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
I know I started out with the 5.3 in my topic title. But the article goes on to talk about a number of engines.
A steel body 3.5 is just 1 mpg behind the aluminum body 2.7. If the aluminum body does indeed save the mpg claimed. Comparing the numbers, it looks as if the 2.7 is not as good a value as the 3.5.
A steel body 3.5 is just 1 mpg behind the aluminum body 2.7. If the aluminum body does indeed save the mpg claimed. Comparing the numbers, it looks as if the 2.7 is not as good a value as the 3.5.
