New Ecoboost Fuel Economy = Awesome!
#62
I had a 6 cylinder 4 liter 2010 Ranger 4x4. Reason I traded it on for an Ecoboost
f150 was the bad mileage the Ranger was getting. Thing was only getting 16-18 US mpg highway and that's driving it like grandma. Driving in town it barely would get 237 miles on a full tank (18.5 US Gallons) which is 12-13 mpg. My Ecoboost gets 18 - 19 in town (20" wheels-3.55 rears). I love the highway mileage and yes I drive 63 mph for testing the mileage and got as high as 24.5 mpg us (thats 30 mpg canadian).http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/sr...cons/icon7.gif
f150 was the bad mileage the Ranger was getting. Thing was only getting 16-18 US mpg highway and that's driving it like grandma. Driving in town it barely would get 237 miles on a full tank (18.5 US Gallons) which is 12-13 mpg. My Ecoboost gets 18 - 19 in town (20" wheels-3.55 rears). I love the highway mileage and yes I drive 63 mph for testing the mileage and got as high as 24.5 mpg us (thats 30 mpg canadian).http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/sr...cons/icon7.gif
#63
I could do a 10 mile run with my EB and get the lie-o-meter to read 40 mpg on the right stretch of road, just isn't far enough to get a legit number.
Last edited by jntibs; 05-01-2012 at 05:46 PM.
#64
The dealer installed those items, so I have noithing to compare it to, but I can say that it's a lot smoother of a ride than I expected it to be.
my 02 F150 4x4 with 5.4 used 20 liters of fuel for every 100 kilometers, and I ordered this truck from the factory and babied it from the start.
No matter what I did, it aberaged 12 MPG. (I'm pretty sure that's what 20 liters of gas per 100 kilometers equates to.
Yesterday I drove from Kingston to Syracuse, NY to get my bedrug and ARE lid installed, and the truck averaged 11.9 Liters per 100 kilometers, that wawith the cruise set at 65 MPH.
It's smooth, handles well and has plenty of passing power when you need it. I'm very happy with this truck and am looking forward to see how it tows.
Thursday I'm picking up a new 2012 Keystone 24 foot tt (actual size from pin to bumper is 29, 4'. I'm hoping it does a good job of towing.
my 02 F150 4x4 with 5.4 used 20 liters of fuel for every 100 kilometers, and I ordered this truck from the factory and babied it from the start.
No matter what I did, it aberaged 12 MPG. (I'm pretty sure that's what 20 liters of gas per 100 kilometers equates to.
Yesterday I drove from Kingston to Syracuse, NY to get my bedrug and ARE lid installed, and the truck averaged 11.9 Liters per 100 kilometers, that wawith the cruise set at 65 MPH.
It's smooth, handles well and has plenty of passing power when you need it. I'm very happy with this truck and am looking forward to see how it tows.
Thursday I'm picking up a new 2012 Keystone 24 foot tt (actual size from pin to bumper is 29, 4'. I'm hoping it does a good job of towing.
#66
My wife now has a '12 Explorer with the 2.0 EB motor. It drives awesome but it takes very little additional throttle input and the instant mileage drops quickly. I have to believe that the turbos are controlled to eliminate the perceived "lag" and therefore mileage may suffer since the motor may not create much torque without the boost. If this is somewhat true, I would imagine the extra torque required to turn taller tires would put the turbos into a "boost" state to compensate and therefore reduce the mileage.
Just speculation on my part, but I am about to order a truck and will likely go with the 5.0 as it seems more folks are consistently getting better mileage than the group reporting with the EB.
#67
A lot of it has to do with driving style and terrain with the EB.
I live in the Midwest and do a lot of flat open road driving, my last 5 fill-ups have averaged 19.6 hand calculated. I also drive 2-3 mph faster than the speed limit and have a soft foot. Filled-up yesterday and hand calculated 20.8 (best to date, 380 some miles). Life of the truck I am now in the 18.8 range with 7300 miles on the clock.
It'd be neat if I could have a 5.0 in the same set-up and see what I could mpg wise. I bet it would be very comparable.....
I live in the Midwest and do a lot of flat open road driving, my last 5 fill-ups have averaged 19.6 hand calculated. I also drive 2-3 mph faster than the speed limit and have a soft foot. Filled-up yesterday and hand calculated 20.8 (best to date, 380 some miles). Life of the truck I am now in the 18.8 range with 7300 miles on the clock.
