This is not going to look good for the new F-150.LINK

We all knew that ALL auto mfrgs. have been padding their MPG figures all along. They get their #'s while running on a Dyno thus no wind resistance, and only 2 tires for rolling resistance. There's no way real world MPG can come close to Dyno MPG.

I've owned several Chrysler products as well as Ford products. I've never had any problem achieving either's rated fuel mileage. I easily get 14 city and 17+ interstate with my 5.4L F250 that the F150 was rated for. Even my Prius easily gives it's EPA rated 48mpg highway and 51mpg city. On the other hand, I can easily achieve much less than EPA rated fuel mileage on any vehicle with short trips in cold weather or excessive heavy pedal stop and go city or excessive speed on the interstate. I wouldn't refrain from buying a vehicle based on the likes or dislikes of the Lexus crowd. Damn the egg on the gas pedal trick. Put it on the brake pedal and you'll get EPA rated fuel mileage on any vehicle.

Reminds me of someone posting only getting 20.2 mpg on their EcoDiesel this morning.Now who was that? :B

I agree about the lousy mpg's of the Ecoboost. I love my F250 diesel but will downsize when I get a new truck. Looking at the Ecoboost but not impressed with the real world gas mileage. Might have to do the regular V-6 or the 5.0 V8 instead, I buy my trucks for the long term also and I believe a naturally aspirated engine would be more reliable long term.

I own an ecoboost. No I don't get the advertised fuel economy, but I like putting my foot in the turbos, and am willing to pay for that fun.I also tow with it and love it.Has anyone here, heard any one who owns one saying, they are disappointing with the towing performance?If you are reading here and looking for fuel economy, you are lost.It takes horse power to tow a heavy load. "if you want more power, burn more gas" pretty simple.I have owned several 5.0's and Chevy small blocks. No comparison in my opinion.I was out last weekend towing a 5000 lb TT into a 20 MPH headwind at 65 mph. It wanted to stay in 5th gear at 2000 rpm. Fine with me.Without the headwind, I can tow with cruise on, in 6th at 1300 rpm.Try that with a normally aspirated V8.Instead of listening to the complaints from people who have never even driven one, why not ask the owner of one, if they would buy it again? I would and will.I have also towed the same trailer with a Ford V8 2010 and the base V6 2006. They all got about the same gas mileage to produce the same result, towing or not.Horse power = burning gas.

Wards does not like the Eco-Boost | Good Sam Community

Michael_in_MN
Explorer
Jan 11, 2015
The Mad Norsky wrote:

So eco-boost owners can relax and drive like the sedated 83 year old librarian for your best fuel mileage.

And when you drive like a sedated 83 year old:

That was from a 300 mile trip on the pan-flat prairie at 55-60mph, no wind or tailwind.

I got 24.5 on a 300 mile trip under similar conditions (snowy/slippery, no wind or tailwind, couldn't drive more than 55mph).

I've also gotten 6mpg on a 300 mile trip, towing against the wind on a red flag day at 60+mph.
Fast_Mopar
Explorer
Jan 11, 2015
tragusa3 wrote:

I think Ford should not have marketed the engine for economy. It has speed and torque beyond anything a half ton owner will need. The engine stands on that merit alone.

I agree. I know at least 4 people who have a 3.5 Ecoboost, and they are all pleased with the power and would gladly buy another, but all are disappointed with the fuel economy. I agree that Ford should not have marketed the engine for economy. But, regardless, I have owned a lot of Fords over the years and hope to own a 3.5 Ecoboost myself some day, regardless of the fuel economy.
Bird_Freak
Explorer II
Jan 11, 2015
hone eagle wrote:
wwest wrote:
The EcoBUST engine MUST run in derated mode when not using BOOST.

An N/A DFI engine can have a compression above 12:1 even 14:1 in some cases (Mazda).

Whereas a BOOSTED DFI engine MUST be derated, ~10:1 CR, in cruise, off-boost mode.

Most engines run in cruise mode 98% of the time.

Ford's EcoBUST FE problem is compounded by the fact of the CAC collecting water and oil as an emulsion in the bottom of the CAC outflow endcap. Roll a perfectly good EcoBUST engine out of the factory door, within just a few miles engine components will begin to fail (bent connecting rods) due to (partial) hydro-locking.

