Another window sticker has appeared and it's still 15/21

http://www.inventory.ford.com/servic...85&modelid=220

 

so both of these stickers are for 4x4's. I wonder what the 2x4 rating will be. 17-23, like the 3.7?

Seems pretty good to me.

 

Probably real close to that. The 3.7 4x4 is rated at 16/21.

 

21 MPG in a fully loaded 4x4 Supercrew Lariat w/ 3.55 gears with the Ecoboosts power and torque? Thats awesome! I don't get what all the complaining is about.

I can't wait for the numbers for a 2WD, they can only be better....

 

The complaining is because many of the ford employess who were in charge of the test drives were bragging about 23-28 mpg freeway at 70- 75 mph with the EB.
That's why. In reality these trucks wont get 21 mpg at true freeway speeds (70-75 mph)
They will likely get what the 5.0 is rated at(14-19), at best.

That's a big difference from what they were touting. The EB will be a much tougher sell now since it's MPG's are not much better than the 5.0.
Most tried and true Ford V8 owners will opt for the V8 over the EB V6.

Ford has let us down with no max tow on the 5.0 and poorer than expected MPG on the EB.

 

But Ford has been building up the Ecoboost for several years. There have been countless articles like these http://green.autoblog.com/2009/09/24...-f-150-lineup/ where Ford claims 20 to 25% improved fuel economy.

 

The EB still isnt available for build & pricing on Ford's website.

 

A heck of a great question for Ford...

Where are the auto journalists?

 

Ford has been saying the Ecoboost gets 20% better mileage than the larger engine its positioned as an alternative for. That engine is the 6.2L.

The idea is 6.2L Towing with 3.7L fuel mileage.

An Ecoboost designed to replace the 3.7L in towing with 20% better mileage would be a 4 cylinder.

 

I built two Lariats on a dealers site last week. The EcoBoost engine cost $750 and the 6.2L cost $1,995. You can have the gas hog 6.2L for that kind of lettuce. It will still take the average Joe about 45,000 miles to pay for the 3.5L EcoBoost over the 5.0L if the fuel numbers are correct, but to pay a premium AND lose fuel economy with the 6.2L is not my bag. Yes, I know some NEED the speed and feel of the 6.2L, but I'm starting to wonder why when the Eco seems so comparable in power WITH the added fuel savings for much less initial cost... and with a 6.5 ft be available.

 

Exactly. And we still don't know the numbers for a 4x2 yet which will be a bit better. I just think some people will never be satisfied....

 

I think some including myself were hoping it was up to 20% improvement over the outgoing 5.4L, not the 6.2L that was never available in anything except the Raptor until 2011.

 

The 5.4 was rated at 18 hwy if I'm not mistaken. A twenty percent increase over that would be 21.6. If the 4x2 is rated at 23 hwy, then that would be over a 27% increase.

 

On top of the fact that they've changed the rating system... I wonder what the EB numbers would be under the old system?

 

Probably 17/23 under the old system.