2.7 eco boost gets 18.5 mpg average according to Motor Trend
Dang topic heading was supposed to say 2.7 eco boost. Sorry can't figure out how to fix it yet. That's horrible. Not much better than 5.3 last year with a steel body Link
Forum Discussion
buddyIam wrote:
It sounds like a good review. But I am not impressed by the MPG. If the 3.5 eco numbers are indeed steel body numbers. It should just about equal the 2.7 when outfitted in the aluminum body.
The comfort and drivability I am speaking of is that with more horse power and torque I would expect an engine such as the 3.5 eco or even the 5.3 would pull with a lot less RPM.
That is fair. I don't think the 2.7 will be marketed to the towing crowd. The city mpg is much greater (almost 30%) than the v8. That is where the gain will be. Does not fit what I need a truck for but most of my driving is city so there can be considerable fuel cost savings if you were not pulling every weekend.