Is it just me (cranky old guy) but this style of post makes me think - teenager?
made me think TROLL.
The_Mad_Norsky
Explorer
Jan 11, 2015
RinconVTR wrote:
It gets better...the truth hurts. But some OEM's don't see another option.

http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-culture/news/a24691/ferrari-engineers-dont-like-turbocharging/

LOL, but I loved this quote from the above noted article: Government fuel-economy test cycles, especially those in Europe, approximate the driving style of a heavily sedated 83-year-old librarian.

So eco-boost owners can relax and drive like the sedated 83 year old librarian for your best fuel mileage.
Hannibal
Explorer
Jan 10, 2015
The Eco-Boost seems pretty tough according to these guys. Unless you would suggest this never happened.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-DsrC57UD8
mich800
Explorer
Jan 10, 2015
hone eagle wrote:
wwest wrote:
The EcoBUST engine MUST run in derated mode when not using BOOST.

An N/A DFI engine can have a compression above 12:1 even 14:1 in some cases (Mazda).

Whereas a BOOSTED DFI engine MUST be derated, ~10:1 CR, in cruise, off-boost mode.

Most engines run in cruise mode 98% of the time.

Ford's EcoBUST FE problem is compounded by the fact of the CAC collecting water and oil as an emulsion in the bottom of the CAC outflow endcap. Roll a perfectly good EcoBUST engine out of the factory door, within just a few miles engine components will begin to fail (bent connecting rods) due to (partial) hydro-locking.

Is it just me (cranky old guy) but this style of post makes me think - teenager?

In any case at least you can count out this source for accurate information regarding engines. There are many who contribute knowledgeable info on this board. The trick is to recognize the BS artists so you can ignore them.
tragusa3
Explorer
Jan 10, 2015
I didn't buy mine for mileage. I bought it to tow. Performance for the dollar, I haven't driven anything else that tows as effortless. I would own mine even if it were the bottom of the pack for mpg.

I towed 6k miles this summer and got 11.5. After 12k miles of my commute, I'm getting 18.5. Does that meet EPA? Probably pretty close considering I'm 4x4 and that is a mixed drive commute.

I think Ford should not have marketed the engine for economy. It has speed and torque beyond anything a half ton owner will need. The engine stands on that merit alone.
RinconVTR
Explorer
Jan 10, 2015
Perrysburg Dodgeboy wrote:
This is not going to look good for the new F-150.

LINK

It gets better...the truth hurts. But some OEM's don't see another option.

http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-culture/news/a24691/ferrari-engineers-dont-like-turbocharging/
hone_eagle
Explorer
Jan 10, 2015
wwest wrote:
The EcoBUST engine MUST run in derated mode when not using BOOST.

An N/A DFI engine can have a compression above 12:1 even 14:1 in some cases (Mazda).

Whereas a BOOSTED DFI engine MUST be derated, ~10:1 CR, in cruise, off-boost mode.

Most engines run in cruise mode 98% of the time.

Ford's EcoBUST FE problem is compounded by the fact of the CAC collecting water and oil as an emulsion in the bottom of the CAC outflow endcap. Roll a perfectly good EcoBUST engine out of the factory door, within just a few miles engine components will begin to fail (bent connecting rods) due to (partial) hydro-locking.

Is it just me (cranky old guy) but this style of post makes me think - teenager?
bob_nestor
Explorer III
Jan 10, 2015
We Cant Wait wrote:
We all knew that ALL auto mfrgs. have been padding their MPG figures all along. They get their #'s while running on a Dyno thus no wind resistance, and only 2 tires for rolling resistance. There's no way real world MPG can come close to Dyno MPG.

Curious why this is a manufacturer problem and how they can pad their EPA MPG figures. They do the testing according to EPA requirements and submit the results to the EPA. The EPA checks and approves the results. The EPA also does it's own testing on 10 to 15% of the vehicles. The blame should lie with the EPA for their mandated testing procedures and their approval of the test results, not with the manufacturers.

How vehicles are tested