ANTAUS Posted December 12, 2011 Share Posted December 12, 2011 My link Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
97svtgoin05gt Posted December 12, 2011 Share Posted December 12, 2011 Nice, it seemed like an odd group with the van stuck in there and the smaller Tacoma but nice job Ford for as much as TOTY means. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sranger Posted December 12, 2011 Share Posted December 12, 2011 Good write up for the F150.... I am glad magazines are starting to report real world gas mileages for these vehicles.... Ecoboost 2WD = 16.5mpg 5.0L 4x4 = 16.6mpg This is more in line with what people can expect from these trucks..... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted December 12, 2011 Share Posted December 12, 2011 Good write up for the F150.... I am glad magazines are starting to report real world gas mileages for these vehicles.... Ecoboost 2WD = 16.5mpg 5.0L 4x4 = 16.6mpg This is more in line with what people can expect from these trucks..... When you drive them like they are driven in these tests (many 0-60, foot to the floor runs), that is to be expected. The EB has a few more HP, and when you use it all, you have to pay for it all. Nothing is free, including HP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sranger Posted December 12, 2011 Share Posted December 12, 2011 When you drive them like they are driven in these tests (many 0-60, foot to the floor runs), that is to be expected. The EB has a few more HP, and when you use it all, you have to pay for it all. Nothing is free, including HP. That is exactly what mine averages NO MATTER HOW I drive it...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted December 12, 2011 Share Posted December 12, 2011 That is exactly what mine averages NO MATTER HOW I drive it...... Don't feel too bad...my '08 F250 gets about 12 MPG with my daily drive...and it takes the ridiculously more expensive (by 25% here) diesel fuel! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aneekr Posted December 12, 2011 Share Posted December 12, 2011 That is exactly what mine averages NO MATTER HOW I drive it...... You're not alone sranger. Just about every real world fuel economy comparison I've read (including Motor Trend's) shows near parity between 5.0L V8 and 3.5L TT V6 equipped F-150s. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boss444 Posted December 12, 2011 Share Posted December 12, 2011 You're not alone sranger. Just about every real world fuel economy comparison I've read (including Motor Trend's) shows near parity between 5.0L V8 and 3.5L TT V6 equipped F-150s. Marketing 101. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MY93SHO Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 That is exactly what mine averages NO MATTER HOW I drive it...... You need to talk to these guys: http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2011/05/cleanmpg-coaxes-32-mpg-from-ford-f-150-ecoboost-pickup.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boss444 Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 (edited) You need to talk to these guys: http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2011/05/cleanmpg-coaxes-32-mpg-from-ford-f-150-ecoboost-pickup.html They should do that with a 5.0.................. Of course though...the EB has a taller rear gear that isn't available with the 5.0 so the EB already has an unfair advantage. I think the results wold be far closer than a lot of people think... Edited December 13, 2011 by Boss444 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sranger Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 You need to talk to these guys: http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2011/05/cleanmpg-coaxes-32-mpg-from-ford-f-150-ecoboost-pickup.html Sorry, I just don't believe them....... I drove to Florida, cruse set at 70mph... 17 mpg after 400 almost continuous miles is all mine would do.... The y had to be costing up hill and getting back up to speed on the down hill is the only way you could do that.... I refuse to drive 40mph up hill to try and do something like this.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boss444 Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 (edited) Sorry, I just don't believe them....... I drove to Florida, cruse set at 70mph... 17 mpg after 400 almost continuous miles is all mine would do.... The y had to be costing up hill and getting back up to speed on the down hill is the only way you could do that.... I refuse to drive 40mph up hill to try and do something like this.... Well...it's not called 'hypermiling' because it has a nice ring to it. Their whole goal was to drive as gently as possible to eek as much distance out of a drop of fuel as possible. It's a gimmick for sure, but you can't go as far as to say it's not true. Remember, they had the granny gear as well as 2WD...you don't (AFAIK). That will make a difference. Edited December 13, 2011 by Boss444 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sranger Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 Well...it's not called 'hypermiling' because it has a nice ring to it. Their whole goal was to drive as gently as possible to eek as much distance out of a drop of fuel as possible. It's a gimmick for sure, but you can't go as far as to say it's not true. Remember, they had the granny gear as well as 2WD...you don't (AFAIK). That will make a difference. I guess, but if I drive any slower, the red around the collar boys around her are going to start shooting at me.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 Big whoop.....Motor Trend is right in the crapper ever since that jack-wagon Angus McKenzie took over as editor... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan1 Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 Good write up for the F150.... I am glad magazines are starting to report real world gas mileages for these vehicles.... Ecoboost 2WD = 16.5mpg 5.0L 4x4 = 16.6mpg Eventhough the 5.0 was a 4x4, the EcoBoost was a loaded heavier SuperCrew Platinum. The 5.0 was a lighter Supercab XLT. We're still not getting an exact comparison. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 Eventhough the 5.0 was a 4x4, the EcoBoost was a loaded heavier SuperCrew Platinum. The 5.0 was a lighter Supercab XLT. We're still not getting an exact comparison. Do not bring facts and important information into this EB fuel economy bashing session! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 Do not bring facts and important information into this EB fuel economy bashing session! Horsepower (SAE net@rpm) 3.5EB _____ 365 @ 5000 5.0 _______ 360 @ 5500 Torque (lb.