Ecoboosters with 3.73 rear end, what MPG are you getting?
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
From: Great Falls, Montana
Well, I'm soon to be a NON-Ecoboost owner. After 7 months of headaches, heartaches, and really poor MPGs, I finally am getting nearly a straight across trade for basically the same truck with a 5.0. Many of you have read my posts explaining all the issues/problems I've had. It's taken a while, but the dealership finally came through for me.
I test drove the new truck yesterday. With only 5 miles on the odometer, on a 60 mile highway run, it got 19+@70mph, and 20+@65mph. The very best the EB truck has ever gotten was 18.4, and that was on a three hour drive, where the top speed never exceeded 65mph.
I can tell you from experience, an EB equipped with 3:73s will not get anywhere near it's advertised MPGs. If you make ANY modifications, larger tires, toppers, etc. it will affect the MPGs grossly to the negative.
I'm taking all of my accessories off my truck today/tomorrow, and will be picking up the new truck on Wed.
As much as I would have liked to be the "flag waving poster boy" for the Ecoboost, it just wasn't meant to be. I know there are a lot of folks out there who are thrilled with their EB, but I wasn't one of them. Between all the problems, and the very poor MPGs, I've really been soured to the EB....it will have to prove itself to me before I would ever consider buying another EB equipped product.
I test drove the new truck yesterday. With only 5 miles on the odometer, on a 60 mile highway run, it got 19+@70mph, and 20+@65mph. The very best the EB truck has ever gotten was 18.4, and that was on a three hour drive, where the top speed never exceeded 65mph.
I can tell you from experience, an EB equipped with 3:73s will not get anywhere near it's advertised MPGs. If you make ANY modifications, larger tires, toppers, etc. it will affect the MPGs grossly to the negative.
I'm taking all of my accessories off my truck today/tomorrow, and will be picking up the new truck on Wed.
As much as I would have liked to be the "flag waving poster boy" for the Ecoboost, it just wasn't meant to be. I know there are a lot of folks out there who are thrilled with their EB, but I wasn't one of them. Between all the problems, and the very poor MPGs, I've really been soured to the EB....it will have to prove itself to me before I would ever consider buying another EB equipped product.
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
From: Whitehorse
Global Moderator &
Senior Member
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 26,080
Likes: 85
From: Burleson/Athens/Brownsboro, TX
Well, I'm soon to be a NON-Ecoboost owner. After 7 months of headaches, heartaches, and really poor MPGs, I finally am getting nearly a straight across trade for basically the same truck with a 5.0. Many of you have read my posts explaining all the issues/problems I've had. It's taken a while, but the dealership finally came through for me.
I test drove the new truck yesterday. With only 5 miles on the odometer, on a 60 mile highway run, it got 19+@70mph, and 20+@65mph. The very best the EB truck has ever gotten was 18.4, and that was on a three hour drive, where the top speed never exceeded 65mph.
I can tell you from experience, an EB equipped with 3:73s will not get anywhere near it's advertised MPGs. If you make ANY modifications, larger tires, toppers, etc. it will affect the MPGs grossly to the negative.
I'm taking all of my accessories off my truck today/tomorrow, and will be picking up the new truck on Wed.
As much as I would have liked to be the "flag waving poster boy" for the Ecoboost, it just wasn't meant to be. I know there are a lot of folks out there who are thrilled with their EB, but I wasn't one of them. Between all the problems, and the very poor MPGs, I've really been soured to the EB....it will have to prove itself to me before I would ever consider buying another EB equipped product.
I test drove the new truck yesterday. With only 5 miles on the odometer, on a 60 mile highway run, it got 19+@70mph, and 20+@65mph. The very best the EB truck has ever gotten was 18.4, and that was on a three hour drive, where the top speed never exceeded 65mph.
I can tell you from experience, an EB equipped with 3:73s will not get anywhere near it's advertised MPGs. If you make ANY modifications, larger tires, toppers, etc. it will affect the MPGs grossly to the negative.
I'm taking all of my accessories off my truck today/tomorrow, and will be picking up the new truck on Wed.
As much as I would have liked to be the "flag waving poster boy" for the Ecoboost, it just wasn't meant to be. I know there are a lot of folks out there who are thrilled with their EB, but I wasn't one of them. Between all the problems, and the very poor MPGs, I've really been soured to the EB....it will have to prove itself to me before I would ever consider buying another EB equipped product.
__________________
Jim
Jim
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,248
Likes: 0
From: Northern VA
So if Ford rates the 6.2L with 3.73 as follows...
