- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
More 2015 F150 news - Ecoboost engine delivers low fuel economy
Posted on 1/8/15 at 11:14 am
Posted on 1/8/15 at 11:14 am
quote:
2.7L EcoBoost V-6: This all-new F-150 pickup engine is compelling for several reasons, particularly the “hybrid” block construction that uses compacted-graphite iron for the upper part and aluminum for the bottom, as well as aluminum heads with integrated exhaust manifolds.
There are lots of interesting technologies onboard, from the fracture-split connecting rods and variable-displacement oil pump to the structural die-cast front engine cover and deep-set fuel injectors capable of four spurts per combustion event.
But there’s a big problem: The observed fuel economy is not that good. The EPA says this engine should get 26 mpg (9 L/100 km) on the highway with 2-wheel drive. Our 4x4 supercab never got close to that, even under a light foot.
quote:
Several editors drove the truck for 253 miles (407 km), and the trip computer displayed a low of 17.6 mpg (13.3 L/100 km) and a high of 19 mpg (12.3 L/100 km).
quote:
This engine has impressive power and torque (325 hp and 375 lb.-ft.[508 Nm]). But heck, we’ve driven 5.0L V-8 F-150s that delivered better mileage.
LINK
This post was edited on 1/8/15 at 11:16 am
Posted on 1/8/15 at 11:16 am to weagle99
I can say the same about my 13
Posted on 1/8/15 at 11:20 am to weagle99
So who came up with that 29 number?
Posted on 1/8/15 at 11:21 am to weagle99
quote:
The observed fuel economy is not that good
This is my shocked face
Posted on 1/8/15 at 11:24 am to weagle99
My '13 Ecoboost has gotten 14.5 in town at best- usually around 13.5. I know that the 20" wheels and 4x4 have something to do with that, but it's a far cry from the 17 that the sticker showed
Posted on 1/8/15 at 11:31 am to LSUGUMBO
quote:
My '13 Ecoboost has gotten 14.5 in town at best- usually around 13.5. I know that the 20" wheels and 4x4 have something to do with that, but it's a far cry from the 17 that the sticker showed
I get better than that in the same truck but 5.0. Just saying
Posted on 1/8/15 at 11:34 am to bayou choupique
But the Ecoboost will drag your 5.0 around the block
Posted on 1/8/15 at 11:35 am to bayou choupique
quote:
I get better than that in the same truck but 5.0. Just saying
Yeah- there's definitely a little buyers remorse in my last post. I test drove both, but the Eco had a little more pep to it. And it only had 10 miles on it when i drove it for the first time!!!
Posted on 1/8/15 at 11:35 am to bayou choupique
quote:
I get better than that in the same truck but 5.0. Just saying
I get better than that in my 5.7 Hemi..Just saying
ETA - for all the Ram fans/haters out there....
This post was edited on 1/8/15 at 11:36 am
Posted on 1/8/15 at 11:36 am to LSUGUMBO
Somebody should be held responsible for that.
It's bullshite that they (whoever they is in this case) can slap an unattainable number on that sticker and get no repercussion other than some upset customers.
I would instantly loose my job for a mistake like that.
It's bullshite that they (whoever they is in this case) can slap an unattainable number on that sticker and get no repercussion other than some upset customers.
I would instantly loose my job for a mistake like that.
Posted on 1/8/15 at 11:37 am to LSUGUMBO
That's pretty bad. I was getting around 16-17 before my 35s
Posted on 1/8/15 at 11:40 am to weagle99
Yeah, Wards called out the entire Eco lineup. Not sure how they get their EPA numbers.
Posted on 1/8/15 at 11:43 am to PapaPogey
quote:
BourgsTheWord
I cant wait to drag you around the neighborhood with my 5.0
Posted on 1/8/15 at 11:45 am to CP3
quote:
I cant wait to drag you around the neighborhood with my 5.0
It's a trap!
Posted on 1/8/15 at 11:47 am to weagle99
So a truck doesn't get the advertised fuel mileage?
Posted on 1/8/15 at 11:50 am to Jack Daniel
quote:
Posted by Jack Daniel
So a truck doesn't get the advertised fuel mileage?
All the other trucks don't put "Eco" in the names of their un-economical truck engines. That being said, Wards mainly called out the smaller Ecoboost engines, not the 3.5/6 found in the F150.
This post was edited on 1/8/15 at 11:52 am
Posted on 1/8/15 at 11:55 am to weagle99
My company car 2010 Fusion without ecoboost avg'd 30 mpg. My 2013 Fusion with same driving habits with ecoboost gets avg 24 mpg.
Posted on 1/8/15 at 12:06 pm to DownshiftAndFloorIt
I just think they should do tests for each engine, wheel size and drivetrain- I know it would create more work but it would make the results a little more accurate- I'm sure the 2wd ext. cab with 18 in wheels on it gets 17 in town and 23 on the hwy
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News