First hand F150 hybrid experience anyone?
Surely someone in this group has purchased and towed with an F150 hybrid by now. If you are one of those people I would love to hear how you think that the hybrid impacts towing.
Forum Discussion
I finally found an article about the F150 Powerboost that strayed away from the rigid testing procedures used by TFL and some others. TFL's testing structure basically prohibits the use of use of the hybrid features and I want some feedback on how they affect the towing experience. So here it is:
Edmunds long term F150 hybrid test
The good:
"That battery-derived torque at low speeds, when the engine benefits from it most, is what it's all about. If you are towing a trailer, hauling a heavy payload or drag racing your buddy's Raptor, the F-150 Hybrid's torque is your friend. For that, we are really digging this PowerBoost F-150."
The bad, maybe:
"A window sticker sets expectations for a vehicle, but now we're finding that the EPA's fuel economy estimates can be just as unrealistic in real life as the MSRP. The EPA rates the F-150 Hybrid (this powertrain is also known as the PowerBoost) at 24 mpg combined (24 city/24 highway). But we aren't getting that in our long-term truck. Not even close.
Our average fuel economy over 10,000 miles, six months and 30 fill-ups is a disappointing 19.3 miles per gallon (excluding towing and performance testing). If we averaged 19.3 mpg in any ordinary full-size pickup, we'd be thrilled. But this powertrain is a $4,000-plus line item, and this truck, to date, has hit an average of 24 mpg per tank just twice and 23 mpg twice. Most fills are in the high 18s."
My opinion is that most professional vehicle testers have lead feet and as a result get worse than average fuel economy. When you have power ready and willing it takes discipline not use it and suck down the fuel. Back when I purchased my 1991 F250 with the 7.5 engine (460 V8) the test results that I could find only showed 8mpg. I never had fuel economy that low, even for a single trip. The closest I came to that number was when I was carrying a large slide in camper AND towing a 22ft offshore fishing boat. I got 8.2 over 1500 miles while doing that. So, I am a little skeptical of the testers. So keep this part of the statement in mind: "If we averaged 19.3 mpg in any ordinary full-size pickup, we'd be thrilled."
The What the Heck?:
"We will admit that our pickup's towing-optimized 3.73 axle puts us at a slight disadvantage with respect to achieving the best fuel economy, but the change shouldn't amount to such a deficit."
The pickup in their picture is clearly a short bed truck. The 3.73 axle is part of the max payload package which I have not been able to configure on a short bed truck. To get the 3.73 axle I have always had to configure the long bed. Regardless, I don't believe that going from a 3.55 axle to the 3.73 is going to affect fuel economy in a noticeable manner. But adding a foot of bed and 200lbs of frame weight would probably have more impact.
Anyway, the bottom line is that it pulled really well and gave better than average fuel economy. Is it worth the extra cost? That might come down to how much you would use the 7.2kw generator feature.
Edmunds long term F150 hybrid test
The good:
"That battery-derived torque at low speeds, when the engine benefits from it most, is what it's all about. If you are towing a trailer, hauling a heavy payload or drag racing your buddy's Raptor, the F-150 Hybrid's torque is your friend. For that, we are really digging this PowerBoost F-150."
The bad, maybe:
"A window sticker sets expectations for a vehicle, but now we're finding that the EPA's fuel economy estimates can be just as unrealistic in real life as the MSRP. The EPA rates the F-150 Hybrid (this powertrain is also known as the PowerBoost) at 24 mpg combined (24 city/24 highway). But we aren't getting that in our long-term truck. Not even close.
Our average fuel economy over 10,000 miles, six months and 30 fill-ups is a disappointing 19.3 miles per gallon (excluding towing and performance testing). If we averaged 19.3 mpg in any ordinary full-size pickup, we'd be thrilled. But this powertrain is a $4,000-plus line item, and this truck, to date, has hit an average of 24 mpg per tank just twice and 23 mpg twice. Most fills are in the high 18s."
My opinion is that most professional vehicle testers have lead feet and as a result get worse than average fuel economy. When you have power ready and willing it takes discipline not use it and suck down the fuel. Back when I purchased my 1991 F250 with the 7.5 engine (460 V8) the test results that I could find only showed 8mpg. I never had fuel economy that low, even for a single trip. The closest I came to that number was when I was carrying a large slide in camper AND towing a 22ft offshore fishing boat. I got 8.2 over 1500 miles while doing that. So, I am a little skeptical of the testers. So keep this part of the statement in mind: "If we averaged 19.3 mpg in any ordinary full-size pickup, we'd be thrilled."
The What the Heck?:
"We will admit that our pickup's towing-optimized 3.73 axle puts us at a slight disadvantage with respect to achieving the best fuel economy, but the change shouldn't amount to such a deficit."
The pickup in their picture is clearly a short bed truck. The 3.73 axle is part of the max payload package which I have not been able to configure on a short bed truck. To get the 3.73 axle I have always had to configure the long bed. Regardless, I don't believe that going from a 3.55 axle to the 3.73 is going to affect fuel economy in a noticeable manner. But adding a foot of bed and 200lbs of frame weight would probably have more impact.
Anyway, the bottom line is that it pulled really well and gave better than average fuel economy. Is it worth the extra cost? That might come down to how much you would use the 7.2kw generator feature.