4x2 13 city, 18 hwy
4x4 12 city, 16 hwy
Do you attribute most of the loss in fuel economy (when compared with more commonly found 3.55-equipped Ecoboosts rated at 16 city/22 hwy in 4x2 or 15/21 in 4x4) to the larger/heavier/thirstier 6.2L motor, or the 3.73 gears, or equal doses of both?
4x2 13 city, 18 hwy
4x4 12 city, 16 hwy
Do you attribute most of the loss in fuel economy (when compared with more commonly found 3.55-equipped Ecoboosts rated at 16 city/22 hwy in 4x2 or 15/21 in 4x4) to the larger/heavier/thirstier 6.2L motor, or the 3.73 gears, or equal doses of both?
Member
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
So if Ford rates the 6.2L with 3.73 as follows...
4x2 13 city, 18 hwy
4x4 12 city, 16 hwy
Do you attribute most of the loss in fuel economy (when compared with more commonly found 3.55-equipped Ecoboosts rated at 16 city/22 hwy in 4x2 or 15/21 in 4x4) to the larger/heavier/thirstier 6.2L motor, or the 3.73 gears, or equal doses of both?
4x2 13 city, 18 hwy
4x4 12 city, 16 hwy
Do you attribute most of the loss in fuel economy (when compared with more commonly found 3.55-equipped Ecoboosts rated at 16 city/22 hwy in 4x2 or 15/21 in 4x4) to the larger/heavier/thirstier 6.2L motor, or the 3.73 gears, or equal doses of both?
really, with the new 6 speed transmissions i think the 3.73 gears are a little ridiculous (and those are the gears in my fx4). I mean really, it shifts into 4th gear at 25 mph, 4th gear was overdrive on my previous chevy!
in all honesty, i like the fx4 for the 4x4 and the look - but i wish i had been able to find the fx2 i wanted and not "settled" for the 4x4 as i really don't use it and the fx2 would have had 3.55 gears or 3.15 gears.
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
From: Brunswick, Ohio
2011 F150 FX4 CC Ecoboost with 3.73 gears here.....
AVG-17.4
Pretty much 50/50 highway and city driving. And I do like to kick up the turbos once in a while!
I did expect it to be better though..... when they advertise 23mpgs hwy.
AVG-17.4
Pretty much 50/50 highway and city driving. And I do like to kick up the turbos once in a while!
I did expect it to be better though..... when they advertise 23mpgs hwy.
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,005
Likes: 0
From: Southern Cali
^ Well, the FX4 is adverstised 21 & 16mpg. Your 17.4 combined is almost spot on for the avg. My 14.5mpg combined 60% highway and 40% city is disappointing.
update.... I just did a 300 mile road trip 90% highway. Never went over 70 mph and only got 17.2 mpg. It pushed my total avg up to 14.8, but pushed my highway % into the 70% range of total miles. Not good at all.
update.... I just did a 300 mile road trip 90% highway. Never went over 70 mph and only got 17.2 mpg. It pushed my total avg up to 14.8, but pushed my highway % into the 70% range of total miles. Not good at all.
Last edited by hydro1; Nov 22, 2011 at 03:04 PM.
Technical Article Contributor
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 4,391
Likes: 0
From: High Plains of West Texas
^ Well, the FX4 is adverstised 21 & 16mpg. Your 17.4 combined is almost spot on for the avg. My 14.5mpg combined 60% highway and 40% city is disappointing.
update.... I just did a 300 mile road trip 90% highway. Never went over 70 mph and only got 17.2 mpg. It pushed my total avg up to 14.8, but pushed my highway % into the 70% range of total miles. Not good at all.
update.... I just did a 300 mile road trip 90% highway. Never went over 70 mph and only got 17.2 mpg. It pushed my total avg up to 14.8, but pushed my highway % into the 70% range of total miles. Not good at all.
Junior Member
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
2011 XLT 4x4 Eco 3.73 Max Tow Off road 6.5 bed with 8500 miles driving 90% highway @ 70 mph I get 16.5. I've been experimenting with this current tankful and driving 60-65 whenever possible instead of 70, and averaging closer to 18. I'm a grandpa who most times drives like a grandpa.
Member
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Man iam glad everyone that talked up the ecoturd so much might realize now that it is a gas sucker! i have a 2011 5.0 and it gets 18 mpg in a hilly region of pa with a level kit and 35s! so all that talked about how good they are should reconsider! V8 all the way! one thing people should realize is that turbos have no low end power (taking time to spool the turbos) and is not that delectable for starting and stopping!! take those turbos off that v6 and u have a 150 horse pill of truck that likes to suck gas and run poopy!
