93 or 91 Octane tune?
I have 87, 89 and 93 octane tunes. After experimenting, I run the 89 tune about 99% of the time. I've also been in the situation (twice) where I could only get 87 octane and since I keep the tuner in the car, it only took 2 minutes to be on my way with no concerns.
In your case, I'd get tunes for whatever 3 octanes they sell in your area but include an 87 tune. As stated above, an 87 custom tune still runs circles around the stock 87 tune. There's more to the performance gain in a custom tune than just the octane.
In your case, I'd get tunes for whatever 3 octanes they sell in your area but include an 87 tune. As stated above, an 87 custom tune still runs circles around the stock 87 tune. There's more to the performance gain in a custom tune than just the octane.
6th Gear Member
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 16,182
From: PA to KY ('07) to IL ('09) to MS ('10) to FL ('11)
Here's how I approached the tunes:
Immediately before I installed the CAI/tunes, I took the Stang out for a rather "aggressive" ride; multiple 0-90+ WOT runs, multiple runs from a roll at various speeds and then some additional more-real-world acceleration (like merging, pulling from a light without getting TOO noticed...).
Then I installed the CAI, loaded the 87 custom tune and repeated that ride, etc etc. As it turned out, each tune had it's own characteristics for low/mid/high end response. I found that my 93 tune was a bit of dog down low (which is where I tend to do about 80% or more of my driving style), the 89 pulled nice both high and low and the 87 was similiar to the 89 but just a tad more... timid.
I'm happy with my 89 tune. Money wasn't an issue. My Stang isn't my DD and I'll often tank up with ethanol-free fuel anyway; wayyyy more expensive than ethanol-laced fuel but because the Stang may not get fueled for 3 months at a time, I don't let it sit with ethanol. But I digress...
Immediately before I installed the CAI/tunes, I took the Stang out for a rather "aggressive" ride; multiple 0-90+ WOT runs, multiple runs from a roll at various speeds and then some additional more-real-world acceleration (like merging, pulling from a light without getting TOO noticed...).
Then I installed the CAI, loaded the 87 custom tune and repeated that ride, etc etc. As it turned out, each tune had it's own characteristics for low/mid/high end response. I found that my 93 tune was a bit of dog down low (which is where I tend to do about 80% or more of my driving style), the 89 pulled nice both high and low and the 87 was similiar to the 89 but just a tad more... timid.
I'm happy with my 89 tune. Money wasn't an issue. My Stang isn't my DD and I'll often tank up with ethanol-free fuel anyway; wayyyy more expensive than ethanol-laced fuel but because the Stang may not get fueled for 3 months at a time, I don't let it sit with ethanol. But I digress...
6th Gear Member
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 16,182
From: PA to KY ('07) to IL ('09) to MS ('10) to FL ('11)
Have you TRIED running a 93 tune with the 93 fuel in your area? Since 93 is available, you're losing out on a few more RWHP IMO. I think I'd run the 93 tune and, if I was pinging, THEN I'd drop down to the next lowest octane tune.
Here's how I approached the tunes:
Immediately before I installed the CAI/tunes, I took the Stang out for a rather "aggressive" ride; multiple 0-90+ WOT runs, multiple runs from a roll at various speeds and then some additional more-real-world acceleration (like merging, pulling from a light without getting TOO noticed...).
Then I installed the CAI, loaded the 87 custom tune and repeated that ride, etc etc. As it turned out, each tune had it's own characteristics for low/mid/high end response. I found that my 93 tune was a bit of dog down low (which is where I tend to do about 80% or more of my driving style), the 89 pulled nice both high and low and the 87 was similiar to the 89 but just a tad more... timid.
I'm happy with my 89 tune. Money wasn't an issue. My Stang isn't my DD and I'll often tank up with ethanol-free fuel anyway; wayyyy more expensive than ethanol-laced fuel but because the Stang may not get fueled for 3 months at a time, I don't let it sit with ethanol. But I digress...
Immediately before I installed the CAI/tunes, I took the Stang out for a rather "aggressive" ride; multiple 0-90+ WOT runs, multiple runs from a roll at various speeds and then some additional more-real-world acceleration (like merging, pulling from a light without getting TOO noticed...).
Then I installed the CAI, loaded the 87 custom tune and repeated that ride, etc etc. As it turned out, each tune had it's own characteristics for low/mid/high end response. I found that my 93 tune was a bit of dog down low (which is where I tend to do about 80% or more of my driving style), the 89 pulled nice both high and low and the 87 was similiar to the 89 but just a tad more... timid.
I'm happy with my 89 tune. Money wasn't an issue. My Stang isn't my DD and I'll often tank up with ethanol-free fuel anyway; wayyyy more expensive than ethanol-laced fuel but because the Stang may not get fueled for 3 months at a time, I don't let it sit with ethanol. But I digress...
This was the real question in my post - use a 91 tune with 93 octane gas to be "safe". FYI - I talked to Mike at AM and he told me the build in a certain amount of tolerance/flexibility into the tunes for this - but it is what I was asking about - would it be "safer" to run a 91 tune with 93 octane gas always. Guess it is protection against potentially getting gas labelled/sold as 93 at a station but actually somehow less octane...
Wonder how they compare? (AM vs Brenspeed)
Last edited by rogan01; Feb 1, 2013 at 12:55 PM.
6th Gear Member
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 16,182
From: PA to KY ('07) to IL ('09) to MS ('10) to FL ('11)
AM's tunes are excellent. Yes, I have the 3 Brenspeed tunes and, at the time, you simply selected the octanes. If you can get 3 tunes from AM for about the same price as 1 tune from Brenspeed, well, need I say more?


