Interesting all this mpg talk and how the ecoboost is so good on fuel, and last issue of truck trend had a wrap up on them with truck for a year. They said good things about truck but what caught my attention was the average over year was only 14 mpg.

Sorry don't have link, but it was in one of the last 2 issues.

But it was probably towing 11,000 pounds uphill for the whole year.

TomG2 wrote:But it was probably towing 11,000 pounds uphill for the whole year.Would that be a 5'er?:B

I would think those magazine guys run them pretty hard. After all why not. Drive it like a rental.

As a GM fan, I appreciate the fuel mileage I get out of my 2000 suburban 5.3 with 200,000 miles. This engine will not beat the ecoboost is 0-60, but does the job towing our tt very well. I am sure that the fuel mileage of my 13 year old truck can beat the new high tech ecoboost. Wonder if the new 5.3 direct injected will give me even better that my old truck ??

Truck trends one year with ecoboost 14 mpg average

womps
Explorer
Feb 21, 2014
I put about 20,000 miles a year on my 2012 ecoboost. Half of these miles I carry a quad and equipment in the box totalling 700 lbs. My mileage doesn't vary whether I am loaded or empty. So if the 2015 Ford F150 is 700 lbs lighter I wonder what difference the mileage will be with the same poertrain. I average about 17 m.p.g. with 1/2 highway and 1/2 rural with very little city driving. Love the power but I got better mileage with my 2010 F150 with the 5.4 V8 powering it.
otrfun
Explorer II
Feb 21, 2014
goducks10 wrote:
otrfun wrote:

My current truck is capable of getting it's rated EPA highway rating of 18 MPG at 75 MPH--which just happens to be the same MPG I got with the Ecoboost at 80 MPH--18 MPG. Yes, slightly better, but certainly not significant. Anyhow, I'm still happily driving my current truck with a bit less torque at 2k, but with a lot more jingle in my pocket--for now.
You must have one of those internet trucks. They seem to get their best mpg on the internet.
Ya know, goducks10, like you and everybody else here I'm presenting my opinion based on my personal experiences. Some may disagree, some may not--that's cool. I wanted the Ecoboost, but after comparing personal experiences with the Ecoboost and my current truck, I elected to keep my current truck. In my post I tried to be unbiased and truthful as I could.

Now, your comment that I must own one of those "internet trucks" accomplishes nothing in my eyes. It's just a shallow comment that just rings with negativity--which, of course, is your intent. Got it.
goducks10
Explorer
Feb 21, 2014
otrfun wrote:
Bionic Man wrote:

My current truck is capable of getting it's rated EPA highway rating of 18 MPG at 75 MPH--which just happens to be the same MPG I got with the Ecoboost at 80 MPH--18 MPG. Yes, slightly better, but certainly not significant. Anyhow, I'm still happily driving my current truck with a bit less torque at 2k, but with a lot more jingle in my pocket--for now.

You must have one of those internet trucks. They seem to get their best mpg on the internet.
Tystevens
Explorer
Feb 21, 2014
otrfun wrote:
My current truck is capable of getting it's rated EPA highway rating of 18 MPG at 75 MPH--which just happens to be the same MPG I got with the Ecoboost at 80 MPH--18 MPG. Yes, slightly better, but certainly not significant. Anyhow, I'm still happily driving my current truck with a bit less torque at 2k, but with a lot more jingle in my pocket--for now.

Out of curiosity, what is your current truck?

I just don't know if I can imagine anything truck-shaped and 6000+ lbs getting much better than 18-19 at high freeway speeds. Aerodynamics, you know ... but I hope I'm wrong and someone can engineer it. Maybe the Ram EcoDiesel will do it.

But I just know that my last few trucks all seemed to drop off quickly after 70 mph. My 2010 Suburban will pull down around 21 mpg, with a best ever of 21.5 mpg, under the right conditions (cruise set at 60-65 on the state highways, such as when I drive from SLC to Moab or Albuquerque), and my Duramax would be around 19.5 mpg for the same trip. But extended freeway driving in the 75-80 mph range puts me in the 17-18 mpg range for both of those trucks.
Tystevens
Explorer
Feb 21, 2014
Bionic Man wrote:
Ecoboost is a good engine but it is NOT a step forward in MPG.

