2011 F-150 4x4 EcoBoost MPG 15 City 21 Highway
#91
Another window sticker has appeared and it's still 15/21
http://www.inventory.ford.com/servic...85&modelid=220
http://www.inventory.ford.com/servic...85&modelid=220
#93
#94
Another window sticker has appeared and it's still 15/21
http://www.inventory.ford.com/servic...85&modelid=220
http://www.inventory.ford.com/servic...85&modelid=220
I can't wait for the numbers for a 2WD, they can only be better....
#95
That's why. In reality these trucks wont get 21 mpg at true freeway speeds (70-75 mph)
They will likely get what the 5.0 is rated at(14-19), at best.
That's a big difference from what they were touting. The EB will be a much tougher sell now since it's MPG's are not much better than the 5.0.
Most tried and true Ford V8 owners will opt for the V8 over the EB V6.
Ford has let us down with no max tow on the 5.0 and poorer than expected MPG on the EB.
#96
The complaining is because many of the ford employess who were in charge of the test drives were bragging about 23-28 mpg freeway at 70- 75 mph with the EB.
That's why. In reality these trucks wont get 21 mpg at true freeway speeds (70-75 mph)
They will likely get what the 5.0 is rated at(14-19), at best.
That's a big difference from what they were touting. The EB will be a much tougher sell now since it's MPG's are not much better than the 5.0.
Most tried and true Ford V8 owners will opt for the V8 over the EB V6.
Ford has let us down with no max tow on the 5.0 and poorer than expected MPG on the EB.
That's why. In reality these trucks wont get 21 mpg at true freeway speeds (70-75 mph)
They will likely get what the 5.0 is rated at(14-19), at best.
That's a big difference from what they were touting. The EB will be a much tougher sell now since it's MPG's are not much better than the 5.0.
Most tried and true Ford V8 owners will opt for the V8 over the EB V6.
Ford has let us down with no max tow on the 5.0 and poorer than expected MPG on the EB.
#99
Ford has been saying the Ecoboost gets 20% better mileage than the larger engine its positioned as an alternative for. That engine is the 6.2L.
The idea is 6.2L Towing with 3.7L fuel mileage.
An Ecoboost designed to replace the 3.7L in towing with 20% better mileage would be a 4 cylinder.
The idea is 6.2L Towing with 3.7L fuel mileage.
An Ecoboost designed to replace the 3.7L in towing with 20% better mileage would be a 4 cylinder.
#100
I built two Lariats on a dealers site last week. The EcoBoost engine cost $750 and the 6.2L cost $1,995. You can have the gas hog 6.2L for that kind of lettuce. It will still take the average Joe about 45,000 miles to pay for the 3.5L EcoBoost over the 5.0L if the fuel numbers are correct, but to pay a premium AND lose fuel economy with the 6.2L is not my bag. Yes, I know some NEED the speed and feel of the 6.2L, but I'm starting to wonder why when the Eco seems so comparable in power WITH the added fuel savings for much less initial cost... and with a 6.5 ft be available.
Last edited by Smokewagun; 01-05-2011 at 10:27 AM. Reason: Engine Cost Verified
#101
Exactly. And we still don't know the numbers for a 4x2 yet which will be a bit better. I just think some people will never be satisfied....
#102
I think some including myself were hoping it was up to 20% improvement over the outgoing 5.4L, not the 6.2L that was never available in anything except the Raptor until 2011.
#104
On top of the fact that they've changed the rating system... I wonder what the EB numbers would be under the old system?