When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
4x4 is hurting the little 2.7 big time. Good numbers though.
I'd still buy that sucky 5.0 though
Yeah 4x4 will definitely hurt the small turbo engine.
ok numbers, but what is up with the 5.0 and 3.5 NA? Did they even improve over the old truck (comparing 3.7 to 3.5)?
Guess they really want to sell those ecoboost engines
The 3.5 EcoBoost went up 2 mpg. That's more than was being reported recently.
ummm what?! Did they recently report a 0-1 mpg gain recently or something? That is rather pathetic for a 700 lb. diet. I guess if you low ball your estimates enough, you will never be disappointed.
ummm what?! Did they recently report a 0-1 mpg gain recently or something? That is rather pathetic for a 700 lb. diet. I guess if you low ball your estimates enough, you will never be disappointed.
Let me remind you.
After Ford came out with the 5% to 20% increase estimates, people on the forums and the media were calculating the 3.5L EB as a 5% or 1 mpg increase because it was carryover. 22 x 5% = 1 mpg.
Then Labnerd said he looked at the books at his dealer friend the other day and confirmed that EcoBoosts would only go up 1 mpg.
This was wrong. 3.5 EB went up 2 which is a 9-10% increase. Only 2 mpg, but on a truck that's a lot and twice what people were talking just the other day.
The Department of Energy says for every 100 lbs of weight you add to a vehicle, you lose 1% fuel economy. So a 700 lb weight loss and a 9-10% increase in economy is good and is not a minor matter.
I'm sorry if this is not sexy enough number for some people, but 24 mpg is better than any non-base gas truck that's out there and better than any V8. Ideally it would have been great to have the 700 lb weight loss, all engines new, 10 speed but nobody can do it all first year.
After Ford came out with the 5% to 20% increase estimates, people on the forums and the media were calculating the 3.5L EB as a 5% or 1 mpg increase because it was carryover. 22 x 5% = 1 mpg.
Fair enough, so a 10% or 2 mpg gain on the 3.5tt was pretty much par for what was expected on the weight loss and no other changes.
So how about the 5.0? It actually LOST ground to the 3.5tt-
Last gen it was 1 mpg behind the 3.5tt across the board. Now it is always 2mpg behind.
Finally, will someone please explain the reasoning behind the 3.5 NA. Is it even the slightest bit more efficient (yeah impossible to tell since they were never in the same frame) than the 3.7 which was a great motor? Seriously, what a waste of goddam R&D money.
Yeah 4x4 will definitely hurt the small turbo engine.
ok numbers, but what is up with the 5.0 and 3.5 NA? Did they even improve over the old truck (comparing 3.7 to 3.5)?
Guess they really want to sell those ecoboost engines
That's what I don't get either. All other things held constant, the 5.0 got less of an improvement from the weight loss than the others did. That makes just about zero sense to me. Those gains should be nearly identical across the board.
That's what I don't get either. All other things held constant, the 5.0 got less of an improvement from the weight loss than the others did. That makes just about zero sense to me. Those gains should be nearly identical across the board.
Its probably more about marketing than anything. Ford wants everyone to buy the ecoboost trucks. Not knocking on the ecoboost motors just saying ford pushes the Eco part big time to sell more. I would bet just like current gen that both the 5.0l and bigger eco are about on par compared to gas mileage. My uncle traded his 10 fx4 for a brand new 14 fx4 Eco, he likes the power but isn't impressed by the gas mileage. He is always asking what kind of mileage my dad, my other uncle and I get in our trucks all 13 and 5.0 trucks.
Its probably more about marketing than anything. Ford wants everyone to buy the ecoboost trucks. Not knocking on the ecoboost motors just saying ford pushes the Eco part big time to sell more. I would bet just like current gen that both the 5.0l and bigger eco are about on par compared to gas mileage. My uncle traded his 10 fx4 for a brand new 14 fx4 Eco, he likes the power but isn't impressed by the gas mileage. He is always asking what kind of mileage my dad, my other uncle and I get in our trucks all 13 and 5.0 trucks.
Oh, I bet it is too. My neighbors have a pair of 2012 Ecoboost screws and they both average over 22 MPG, yet others get 14 MPG, so I believe it all depends on how you drive them.
I'm a bit surprised that the 4x4 mpg's for the 3.5L Eco are nearly identical to the 2.7L Eco, considering the substantial difference in towing and cargo capacity. Glad I ordered a 3.5L Eco (actually, I'm very smart and had figured this out in advance).
11-21-2014, 12:01 PM