Well, it kind of is. Meaning, small block fuel economy with big block torque. So in that sense, it is quite an improvement.

It just might not be the step forward that many are looking for.
Turbo_Diesel_Du
Explorer
Feb 21, 2014
My 2013 Ecoboost SC 4X4 gets about 13 + in town and best on the open road was right at 18. Only have about 3400 miles so far. Going for air bags and load range E tires so I can pull my 7400 lb TT. Some will say it'll be overloaded and I say I could care less. It is what it is and if it breaks, Then I'll buy another. Get over it. JMHO LOL
otrfun
Explorer II
Feb 21, 2014
Bionic Man wrote:
Ecoboost is a good engine but it is NOT a step forward in MPG.
After driving an Ecoboost for the first time several years, that low-end torque and power hooked me big-time. One look at the EPA MPG numbers (16/22) on the window sticker seemed to make it a no-brainer to possibly make it my next truck. However, before I made the plunge I figured it might be advisable to visit several Ford forums and talk to a few owners.

Well, I did the above. Plus, I was lucky enough to personally drive 5 or 6 different Ecoboosts soon thereafter over a 6-month period. Long story short, the forum feedback was not flattering in terms of realworld MPG. Several owners all told me the MPG's weren't as good as expected, but the power made up for it. From a personal experience, I tried long and hard and could not get 22 MPG highway unless I drove 60 MPH or slower. From years and years of driving rental vehicles (both cars and trucks), I've noticed a pattern of usually obtaining EPA MPG highway numbers (many times better) at approx. 70-75 MPH.

My current truck is capable of getting it's rated EPA highway rating of 18 MPG at 75 MPH--which just happens to be the same MPG I got with the Ecoboost at 80 MPH--18 MPG. Yes, slightly better, but certainly not significant. Anyhow, I'm still happily driving my current truck with a bit less torque at 2k, but with a lot more jingle in my pocket--for now.

As soon as a truck comes on the market that has a payload close to 2000 lbs., can tow at least 12k, AND gets a minimum, realworld, low 20's MPG at 75 MPH, I'm pulling the trigger. Got my fingers crossed, big-time, that Toyota or Nissan can pull off these numbers with their new 5.0 Cummins! Or, maybe, the new aluminum Ecoboost with the HD/MAX Tow can do it. Either way is fine with me.
Unyalli
Explorer
Feb 21, 2014
EcoBullet wrote:
Your Boss 379 gets better fuel economy than an Ecoboost?

Never said that.
Fordlover
Explorer
Feb 21, 2014
MARK VANDERBENT wrote:
As a GM fan, I appreciate the fuel mileage I get out of my 2000 suburban 5.3 with 200,000 miles. This engine will not beat the ecoboost is 0-60, but does the job towing our tt very well. I am sure that the fuel mileage of my 13 year old truck can beat the new high tech ecoboost. Wonder if the new 5.3 direct injected will give me even better that my old truck ??

I appreciate the fact that you are a big GM fan, as many of your posts read like a GM advert.

But you sure about your 13 year old truck beating a ecoboost in MPG? This link (32MPG in Ecoboost F-150) might make you reconsider your boast.

From the story: "CleanMPG drove a two-wheel drive model from California to Georgia with a conservative 3.15 rear axle for maximum fuel economy. That doesn't mean they didn't use the truck like it was meant to be used. There were five adults in the pickup for most of the journey plus a cargo box full of camping gear and supplies that pushed the F-150's gross vehicle weight to 7,120 pounds -- 20 pounds over its 7,100-pound GVWR."
EcoBullet
Explorer
Feb 21, 2014
Unyalli wrote:
Perrysburg Dodgeboy wrote:
parkersdad wrote:
skipnchar wrote:
Ford doesn't talk much about it's being the most economical truck to drive. Their wording is the best COMBINATION of mileage and power. Lots of trucks may get better mileage with small V-8s or 6 cyl engines but certainly can't tow 11,000 lb. over 7% grades at over 12,000 feet elevation and do it in 4th gear.

My 2013 2500 Cummins can??

My 2004 tractor motor can.

My 2012 Boss 379 can.

Your Boss 379 gets better fuel economy than an Ecoboost? If that is so, it looks like Ford would be pushing that engine. What sort of empty highway mileage do you get?