My 2009's (4x4 S-Crew) real world overall 5.4 number is 14.9 MPG. It can do much better if driven very carefully. Over 20 MPG is possible at 45MPH with no air. Highway trips net a solid 16MPG.

The review in Autoweek talking about the ecoboost says they were able to achieve over 20MPG driving very easily. It does not sound that different to me.

 

... with 55 more PEAK hp and 55 more PEAK ft/lbs tq then any gain is a huge win. Never mind the higher levels across the curve.

 

autoweek got 19.4 with the regular V6. EcoBoost v6 got 29.3 mpg. that on top of the big power increase PK mentioned, sounds very different to me.

 

The 6-spd auto top gear has almost the same ratio as the prior 4-spd, 0.69 vs. 0.70. The info on the 2011 EB shows like 0.63, but we have no FE numbers yet. 2009 highway is same as 2008 for same engine.

 

Rambo, it says this:

NOT a good comparison. The 19.4 figure with the 3.7 is probably pretty realistic in mixed driving but that 29.3 in the EB is far from realistic.

 

Yes, that is what they wrote. I was replying to the post that said "over 20 is possible" with a 5.4 at 45mph, and that Autoweek got over 20 with EB (45mph) so he did not see any difference between the two. Wrong. Autoweek got 29.3 mpg. That is a big difference from over 20 "possible". Realistic or not. They were also going over hills, in traffic and made stops. So I don't believe it was that easy of a test. The 3.7 is rated at 23 highway and the EB will beat it. If EB can do 19 to 25 and have much more power then that is a big difference to me.

 

I'm LMAO at everyone that seems to ignore all of the posts where people are writing about actual driving experiences in the EB where high 20's were achieved... NOT coasting downhill at 45 mph.

I may be disappointed later, but I truly believe mid-20's are a very realistic expectation for this engine.

 

The sales manager at the dealership i ordered my truck said the test they did was windows down(no ac) 45 mph cruise and averaged upper 20s....thats not realistic what so ever...not for me anyways. My mom has a sho with eco boost and does not get upper 20s...so...but guess we will see huh!!! either way ill be driving a 5.0 with like maybe 20 mpgso it doesnt really concern me...just thought id give my .02

 

In my area I can go three to four months out of the year with no a/c or defrost. It is cool enough that I don't need the windows down and can just use the vent. The majority of my ride to and from work is on a road that has no lights and has a speed limit of 35, but 45-50 is the norm. So those numbers could be viable for me. At the very least I would expect mileage about as good as I am getting with my car, which is rated about what the 5.0 is.

 

My 2010 STX SC 2wd 4.6 2 valve gets around 17 mpg rural driving (around town and country roads with lights). The worse I've ever seen is 15.5 and that was putt'n around town idling in parking lots with the air on in 100 deg. Texas heat. Pretty much every car or truck I have owned has gotten better than the rating by at least .5 mpg and usualy 1 or 2 mpg better. If that holds true for the new Ford's that's pretty damn good milage.

 

I think anyone expecting an EPA rating over 24mpg HWY will be disappointed. I think 22 or 23 would be great! More horsepower, way more torque and a 4to 5mpg increase over a 5.4 would be a great accomplishment.
A 2wd EcoBoost (if that's an option) could get an EPA rating of 25 or so HWY and with a super light foot I could see upper 20's depending where you live.....

 

[QUOTE=Wookie;4373418]I've owned 3 5.4L F-150s and have hit a sustained 20 MPG ....going less than 65MPH over flat ground behind a larger vehicle. The rest of time I have averaged closer to 15-16 on the highway at reasonable speeds (~75). Going faster or in town it will drop like a rock. /QUOTE]

Same experience minus 1 (for a total of 2) 5.4s. my record on the 5.4 is 23 but 18-20 is more my norm under your driving conditions. 75 or so its 17/18 depending on wind, etc. 60/40 hwy city I get 15.

IF a diff engine would let me run 75 and get 20+ or 60/40 hwy/city and get upper teen to 20 = WOW.

 

Somebody at Pick up trucks dot come said they ordered a 2011 and got the window sticker in. It was a 5.0 4x4 and mileage was 15/19. Thats disappointing to me but I understand how hard it is to get even one more mpg. The 4x2 was 15/21 if memory serves me. Its hard to believe that 300 more lbs and setting maybe 2 inches higher in the air loses 2 mpg but I guess it does. The 5.4 was 14/18 I think in a 4x4 and 14/20 in 4x2 so its basically a 1 mpg improvment with better power. Whether it tows any better is yet to be seen so I would not expect any miracles for those that tow heavy stuff. Get the EB if you want a real difference in towing power.

Im just sitting here pondering why Ford killed the Ranger. I dont want to beat a dead horse but those little trucks will do a lot of work cheap. As good as the 3.7 base truck is going to be its NO replacement for the Ranger.

I notice that GM's 5.3 is 15/21 no matter if its 4x4 or 4x2. What gives here?

 

The guy actually said " We just got our first window stickers on 2011 F-150's. Looks like the 5.0L on a 4x4 will be rated at 14 City and 19 Higway, so the 5.0L doesn't quite match the 4.6L 3V it replaces on fuel economy. "

So I don't know if this guy works in one of the truck plants or is full of BS.
I checked the EPA website and their are no figures there yet, so maybe the guy is full of it- at least we can hope, especially since that was his first post at that site.