These little engines really respond after 10 miles of driving. It is the warm up time. Everytime U do a 150 mile trip you see the increase over the 6 mile one.

 

i never got above 16 l/100km...confusing, i know, its a Canada thing....so it boils down to 14.7 mpg....and i drive 75% highway 25%city
but now i run 35inch wheels and i only get 10.5mpg!!! oh well, its still fun to drive!
but ive never got close to advertised mileage!
this is 2nd eco boost...had a 2012 xlt 4x4 crew and now the lifted 2013 fx4 crew...

 

My EB never improved over the life of the truck, it actually got worse the longer I had it. With the towing package and gears, the EB will get the same or worse mileage towing as any other 1/2 ton truck out there. I just opted to get rid of the headache that is the EB, had i originally bought a 5.0 I may still have a Ford.

 

I am still disappointed with the mileage I am getting with my truck. Around town it only gets about 12.5 mpg. I have made a couple of observations and would like to hear any comments. (My truck is Supercrew, 4X4, long bed, with 3.73 gearing. It has about 7500 miles on it now.)

The other day while rotating the tires, I noticed that the rolling resistance of the front wheel was extremely high. I felt it took excessive force to be able to rotate the wheels. I also have a 2001 Screw 4X4 and comparatively its wheels rotate very easily.

Yesterday. I got on the freeway with the engine cold and watched the previous 5 minute mileage indicator. Immediately upon entering the freeway, I set the cruise control at 65 mph. The first two minutes were below 10 mpg then the next two were just over 10. The mileage climb like this until it was getting about 19-20 mpg after about 12 miles/minutes. The engine itself was up to operating temperature after the first mile on the freeway. (I did not check the transmission temp during the ride.)

I am wondering if these two observations are related to the poor mileage the truck is getting. Could the high rolling resistance of the front axle be giving me bad mileage and as it warms up its resistance reduces?

 

Just in case anyone hadn't read it already, both Consumer Reports and AutoWeek are questioning the MPG stickers albeit in the Fusion.

Autoweek/Consumer Reports Mention the Ecoboost

In the end, I think it's probably mainly a function of being able to design an engine specifically for EPA testing. With this in mind you could do things like make sure the engine does most of the work at cruising speeds up to 60 and the turbo kicks in on a more constant basis from 65+. I think that's the most interesting thing I've noticed is how much bigger the drop is going from 60-65 or 60-70 in terms of MPG than in most other vehicles I've had.

As for the above, I'll absolutely concur that initial MPG is terrible when the engine is cold. If you live fairly close to work, this makes your averages terrible even if it's all highway. Don't know if it's the front axle or not, maybe someone else can chime in.

 

So you mean to tell me your mileage was so bad with the Ecoboost that you traded it for a Tundra???? Don't know exactly what kind of #'s you had with your Ford but i certainly cant see you doing any better with the tundra. It's certainly not any better in the power and payload department. I'm not getting the advertised mileage with mine either but everything else about the truck out weighs the fuel mileage by a long shot. I wish you the best of luck with your new truck.

 

^ don't mind him Kevin. He had a EB that has the CAC issue. Now he's a tundra fanboy and comes on here all the time proclaiming how awesome it is. I can guarantee you it's (turdra) getting 12 mpg city and 16 hwy.

 

Actually for the life of my current Tundra she has been in the shop ZERO times, has had ZERO misfiring or CAC issues, has towed 9500lbs with ZERO problems with overheating. If I keep my foot out of it in town I'm getting around 14.5mpg. Highway really depends on if I want to flow with traffic or be a jackass, but ranges from 18.5-19.5. The EB I had, had more than CAC issues but either way I had 11 different issues between the engine and cosmetics on the previous ford... all within 3600 miles. Now I maybe a "fanboy" for Tundra's but so far in 6000 miles it hasn't missed a lick. There were things I liked about the f150, but when you pay your hard earned cash for something, you damn well better expect it to work.

 

^ My 2011 EB with 15k hasn't missed a lick either. Also has a Tundra and 2007 Duramax with a PPE 120 tune kill under it's belt..so, why are you still around?? Paid my cash and she works DAMN well. Move along TROLL!

 

I could almost bet you a very large sum of cash that my truck will be running flawlessly far longer than yours will. But hey that would be stealing. No trolling here, I'm just stating the experience I had with the f150 EB.

 

^^ Sorry you had so many issues with the Ford but all manufacturers have a few bad eggs in the bunch and it was just your bad luck that you got stuck with one. I'm going on two years of ownership with my truck and the only time it has been in the shop is for an oil change. You can say whatever you want about your Toyota because you are entitled to your opinion. But we all know the facts speak for themselves and the F series is the best selling truck period!! I suggest you head over to the Tonka toy forum and hangout there now.

 

2012 FX4 EB now with 23K, 18.5 mpg ave. 50% local driving. Haven't trailered, but frequent loads of 1T. Cold or short trips, knocks it down as low as 15mpg. Warm and long trips = 20+ at posted speeds. Also, zero, and I mean zero problems. Tundra's a got a great engine and drive train. But mpg? No. Want my mileage? Buy the Tacoma. Been there, done that.

Features? Not close to my FX4. Fun to drive? Can't imagine anything beating this FX4.

In a video comparing Tundra, Silverado and F150 on a torture test track, the Tundra's C-channel frame and shocks made it downright scary. Could never imagine any frame could twist so much and hold together. Anything in the bed would fly out, even if tied down. Dog in the bed? A goner. Motorcycle? Gone. Carrying a paint sprayer? Call your insurance agent. The F150 box frame held up great, and the Silverado, too. This is the legacy of the F series (100/150).

 

2012 FX4 EB 3.73 rear axle, stock everything. Yesterday on central california rural highways, with 2 passengers got 20.5mpg going, and about 18.5 during some more non cruise control driving in slight hills. But around town I drop down to 15mpg.

Anytime that turbo boost comes up, MPG drops like a stone.

 

Post a link to that video. I would like to see it!

 

I'm pretty sure this is the referenced clip: