Ecoboost Real World Numbers

[Bob Rosadini]

Been involved in a pvt discussion on another site with an industry guy who is saying Ecoboost mpg numbers are poor in real world applications.

 

So how about it? Any owners out there? What is your current mileage and what kind of numbers are you getting and in what sort of service?

[97svtgoin05gt]

I drive a '13 Focus ST. The dash reads 25 pretty much all the time. I commute 30 miles out and 30 back each day. I normally fill up on Sunday and can go just fine until Thursday when I need to fill er up again. If the car has a 2 gallon larger tank I could make the week but the tank on them is small. I am judicious with throttle application. My normal cruising speed is between 70 and 80 so I'm not generally putting around. I've never gotten the ST up to a 27 or 28 MPG range but haven't been on long long stretches with it either so highway for long distance might be better.

 

The Escape Titanium we just got seems to be between 22 and 23 but we've only had it a short time so tough to say on that. The 2.0 can be thirsty for a 4cyl but seriously, if you want the power it has to come from somewhere. Conversely with my driving style, if I was running a v6 or v8 I'm sure mpgs would be seriously sub 20, probably down around 15 so are they better? Yes. Are they great? No. But they are a nice compromise and I don't see how anyone will do drastically better to be honest.

[akirby]

That's the party line with all ecoboost engines. I've had my Fusion 2.0EB for 2 years and this is the difference.

 

If you drive it very carefully (the way they drive it on the EPA test) and stay completely off the gas as much as possible, and drive at EPA test speeds on 100% gasoline AND have the same equipment level as the EPA tests (which usually excludes heavier options) you can get window sticker mpg or better. If you don't follow all of those you can get much worse than the EPA estimates.

 

The range of possible mpg is broader on an ecoboosted engine than a NA engine. Driven properly it can do much better but driven improperly or with heavy options on E-10 you can also do much worse.

 

Some people also mistakenly compare the 3.5L EB to the 5.0L but it should be compared to the 6.2L based on power and capability.

[Sevensecondsuv]

Two guys at work have '14 F150s with the 3.5EB. Their only complaint is the gas mileage. At 14-15 it isn't bad considering the capability but it doesn't really live up to the hype or window sticker either. Pretty much the same as the 5.4 from the previous generation delivered. One guy was wishing he had just saved the option money and got the 5.0.

Edited March 26, 2015 by Sevensecondsuv

[Anthony]

 

The range of possible mpg is broader on an ecoboosted engine than a NA engine. Driven properly it can do much better but driven improperly or with heavy options on E-10 you can also do much worse.

 

 

 

Tee hee

 

[ajvolpe]

What I have observed of the driving public is most alarming from a practical standpoint. Jack-rabbit starts and staying on the accelerator until you are 100 feet from a stop sign or red light, is the norm. Also, the meaning of speed limit is totally misunderstood. Legally it is the maximum speed your are supposed to achieve, not the minimum. Whether you are in an NA vehicle or an Ecoboost, does not matter. What is worse, is that young drivers are given this as an daily example of how to drive, and perpetuate this stupidity. Couple this with all the modern distractions such as cellphones and social media, you have a recipe for low efficiency. We are taking driving for granted, like tying our shoes, and are not involved in the process, hence inefficiency and accidents. I have 2015 Expedition Limited 4x4, and have averaged 19.5 mpg(observed) over the previous 1000 miles. Granted, I try to enlist basic conservation techniques, and have not exceeded 70 mph during interstate driving. I believe that we are our own worst enemy in the effort to achieve published EPA numbers, and choose to blame the manufacturer and government for lack of understanding.

[pictor]

We have an 2015 Escape(2.3 L) and 2015 Audi 2.0L, both are direct inject turbo 4's and from a MPG and power perspective behave in a similar manner. Drive it in a manner consistent with normal driving patterns, MPG's are as advertised, spirited driving, for get about it. I think this is an intrinsic attribute of these type of engines. The fun doesn't come without cost, but since when has that not been the case in all things

[akirby]

The problem with most speed limits is that they are artificially too low. We have a 2 lane county road with a lot of subdivisions and it's 50 mph. No problem there. But they've recently built/widened an intersecting road with 4 lanes and a divided median and full traffic lights. That road is now 45 mph max. They also changed another older intersecting road from 55 to 45 mph. 45 is WAY too slow for a 4 lane divided highway in low to medium density residential and commercial areas. People drive 55-60 on these roads all the time.

 

The state of GA actually recently decided it was safer to raise the speed limit on I-285 (circles Atlanta) from 55 to 65 because you have some people driving 55 and everyone else driving 70 because 55 is too slow and the speed differential is what causes accidents, not driving 65 or 70. Of course they did it the wrong way with a continuously variable limit based on local traffic conditions which required an unbelievably expensive and complicated speed limit sign infrastructure instead of just making the limit 65 period. If traffic increases people naturally slow down anyway.

