would be better served to be fully aware of what i am dealing with and how to get better performance out of my newly found joy!

Thanks Gents

CP
Peaches91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2012, 09:36 AM   #56
JimC
Moderator
 
JimC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Vehicle: 2013 MCA convertible
Location: Michigan
Posts: 5,624
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peaches91 View Post
Hello gents. Just picked myself up a 07 GT, and looking for some inforamtion.

Im Kinda new to the Bama, and brenspeed chips, would anyone be so kind as to explain the difference between the two, and possibly the difference between the settings?

The previous owner hooked my up with the latest updates, however i feel i would be better served to be fully aware of what i am dealing with and how to get better performance out of my newly found joy!

Thanks Gents

CP
You are in the wrong section of the forum actually - this one is specific to the 3.7L V6.

But as far as the "chips" - the new Mustangs no longer using chips for tuning. You get a handheld tuner, with SCT being the most common and most widely used by the tuners.
__________________

JimC is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2013, 07:56 AM   #57
jimbo101
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Vehicle: 2014 mustang premium coup
Location: Illinois
Posts: 7
Default

If I used 89 octane with my 87 octane hybrid tune could this improve my mpg or would it mess my tune up.
Would very much like to hear any info. thank you
jimbo101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2013, 09:46 AM   #58
JimC
Moderator
 
JimC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Vehicle: 2013 MCA convertible
Location: Michigan
Posts: 5,624
Default

You can always go to a higher octane with no problems - and with the 2014 you have the computer will make some adjustments using the knock sensors. But you won't get the most power out of it without a tune.

It won't improve your MPG either.
__________________

JimC is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2013, 09:46 AM
MustangForums
Ford Mustang




Paid Advertisement

 
 
 
Reply

Tags
2011, 87, bama, idle, jungo, llc, mpg, mustang, performance, rough, rpm, sct, street, tune, v6

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

Forum Jump

Advertising

Featured Sponsors
Vendor Directory
New Sponsors
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:21 PM.

© Internet Brands, Inc.


This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. Ford® is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company
Emails Backup