-ft. @rpm) 3.5EB _____ 420 @ 2500 5.0 _______ 380 @ 4250 Sorry! I couldn't resist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 Horsepower (SAE net@rpm) 3.5EB _____ 365 @ 5000 5.0 _______ 360 @ 5500 Torque (lb.-ft. @rpm) 3.5EB _____ 420 @ 2500 5.0 _______ 380 @ 4250 Sorry! I couldn't resist. Source? Link? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan1 Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 (edited) Do not bring facts and important information into this EB fuel economy bashing session! Exactly. Also if you read the fine print at the bottom it says: EcoBoost was towing a 8,250 lb trailer and hauling 1,275 lbs. 5.0 was towing a 6,900 lb trailer and hauling 1185 lbs. This was not apples to apples comparison. But at least you could say EcoBoost gets about the same mileage in a heavier cab configuation and towing and hauling heavier loads than the 5.0 in a smaller cab and towing and hauling lighter loads. Edited December 13, 2011 by Bryan1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aneekr Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 Source? Link? 2012 F-150 specifications 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sranger Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 Exactly. Also if you read the fine print at the bottom it says: EcoBoost was towing a 8,250 lb trailer and hauling 1,275 lbs. 5.0 was towing a 6,900 lb trailer and hauling 1185 lbs. This was not apples to apples comparison. But at least you could say EcoBoost gets about the same mileage in a heavier cab configuation and towing and hauling heavier loads than the 5.0 in a smaller cab and towing and hauling lighter loads. My point was simply that they did not get 20MPG while doing all of this like some of the crap you see all over the internet. The fact that the 5.0L and the Ecoboost are similar in economy was not the primary point, but I do know that they are similar. Yes I agree the the Ecoboost is more powerful. However it is far more about boost and not so much eco... ( at least in the real world ) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 2012 F-150 specifications Guess my sarcasm wasn't obvious enough... My point was simply that they did not get 20MPG while doing all of this like some of the crap you see all over the internet. The fact that the 5.0L and the Ecoboost are similar in economy was not the primary point, but I do know that they are similar. Yes I agree the the Ecoboost is more powerful. However it is far more about boost and not so much eco... ( at least in the real world ) Ummm, if you expect them to get 20 MPG while towing, hauling, running 0-60 runs at WOT, driving the truck hard, etc., then you need to step away from the internet and go hook your truck up to varying weights and see what affect that has on fuel economy. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V8-X Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 (edited) Eventhough the 5.0 was a 4x4, the EcoBoost was a loaded heavier SuperCrew Platinum. The 5.0 was a lighter Supercab XLT. We're still not getting an exact comparison. Um, by 30lbs? I wouldn't call that significant. 5649lbs for the Screw Ecoboost and 5619lbs for the Scab 5.0L Heck, the 5.0L had the 36 gallon tank while the EB had only a 26 gallon tank. If they filled them both up, I'm sure that 30lbs would be offset by the added weight of the extra 10 gallons of fuel. Could have been offset by different drivers. Exactly. Also if you read the fine print at the bottom it says: EcoBoost was towing a 8,250 lb trailer and hauling 1,275 lbs. 5.0 was towing a 6,900 lb trailer and hauling 1185 lbs. This was not apples to apples comparison. But at least you could say EcoBoost gets about the same mileage in a heavier cab configuation and towing and hauling heavier loads than the 5.0 in a smaller cab and towing and hauling lighter loads. Did anyone watch the video? They tested these vehicles at 75% of the payload/towing capacity. So duh, the 5.0 would haul less because Ford rates it lower (1830lbs & 9400lbs). All in all, bother trucks are awesome. But simply shows the 5.0L is nipping at the heals of the EB all the way. Both great motors. Edited December 13, 2011 by V8-X Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 Did anyone watch the video? They tested these vehicles at 75% of the payload/towing capacity. So duh, the 5.0 would haul less because Ford rates it lower (1830lbs & 9400lbs). Did you read the original discussion point? The EB gets within 0.1 MPG while towing the heavier load. That's the point being made...it towed/hauled more, and get essentially the same fuel economy. All in all, bother trucks are awesome. But simply shows the 5.0L is nipping at the heals of the EB all the way. Both great motors. Agreed! Both are great motors, but from everything I have read, the EB really outshines the 5.0 when towing large loads. Both are great motors, and I'm sure the 5.0 will out-tow my old 5.4, but when towing heavy, it really can't hold a candle to the EB. I'm sure for 99% of the folks, the 5.0 will fit their towing needs (honestly, if it doesn't, you probably need a Super Duty), but if you want the extra reserve power, and the slightly better fuel economy empty, then the EB is a perfect fit! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V8-X Posted December 13, 2011 Share Posted December 13, 2011 Did you read the original discussion point? The EB gets within 0.1 MPG while towing the heavier load. That's the point being made...it towed/hauled more, and get essentially the same fuel economy. Big issue with your conclusion here. MT only listed "overall mpg". That includes all tests, with and without a load. So something isn't adding up hear. Either the EB got really bad mpgs towing to offset its better unloaded mpgs. Or simply the EB doesn't get as good of mpgs as advertised unloaded, so the towing area is where it did better and brought the EB back up in line. Wish MT would have provided an mpg breakdown in unloaded and towing conditions. Look at these numbers. The EB was rated 16/22 and the 5.0 at 14/19. How do you conclude the 5.0L exceeded it's city average by 2mpgs (with and without towing a load) where as the EB could barely match (slightly exceeded) it's base cit mpg average? Yes the EB provides more power and is a great motor. But the mpg's were being told this truck should bring home just don't jive with real world results. Maybe Ford is sand bagging the 5.0L power and mpg numbers to make the EB look better. I'm not sure. Again, not knocking the EB, it's a great motor. But something just doesn't appear right on these figures. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.