I am getting about 400 miles per tank so far, not sure what that translates, but the computer said I was getting 18.1 on the highway and I am getting about 16.5 driving the truck pretty hard.

I figure if I break it in how I will drive it then it shouldn't break. The other thing is the Lariat ecoboost I drove got 18.1 in the city and 24.5 on the highway with a combined 20.9 but it also had 24K miles on it. I think mine will loosen up over time and get better. I am not real happy with the first tank so far and this truck has about 620 miles on it.

Platinum 3.5 Eco 4X4 with all options (Heavy Truck)

 

Well the reason I want one of these is because I have always been a truck guy, we get bad winters and bad weather here in Calgary. I am sick of driving my Acura TL Type S and since the mileage on these trucks are better then alot of cars in this class, thats why I want one.

So as for motor choice, I still don't know what to do. Won't be a whole lot of towing, more snowboarding in the mountains and trips up there..

 

And this is why i want the 36 gallon tank, i can go right at 500 miles on a tank with my 5.4, its nice to commute a whole week on one tank of gas

 

Why not consider the 3.7? It's got the most mpg, some pep and if you don't tow you won't be missing the lack of low torque.

 

Uh, how is this different than *every* warranty service job at the dealer? My 05 had a bad rattle in the door thanks to it being mounted improperly, and suffered from those damned cracked spark plugs and clogged injectors that caused so many headaches for us that model year, and getting my dealer to correct both took many angry phone calls to Ford corporate. I've purchased 4 vehicles from the only two Ford dealerships within 300 miles, and both required calls from corporate to do the right thing and take care of my fully covered by warranty issues.

Besides, if half of what people say about this thing is true, Ford stress tested the hell out of the EB's, well beyond what they would normally experience in conditions no vehicle could ever encounter unless it was driven from the North Pole to Arizona and back at full throttle for ten years. Besides, if I didn't trust Ford, I wouldn't be buying a fifth vehicle from them.

 

The first few tanks are always less than stellar. It takes time for the computer to adjust itself to your vehicle, your driving style, and it's environment. If the dealer didn't explain it when you got it, there is a whole section in the manual about breaking it in. When I first got my 05, I took it back to the dealer a week later because it was getting worse mileage than the 89 bronco it was replacing. After a few weeks of normal driving, I was getting 15-16 mixed, and all was right with the world.

 

Yeah anyone who puts any merit into fuel economy numbers being posted on here when the truck is a month old and has under 10000 miles on it is not getting the big picture. Give these trucks some time to break in and accumulate some miles before we are critical of any of the "real world" numbers. It took me over 12000 miles before I started to feel my 5.4 loosen up and achieve (what I think) is decent mileage for a 6000lb truck!

I drove a 5.0 last week and posted my thoughts somewhere on here. I never included the fuel economy numbers in my post because it was irrelevant due to the low miles on the vehicle (200), but here it goes to illustrate my points above: After a few miles I toggled through the productivity screen and it read 36L/100km which is 6.53MPG. I drove it for about 15 more miles and drove it hard for a part of that and the mileage improved to 25L/100km or 9.41MPG. These numbers would have been similar irregardless of the motor and would represent driving style and the lack of a broken in motor rather than the actual fuel economy characteristics of the motor. But some folks on here are loosing sight of those factors.

So for the OP - if you are not going to be towing then I wouldn't shy away from a 3.7 if you can get it in the configuration you want. If you are getting a SCREW 4x4 and F/E is primary concern then EB will most likely be the best plan. If the 5.0 is exactly what you desire then don't put any merit into the MPG figures I posted above.

 

As Blk Dwg says, try out the 3.7. Ford's V6 powertrain engineer explained to me in a public forum that the NA 3.7 will get the best fuel economy of any of the options. Mine is getting 12.3 L/100 in the city with lots of hills and traffic. Does 10.23 on the highway driving at 120 km/hr. (all converted from MPG/MPH seeing 19-20 in the City and 22-23 on the highway so far) ... and it keeps getting much better with more miles (only 600 so far).

I like the FX2/FX4 packages and considered going that route. The FX interior trim as a bit too STAR WARS for my taste. The Custom package has painted silver inserts that I like a bit better. Of course the price for the XLT/Custom is a lot less than the FX series. With back up camera, tow pkg, Sat Radio, I was out the door for $26,000'ish after incentives & before local taxes.

As for engine sound. Try the 3.7. Somebody at Ford did a very good job with that exhaust too. With all the technology toys and really comfortable seating, this truck is the ultimate multipurpose vehicle. Sporty, Luxurious, yet something you can work with and get dirty. The 3.7 with its 7000 RPM red line reminds me of my sports cars of days gone by and performs as well as many sports cars did in the last couple of decades. The 5.0 is the Muscle Car

The GREAT news is, I don't see how you could go wrong with any of the 2011 engines. Ford just completely dominates right now.

 

Nice rig f150 love the white! So that is an "XLT custom" in Canada? 2 wheeler by the looks of it (i'm not sure if you can get scab with 4x4 and 3.7?)

 

My experience with Ford Dealers has been the opposite. In fact, I've been surprised at how eager they've been to fix stuff (that sometimes I've broken by being stupid).

I attended the tear down with an engine expert friend of mine and we were both very impressed with the EB and the basic architecture of the entire new engine line up (3.7, 5.0 and EB). My only long term reliability concern would be the fuel injectors, fuel pump and sensors and that is without any knowledge of which suppliers Ford is actually using.

Bosh worked with Ford on the design and in many ways the EB is more cutting edge than the similar BMW engines which have had lack luster reliability with their DI components. I understand Ford switched suppliers in the interest of sourcing the most reliable components and if you read the blogs of the other EB owners (Taurus, Flex, Mondeo) no one is complaining about reliability and durability.

The only complaints I've been seeing are kibitzing about the tapping noises which seem to be inherent in this design. Since I understand why those noises are happening, it does not bother me, but some folks are all upset. Maybe we need foam filled engine covers on trucks

 

Score another one for EcoBoost. A twin turbo V6 EcoBoost does better in the mountains/high elevations.

 

Nice rig FI50. That would look nice in my drive-way, next to my Gen. 1 White Lightning. The seat color is similar to the '94-'95 Lightnings. Can you give us a picture of the center stack area. It look's to have the accent I'm hoping to put in my STX.

 

Mountains? EB is the way to go, you can't beat forced induction at high altitudes. Why do you think all the diesels these days have turbos?

 

I live at about 3100 ft elevation. I drive a 2011 screw fx2 3.55s with 5.0. Last city tank was about 90% city and HAND CALCULATED was 16.1. Instrument cluster was showing 16.2. Just got back from a 500 mile road trip and on the way up to where I was going averaged 24.7 (tail wind) and on the way back 20.4 (head wind) and thus was in very hilly areas and this truck only downshifted once! I have been so impressed with my 5.0. Previous trucks were 2009 f150 fx4 with 5.4 3.73s and 2010 f250 6.4 diesel.

 

my 5.0 is getting 16.5 hand calc. city driving easy 13 driving hard 19-22 highway under 65mph in houston