Ford released the MPG for the 5.0 and the 3.7, finally. The numbers aren't too bad. The 3.7 is supposed to get 16/23 and the 5.0 is supposed to get 15/21. That 5.0 is getting about what my cars is rated at, not too shabby. Assuming the 3.5 gets 10% better fuel mileage it should come in at around 16/23. That is doable as far as I'm concerned and well worth the extra money.

 

Well I'm getting 21 mpg on the highway with my 2010 Lariat so what would be the advantage to going to a 3.7?

 

The advantage would be 2 mpg or roughly 10%. It isn't a phenomenal difference, but enough for some to justify the V6, particularly for fleet owners or more thrifty buyers.

I didn't see the new mpg numbers on Ford's website, but did find a USA Today article mentioning the newly released figures. The 6.2 is apparently rated at 12/17, yuck! That is the price you pay for being able to boast the most half-ton power. Still, disappointing given you can get nearly as much power out of either the Dodge or the Yota's 5.7 and get 20 mpg highway.

The 3.7 and 5.0 were close to what I was predicting (I had predicted 17/22 on the 3.7 and 16/22 for the 5.0). I am a bit disappointed in the 5.0, though relieved at the same time. While I had hoped Ford would be able to exceed the fuel economy rating of the 5.3 Chevy, I feel better about buying my 2010 4.6 3v now that I know the new engine at least isn't any better on gas (and you needn't remind me of the power difference, Im ok with that).

 

Only 1 MPG over the 2010's Ford is definitely wanting to downplay these motors to make the eco boost look better. When will the Eco-Boost numbers be released?

 

It's all how you drive. My straight highway driving in mid 20s... not kidding either. Keep that foot light and you'll pull some crazy numbers

 

very dissapointing they can do better

 

I love Ford trucks, but I've felt they've been a little behind the competition in recent years. I'm glad to see with the redesigned powertrains they're gonna be back to kickin' the competition's azz!

 

IMHO ...

They haven't yet addressed the F150's weight.

I have a feeling that is next on the agenda - with the Gubmint tightening the screws on mileage standards, there is only so much you can do via drivetrain alone. And given the vehicle's mission, not a lot of wiggle room for aero improvements.

It's either that, or say goodbye mainstream 1/2-ton trucks.

MGD

 

And it always cracks me up when one of the guys getting realy good mileage out of a 5.4 claims to do as well as the new motors. Sure, you're getting good mileage once in a while, but you're in the vast minority. Most people driving a 5.4 are getting 3-8 MPG worse than those lucky 3% of 5.4 owners claiming 20's on the highway.

 

I average 18.6 mpg with my 4.6 3V, 3.73 LSD, XLT 4x4. Half city, half highway.
I sit the Cruise Control at 2,000 Rpm which is right around 75 mph on the highway.

 

No one can compare how they drive any vehicle to its EPA rating. The EPA rating is a standardized test. Any given driver knows how he drives and what FE he gets relative to the EPA rating. If one beats the 18MPG highway rating of the 5.4L, then they can expect to beat the 5.0L too, by a similar percentage.

The 5.0L gets better FE than the 4.6L 3V and more power than the 5.4L. Why would anyone complain about that?

 

 

Not bad on the 3.7 and 5.0. But the numbers on the 6.2 officially put any slim thought of that engine to bed for me even without a test drive. The limited testing so far already shows the EB about as strong as the 6.2 and bet it will get significantly better mileage. A tricked EB or blown 5.0 would still likely beat the 6.2 in economy by a good margin and kill it in performance. I just don't see the 6.2 as a highly desireable option unless you wanted to build a 6-700+ hp monster that was not a daily driver.

 

Nope, exactly the same mpg between 4.6 3v and 5.0. It isn't exactly terrible given how much more power the 5.0 has over the 4.6, but it would have been nice to see a even a 1 mpg bump both city and highway just to one-up the competition in economy and power. I am not saying I wouldn't want the 5.0, especially since I had the old pushrod 5.0 in my 91 and I have a soft spot for a motor with the same nomenclature.

 

BTW, these aren't the final EPA numbers. I expect Ford is undershooting what these engines will likely get, so that when the final EPA numbers come out everyone will be pleasantly surprised.

Although, I must say the 15/21 rating on the 5.0L is about what I expected and seems about right. I think the 3.7L's final EPA rating may be more, like 17/24. Can't wait to see what the next few weeks bring.