7.3 twin turbo Godzilla

Bionic Man wrote:


Not going to go into the fuel type argument other than to say the current 6.2 only recommends premium, not requires. It is in the article you referenced.

And the argument of the 3.5 using more air/more power than the 6.2 isn't accurate either. The only place the 6.2 lacked power of the EB was up the passes. And while a lot is made of the Ike runs, all 3 or 4 steep grades where the EB has an advantage on my trips amount to less than 20 miles. So there shouldn't be THAT much of a difference in fuel economy. It would balance out in the rest of the trip, and certainly after fill ups. But it never did/does. The worst MPG I've experienced was towing the boat from Grand Junction Colorado to Bullfrog UT. Not high elevation, no long hills, grades that any V8 could maintain speed at returned MPG of 7.07 MPG. The tank before was 7.82. The tank after was 7.95. Also, when towing my Ranger (3000ish pounds), I was 10.68 MPG in that stretch. 12.44 the tank before, and 10.59 the tank after. The 6.2 pulling the Malibu never pulled less than 8.83 MPG. And towing the little boat I don't think it ever got less than 12 MPG.

I just filled the Ex from our trip home over the weekend. 8.47 MPG towing 72 MPH from Sterling CO to Denver CO (part of the loop that FLT does for their MPG tests). Yes there was some wind and rain, but the truck pulling the 5er still pulled down 10.75 MPG.

My buddy just bought a PowerBoost, and is towing a 26' trailer. He gets 5 - 7 MPG towing (no idea how fast, but he is a retired county sheriff, and never seems to be in a hurry).

The moral of the story is you won't convince me that, overall, while towing, the EcoBoost gets comparable MPG. Solo might be different, but that isn't what we are arguing. And if Ford ever considered giving the same treatment to the 7.3, people would be DREAMING about getting 7 MPG. It would more likely be considerably less.

That is not what we have seen in our fleet although this is in comparison to the Ford 5.0L and GM 5.3L. As I said, the 6.2L does require a premium to achieve its advertised numbers according to GM (LINK), is a different animal since it actually gets better fuel economy than the Ford 5.0L and GM 5.3L.

How much of that is due to it being tuned using premium fuel I have no idea. I would love to see a test using regular fuel in both(which is what the standard Ecoboost is tuned for). The high output 3.5L Ecoboost found in the Raptor and Lincoln's with larger turbo's and more fueling does require premium fuel and is not very fuel-efficient.