 

[/soapbox]

[jcartwright99]

My 2014 Escape (1.6) can get numbers "close" to the EPA numbers. However, I live in the Chicago area. Congested start/stop and aggressive driving is the norm and I rarely, if ever, attain EPA estimates in the city. However, I can get real close when driving 55 mph (which is the expressway limit within a radius of the city). Anything more than 55 however, it starts to drop. 70-75 gets me 25-26mpg. I only put premium (93) in my Escape.

 

I use fuelly for the most accurate reading versus my dash computer. I am not impressed or really disappointed in my mileage. If I had to do it over again, I would probably opt for the 2.0, as the mileage would be close for the type of driving that I am in but the power would be substantially more. You really have to get into the gas/turbo in the 1.6 to get anything more grandpa (maybe a tick above) like acceleration.

 

Overall, I think these first gen ecoboost engines are good. However, there is a much more delicate of line between power/fuel economy of naturally aspirated engines. Ford did the EPA tests and hit the good numbers. I think what consumers are finding is that EPA tests are flawed and not the norm in the real world.

[Tico]

I have and SN95 Mustang with the 4.6L and 4 speed auto. In mixed driving I average 19 MPG all the time. I definitely floor it on the on ramps but besides that I drive pretty conservatively. I am thinking about a Fusion ecoboost 2.0. It will be interesting to see what kinda MPG I get on the same drive if I get the Fusion.

 

As far as the speed limit being too low...my experience is people will drive 10 to 15 MPH over no matter what you post the limits at. If they raise the speed limit from 65 to 70 it just means people will be averaging 82 in the fast lane instead of 77. We may have this experiment in Wisconsin soon. So we shall see.

[1999 White C5 Coupe]

AJVLOPE,

 

I have a 2015 Ford Expedition Limited 4 x 4 on order - build date was 3/23/2015.

 

I live in the Midwest with lots of hills, cold winters, and no 100% gasoline (only E-10, thanks to the Federal Government). I drive lots of back roads and State highways (not expressways).

 

Your post makes me hopeful that I will achieve close to the rated mileage (15 city / 20 highway).

Edited March 26, 2015 by 1999 White C5 Coupe

[Bob Rosadini]

Thx everyone for the comments- I should have been more specific in my post as my "debate" involves 150 numbers. I too own an EB (2010 SHO) and in average mixed driving it hardly ever goes below 22. Steady hiway at 70+ it will be steady at mid 23.

 

But as for 150's, this guy (knowledgeable heavy truck industry guy) is claiming Ford's numbers are BS hype and real world does not come close to claims. I'm beginning to get the feeling it all comes down to a question of "capability" vs. economy. Will the 3.5 EB give good numbers? Yes- but use that power and the numbers go down quickly.

 

The question then becomes for example when comparing the EB say with a Dodge with the VM diesel, if the diesel is driven hard-better make that under load- are the VM numbers better than a 3.5 EB under load.

 

For comparison's sake, was on a road trip yesterday in a friends '14 Super Cab 150, 5.0. 4200 miles on the clock, two of us at 200 lbs and third guy closer to 280. Thing never got above 13.4 at fairly constant 70 mph.

[Deanh]

91 Octane, and shes NOT babied, far from it, combined, but more bumper to bumper freeway than anything else....reading 29.7, Fiesta....ST....quite happy with that, didn't expect over 26, but.........I DIDNT CARE...

[akirby]

As far as the speed limit being too low...my experience is people will drive 10 to 15 MPH over no matter what you post the limits at. If they raise the speed limit from 65 to 70 it just means people will be averaging 82 in the fast lane instead of 77. We may have this experiment in Wisconsin soon. So we shall see.

 

Not true. Studies have shown that people (on average) tend to drive at whatever speed they feel is safe regardless of the posted limit. The limits on Atlanta interstates vary from 55 to 70 and people tend to drive 70-75 regardless.

 

If you set speed limits realistically then only the outliers would be the ones going more than 5 mph above the limit and you could start enforcing that. As it is most cops let you go 10 mph over anyway looking for the 15-20 over drivers. But this allows speed traps where greedy governments use it as a revenue tool.

 

Make congested areas 45, 2 lane roads 50-60, 4 lane roads 55-65 and interstate/ltd access 65-75 and start ticketing at more than 5 over. Traffic would flow better, it would be safer (less speed differential) and would pretty much eliminate speed traps.

 

Longer yellow lights is a similar idea. By making the yellow light longer you decrease the number of people who run red lights resulting in less accidents. Amazingly simple solution that costs nothing, but it also doesn't provide revenue from red light cameras.

 

It all depends on your priority.

[Biker16]

Cold is another issue.

 

Using excess engine heat to warm the interiors on a high efficiency engine isn't the best idea. the engine expends alot of energy maintaining operating temperature which is now 212 degrees not the 180 degrees of a couple years ago. Adding the added load of warming the interior has a large effect on the efficiency of the engine.