It'd be neat if I could have a 5.0 in the same set-up and see what I could mpg wise. I bet it would be very comparable.....
#68
A lot of it has to do with driving style and terrain with the EB.
I live in the Midwest and do a lot of flat open road driving, my last 5 fill-ups have averaged 19.6 hand calculated. I also drive 2-3 mph faster than the speed limit and have a soft foot. Filled-up yesterday and hand calculated 20.8 (best to date, 380 some miles). Life of the truck I am now in the 18.8 range with 7300 miles on the clock.
It'd be neat if I could have a 5.0 in the same set-up and see what I could mpg wise. I bet it would be very comparable.....
I live in the Midwest and do a lot of flat open road driving, my last 5 fill-ups have averaged 19.6 hand calculated. I also drive 2-3 mph faster than the speed limit and have a soft foot. Filled-up yesterday and hand calculated 20.8 (best to date, 380 some miles). Life of the truck I am now in the 18.8 range with 7300 miles on the clock.
It'd be neat if I could have a 5.0 in the same set-up and see what I could mpg wise. I bet it would be very comparable.....
__________________
Jim
Jim
#69
Jay, I am running 3.55's, probably could have gotten away with the 3.31's really, but I have only ever had 3.55's in my F-150's.
#70
BTW I just made a 200 mile road trip and funny how it still averaged over 22 mpg at 65 mph. IMHO 10 miles is enough road to get a base mpg. I don't live in the hills
#71
Touche on your lie-o-meter comment but mine sounds like a truck and not some space car from the Jetson's On the same 10 mile stretch as before going at faster speed like 70 mph it drops to 20.5 mpg and at 75 mph it drops again to 18.5 mpg.
BTW I just made a 200 mile road trip and funny how it still averaged over 22 mpg at 65 mph. IMHO 10 miles is enough road to get a base mpg. I don't live in the hills
BTW I just made a 200 mile road trip and funny how it still averaged over 22 mpg at 65 mph. IMHO 10 miles is enough road to get a base mpg. I don't live in the hills
__________________
Jim
Jim
#72
That is all very similar to what I get with the 5.0. I don't drive hard, but don't baby it either. The cruise will be set at 70 on the highway and I will go faster to pass when needed. Over the trucks life, I have averaged 19.5 for 25,000 miles. This is probably 80% highway with hills and many small towns and 20% in Fort Worth. I get about 17 in town and will average about 20 to 20.5 for a week. The absolute best I have gotten is 23.4 for a about 85 miles of interstate with a few hills, but mostly level. What I have found that kills the mpg is idling, wind, and continual climbing, even if gradual. Going into a headwind, even a slight one will knock off at least 1 mpg.
#73
#74
That will be an interesting question.
My wife now has a '12 Explorer with the 2.0 EB motor. It drives awesome but it takes very little additional throttle input and the instant mileage drops quickly. I have to believe that the turbos are controlled to eliminate the perceived "lag" and therefore mileage may suffer since the motor may not create much torque without the boost. If this is somewhat true, I would imagine the extra torque required to turn taller tires would put the turbos into a "boost" state to compensate and therefore reduce the mileage.
Just speculation on my part, but I am about to order a truck and will likely go with the 5.0 as it seems more folks are consistently getting better mileage than the group reporting with the EB.
My wife now has a '12 Explorer with the 2.0 EB motor. It drives awesome but it takes very little additional throttle input and the instant mileage drops quickly. I have to believe that the turbos are controlled to eliminate the perceived "lag" and therefore mileage may suffer since the motor may not create much torque without the boost. If this is somewhat true, I would imagine the extra torque required to turn taller tires would put the turbos into a "boost" state to compensate and therefore reduce the mileage.
Just speculation on my part, but I am about to order a truck and will likely go with the 5.0 as it seems more folks are consistently getting better mileage than the group reporting with the EB.
#75
If you want a larger sample than a few people posting on a forum, go to fuelly.com and you can see what mileage people get. My 4 x 4 ecoboost is averaging 11l/100km or 21mpg. Had a 5.4 before and doing same driving I got 15mpg. Ecoboost is great in my opinion. One observation is that I notice mileage gets better after warmup which takes 15km or so and I drive 30 hwy km to work. I think short trips in the city the mileage would not be as good.
__________________
Jim
Jim