Last post on Apr 21, 2013 at 8:42 PM
You are in the Ford F-Series
What is this discussion about?
Ford F-150, Truck
#76 of 236 Love the truck
Aug 24, 2011 (7:58 pm)
I own one. I have 6300 miles on mine and I got 27 mpg on the highway last night. I reset the computer at highway speeds and drove 50 miles to my house and ended up with 27 mpg at my door. I did have some stop and go to contend with but not much. I live way out in the country. BTW, I was driving back from a Ford dealer where I bought my wife a Ford Fusion SE. She got 38.7 mpg on the way home!
I have a 31 ft travel trailer that weighs 7900 lbs dry and this truck pulls it like no other I have owned.( 1998 silverado, 2003 yukon xl) I am very, very pleased with the truck. I got 8-10 mpg towing this trailer with the yukon when it was new and I get 9 with the f150 eb.
I never thought I'd own a Ford, but I love it now.
#77 of 236 Re: Prices Paid to Options [curt1234]
Aug 28, 2011 (6:15 am)
MSRP $42,200 paid (after 3k rebate) paid $35,000 plus tax.
If you buy an F150 with out the 3.5 you will regret it. The truck is nice but the engine is amazing. It is hard to believe you can have this much power and save gas. My first tank with around town and a 32 mile commute to work (Atlanta) was 19.8 MPG. I am sold.
#78 of 236 Ecoboost is good on fuel.
Sep 11, 2011 (4:44 pm)
I just drove 286 miles (all highway) on less than half a tank. With about 20 miles until empty, as per my mileage calculator on my dash.
That's above 20mpg highway. My dash mileage monitor said 22.1, and I'm inclined to believe that isn't far off, because of the distance I traveled without having to fill up. I was astonished that I didn't have to stop to fill up dozens of miles before I did.
Averaged 60-70mph the whole way. Relatively flat (Rt. 95 from Maryland to Connecticut), but it is riddled with toll booths, so room to improve on mileage even.
And mine is the 4x4, Supercab, and the gear ratio is 3.73.
Not making this up. 20++ mpg highway out of a stock 4WD version of the EcoBoost F150.
I'm a bit of a light-foot (I like vehicles with ample power, so I don't always have to rev them). So I'll bet I could get ~24mpg out of a 2WD Ecoboost equipped Fun-50 from Florida to Maine, traffic and weather permitting.
GM says they are not worried about the Ecoboost, but they are underestimating its capabilities!
#79 of 236 Re: Ecoboost is good on fuel. [bigmclargehuge]
Sep 11, 2011 (7:41 pm)
I'm with GM, EcoBoost is simply a marketing SHAM. 98% of the time you will be running off-boost, a derated/detuned V6.
#80 of 236 Re: Ecoboost is good on fuel. [wwest]
Sep 12, 2011 (4:37 am)
EcoBoost is simply a marketing SHAM. 98%
Are you simply against Ford or turbo charging? Just about every manufacturer is using DI and turbo charging. Even GM uses it.
And don't bring up simply using DI and high compression. It's not enough on a small displacement engine for truck use. Sure it will make big HP, but torque at a usable rpm is far more essential in a truck.
#81 of 236 Re: Ecoboost is good on fuel. [wwest]
Sep 12, 2011 (6:34 am)
Wwest, your post makes no sense whatsoever. Thats like saying a Vortec is just a 50hp engine because that's how much power it needs to drive in steady-state with the cruise-control activated. Or saying a Hemi is just a retuned 4-cylinder just because 'most' of the time 4 cylinders are deactivated.
Not very well thought out, IMO.
Actually, during acceleration, going up even a slight incline, or towing, you will ALWAYS be on boost in the EcoBoost. Torque peaks at 2500 rpm, lower than the V8s options. And even under very light acceleration you can hear the turbos spool, and you feel the vehicle accelerating, regardless of your theories on pedal position and wastegate operation.
You've somehow theorized that because wastegates could be overactive, that they necessarily have to be in this application. That is some pretty wild guestimating on your part, backed up neither by reports nor data. You cannot will the Ecoboost to be an inferior engine, I'm sorry to say
Your post about pedals and feel is irrelevant. When you demand torque, the engine responds by closing the wastegates linearly, because the vehicle
increases velocity at a linear rate. It is not beyond all of us who are used to driving v8 trucks to take notice of the sensation of acceleration, contrary to your flimsy theories. In fact, it makes my prior 5.4 seem athsmatic and weak by comparison. Not only does the EB accelerate more readily, it burns 30% less fuel on average as per my real-world driving.
I.E. There is no acceleration lag, whether by lack of spool or boost going to waste, you are incorrect either way. Whatever you seem to think could happen, has been programmed out of this vehicle. And just because torque peaks at 2500 doesn't mean there isn't ample torque under partial throttle. The EB is more responsive at lower rpms and partial throttle than the Vortec 6.0
And it most certainly does not go straight to WOT with partial application of the accelerator. I don't know where you came up with that nonsense. I am far more likely to need close to WOT to get a naturally aspirated slug to move. The difference in actual acceleration between partial throttle and full throttle in the EcoBoost is very wide. Under partial throttle it accelerates with traffic, under full throttle it accelerates more aggressively than any stock naturally aspirated truck I've driven. So it cannot be all or nothing. The middle (linear) progression you claim doesnt exist, happily does. You are mistaken on all counts, it drives just like a more responsive, more efficient, more powerful truck.
There literally is no real-world situation in which the powerband of the EB is not superior to the 5.4, the 5.0, as well as the equivalent Vortec offerings.
Sep 19, 2011 (3:48 pm)
Well, I've been oogling an EB Supercrew for a few weeks now and am really interested in how this engine holds up so keep the reports coming! I test drove one last weekend and i think it's faster than my 328 ix!
#83 of 236 What's the lowest you've heard spool?
Sep 21, 2011 (4:07 pm)
I can hear turbo spool as low as 1500rpms. This happens when in high-gear (4th, 5th, 6th) and accelerating under load (up a hill, etc)
Torques like a modern diesel when you do it that way. Granted the range of the powerband is like 1500-4500 rpm compared to a diesel where its 800-2400, but unless you had a tach, you couldn't tell.
In 1st - 3rd, I can hear spool at 1900-2000 rpm.
Averaged 23.6 mpg highway (on the dash) yesterday over a 30 mile trip (i.e. not instantaneous fuel economy, but averaged over a distance). Mountainous highway driving with moderate inclines and declines. 70 degrees F. 60mph cruise control setting.
Hoping to find the speed in which I can get over 24 mpg over a distance before they switch to wintergas.
#84 of 236 Re: Ecoboost is good on fuel. [wwest]
Oct 03, 2011 (1:53 pm)
Yes,I guess cylinder deactivation is the answer! Ecoboost is not shutting of the fuel totally to four cylinders to try to achieve some sort of fuel economy , only metering it down.If you cut the fuel to four out of eight cylinders you still have the parasitic load of a v-8 only with four dead holes.420 lbs. torque.375 hp. Remember the old eight six four caddy?
#85 of 236 Re: Ecoboost is good on fuel. [dieselone]
Oct 04, 2011 (9:43 am)
"...don't bring up.."
The how about DI, high/low compression, and......
No energy "WASTED" out the exhaust during cruising, 98% of the time.
15:1 native/base CR, 12:1 effective (E/VVT-i) for cruising. 10:1 "effective" before boost with heavy engine loading.