 

With my 2012 focus I have had MPG #s of 25-27MPGs HWY, in -3 degree weather, simply truing down the heat, increases economy by 1-2 MPG.

 

Gen II and Gen III GTDI engines are better at managing heat within the engine and are designed to be more tolerant of transient Heat conditions, allowing a reduction in the Cooling capacity of the engine..

 

the underlying issue with Ford's implementation of GTDI technology is they are too powerful. you may be better off increasing displacement and reducing the size of the turbo, to Reduce the loss of efficiency from running so much extra stuff (inter-cooler, larger water pump, ETC) under light loads.

 

IMO.

[fuzzymoomoo]

 

The limits on Atlanta interstates vary from 55 to 70 and people tend to drive 70-75 regardless.

Anyone who lives in Metro Detroit knows exactly what you mean. I-696 has a speed limit of 70 and if you are going any slower than 80, you are getting run over. M-39 (Southfield Freeway) has a 55mph limit and people regularly go 70-80 down there too.

[akirby]

It doesn't matter whether the engine is running at 180 or 220, there is plenty of residual heat available in the coolant to warm the interior. You're just redirecting heat that would have been lost through the radiator to the heater core which is just another radiator.

[RichardJensen]

Thx everyone for the comments- I should have been more specific in my post as my "debate" involves 150 numbers. I too own an EB (2010 SHO) and in average mixed driving it hardly ever goes below 22. Steady hiway at 70+ it will be steady at mid 23.

 

But as for 150's, this guy (knowledgeable heavy truck industry guy) is claiming Ford's numbers are BS hype and real world does not come close to claims. I'm beginning to get the feeling it all comes down to a question of "capability" vs. economy. Will the 3.5 EB give good numbers? Yes- but use that power and the numbers go down quickly.

 

The question then becomes for example when comparing the EB say with a Dodge with the VM diesel, if the diesel is driven hard-better make that under load- are the VM numbers better than a 3.5 EB under load.

 

For comparison's sake, was on a road trip yesterday in a friends '14 Super Cab 150, 5.0. 4200 miles on the clock, two of us at 200 lbs and third guy closer to 280. Thing never got above 13.4 at fairly constant 70 mph.

 

Wind is a factor too. I replaced the Sable with a Fusion that has one of those fun little bar graph MPG things, and with a 20MPH crosswind (which is certainly not unusual for this area), you are not going to sniff rated highway mileage. And that is going to be even more of an issue with trucks.

 

Also, I don't know how sensitive EBs are to oxygenated gas. I haven't noticed enough of a difference with my 2.5L NA to justify buying more expensive ethanol-free gas, but YMMV.

Edited March 26, 2015 by RichardJensen

[akirby]

The first gen EBs ran rich to keep the heads cool. That has to hurt mileage and it means my tail pipes are completely covered in soot all the time. The 2nd gen with integrated head cooling should be much better.

[MadManMoon]

 

I replaced the Sable with a Fusion

 

You should update your profile! Still says Sable.

[JZ150]

50,000 miles on a 2012 F150 Supercrew 4X4 and according to the MPG readout, I have averaged 16.0 MPG for the 50,000 miles. I am good with that considering how much time my truck spends at the job site (low speed, idle time).

 

I can get close to 20 on the highway running 70 ish MPH. You can def tell a difference in the way you drive it.

[Bob Rosadini]

50,000 miles on a 2012 F150 Supercrew 4X4 and according to the MPG readout, I have averaged 16.0 MPG for the 50,000 miles. I am good with that considering how much time my truck spends at the job site (low speed, idle time).

 

I can get close to 20 on the highway running 70 ish MPH. You can def tell a difference in the way you drive it.

Good numbers IMO. Are you a trades guy who also carries a lot of tools?

[fordtech1]

My 13 Fx4 crew with 20s and 3.55 gets 17mpg about all the time. That's a mix driving and I am not super hard on the accel pedal, nor do I poke around. I use the boost. However, I can drive easier and get close to 20 but haven't been able to sustain it for very long. Cold weather makes a huge difference and so does high ethonal content. Also, driving above 70 makes a difference. I have gotten 19.5 on a trip once.

Overall, I love the truck and the MPG could always be more, but who wouldn't love more MPG. Considering the capabilities and the ability to shame a lot of people at red lights, its worth it.

[Biker16]

It doesn't matter whether the engine is running at 180 or 220, there is plenty of residual heat available in the coolant to warm the interior. You're just redirecting heat that would have been lost through the radiator to the heater core which is just another radiator.

There isn't at -10 degrees. even going from 32 to 48 makes a huge difference in MPG.

 

try it sometime, my grille shutters don't open below 30 degrees on the highway.

 

The goal of efficient engines is to NOT generate waste heat, The ECU monitors the HVAC thermostat and changes the operation of the engine to provide the "waste " heat for the Cabin.

[RichardJensen]

There isn't at -10 degrees.

 

You'll have to excuse him. He's from Atlanta. He doesn't even know that there are temperatures below 0.