F150 2.7 22MPG vs Ram ED 23MPG
So there it is. F150 - 2.7 320hp/375tq - 19/26 - 22mpg comb $600(?) option or standard Available with 2250# payload 0-60 ~ 7s - with 6000# trailer est 13sec Ram ED - 3.0 240hp/420tq - 20/28 - 2...
Forum Discussion
boocoodinkydow wrote:Excellent, informative post, boocoodinkydow!
. . . On a 1500 diesel forum there is a thread entitled "30 mpg club" with numerous accounts of 30+mpg. Another forum has a thread following a family of 4 towing an almost 6000# tt with gear on a trip from n.c. To Cali. Daily mpg reports range from 14-16 . . .
I've read the 30MPG EcoDiesel Club thread at ram1500diesel.com and perused a bit of Ecodiesel data at fuelly.com. The anecdotal evidence strongly suggests the Ecodiesel is capable of obtaining its EPA fuel mileage rating with minimal effort.
This is simply not the case with the 3.5 Ecoboost. The vast majority of comments online, plus the Ecoboost owners I've talked to, say the same thing: "love this engine, love the torque, but . . . a bit disappointed with the fuel mileage." I've driven a number of Ecoboosts. It requires a conscious effort (i.e., hypermiling) to even approach anything close to it's EPA fuel mileage rating.
Since the 2.7 Ecoboost has a similar design as the 3.5 (turbo V6), one could easily assume it will also have a difficult time obtaining its EPA estimates.
It's very interesting to note the EPA Highway and Combined estimates for the 4x4 version of the 2.7 Ecoboost are much lower than the 4x2 version. The 4x4 version results in a 3 MPG drop in EPA Highway and 2 MPG drop in EPA Combined estimates compared to the 4x2 2.7 Ecoboost (18/23/20 vs. 19/26/22). The 4x2 to 4x4 drop in city/highway/combined for the vast majority of trucks is typically 1 MPG. If the 4x4 drivetrain alone causes a 2-3 MPG drop for the 2.7 Ecoboost, that doesn't bode well for the 4x2 2.7 Ecoboost's fuel mileage in the realworld when under load or towing.
The 2.7 Ecoboost may have beat the 3.0 Ecodiesel towing up a hill. However, if the MPG results had been provided for this same test I'm confident it would have painted a much different overall picture. For my needs, I'd gladly trade a few more MPG's for a few extra seconds of sightseeing while towing up some of the hills here in the scenic SW.
