My Ecoboost most recent mpg's

brulaz wrote:

prfssr wrote:
I am assuming that your solely relying on the trucks computer to calculate your mileage? Try to do the hand calulation and you may find out that your about 1.2 - 1.8 mpg lower. Not trying to bust your great mileage but these trucks never tell the truth. Just pretend that you are on top of a hill and going down on a 7% grade for 2 miles - you will most likely get about 99 mpg per the computer. Just saying that the computer is not accurate.

I've compared the two methods in my EcoB F150 for the last 3 years (~130 fill-ups), and over that long run, the difference in mileage is only 0.08%,

The computer is actually more accurate than hand calculations over the short term because when doing it by hand you never can fill up the tank to exactly the same spot.

Yep, my computer has been within .2 mpg on each of my fillups so far, and I track each one by hand. This computer is very accurate.

FWIW, mine is averaging 18.6 mpg after 4 tanks of commuting and normal use for me (which is nearly all around town). I'm very happy with the day-to-day mileage so far. It is actually within 3 mpg of what my Subaru Outback got for the same types of duties.

Sport45 wrote:
Looks good.

Now if they'd only add a couple cylinders and release it as a 4.7L V-8 in the 250/350 trucks I'd have to try one.

A 5.0L Ecoboost would be really sweet in a F-250

prfssr wrote:
I am assuming that your solely relying on the trucks computer to calculate your mileage? Try to do the hand calulation and you may find out that your about 1.2 - 1.8 mpg lower. Not trying to bust your great mileage but these trucks never tell the truth. Just pretend that you are on top of a hill and going down on a 7% grade for 2 miles - you will most likely get about 99 mpg per the computer. Just saying that the computer is not accurate.

I've compared the two methods in my EcoB F150 for the last 3 years (~130 fill-ups), and over that long run, the difference in mileage is only 0.08%,

The computer is actually more accurate than hand calculations over the short term because when doing it by hand you never can fill up the tank to exactly the same spot.

prfssr,

I hand calculated mine in Feb on a trip to the Keys. Very, very close. Can't remember exactly but no where near 1mpg off. You may be right on a very short trip, but on longer runs I think the computer is accurate. BTW You are also getting 99pmg going downhill with no power, even w/o a computer, you just can't see it on a screen. It is the Average that matters!!

prfssr

all I can tell you is on my 2100 Ford f-150 Eco boost that the fuel used and mpg reading are with in .2 to .3 mpg when I do the hand calculation method. no on the Chevy work truck up to .75 difference in reading.

Congrats!! That is great mileage and about what I am getting with mine. Wind is a major factor for me towing. Returned last week from a 300 mile ( one way ) trip to SC foothills. Got about 9.5 towing going there with a very brisk windy day. Coming back we detoured by Santee Cooper lake for a few days. Both legs of that trip were pretty calm, wind wise. Got 11.2 one day and 11.8 the second. That is towing a 4000 lb TT at 62-65mph. And I can actually pass someone on a 2 lane road if necessary w/o a lot of stress. Enjoy that Ecoboost!

I am assuming that your solely relying on the trucks computer to calculate your mileage? Try to do the hand calulation and you may find out that your about 1.2 - 1.8 mpg lower. Not trying to bust your great mileage but these trucks never tell the truth. Just pretend that you are on top of a hill and going down on a 7% grade for 2 miles - you will most likely get about 99 mpg per the computer. Just saying that the computer is not accurate.

Yeah I hate you Mitch. :-)

Thats great milage, glad you enjoy it.

Looks good.

Now if they'd only add a couple cylinders and release it as a 4.7L V-8 in the 250/350 trucks I'd have to try one.

Sounds good! My old Town Car gets 19... Lol. I need an EcoBoost!!!!