Anyone have a 3.5 Ecoboost F150

Messages
2,246
Location
WNY
Anyone have an F150 with the Ecoboost 3.5? Is it your daily driver? What MPG are you seeing with it?
 
Messages
362
Location
Canada
I have a 2011 XLT Crew Cab with the Ecoboost. The best I''ve done on the highway is 19.9 miles per U.S. gallon. More typical is right around 19 miles per U.S. gallon. That's driving around 75 miles per hour in the summer with my wife and two small girls. I don't track mileage around town but it doesn't seem too bad. I should add that's with a 3.55 rear axle and factory A/T tires burning regular E10 gasoline.
 
Last edited:
Messages
7,492
Location
North America
I don't have the EB, after doing research decided on the 5.0 instead. Saw that most folks were getting the same mpg (www.f150forum.com) as listed above, rather than the 21 advertised. They all love the power though. Averaged 17.1 on a 4900 mile trip back in April, a/c on, cruise set above 70 for almost the whole trip. Included one day of about 770 miles at 13mpg, with a 30 mph wind on the nose and cruise set higher than other days.
 
Messages
5,179
Location
Midwest
I have 2011 3.5L with 3:73 and the off road package. I average 17.2 and usually run premium E0 and my mileage is better on it, I use to average 15.7mpg on 87 E20. On highway going 60mph on relatively flat ground I can get 22-23mpg but that's not too often. It's sure a fun truck to drive with the 3:73s.
 
Messages
19,686
Location
Sunny Florida
Originally Posted By: DemoFly
www.fuelly.org shows the 3.5L ecoboost averaging 17mpg.
3 different Eboosters here, all were 3.5's. All averaged about the same 17 to 18 mpg in normal around town driving, slightly better highway...
 
Messages
2,750
Location
Rochester, NY
They don't do much better than the V8 trucks unless you really baby them, although the torque curve is really nice. The time where the ecoboosts shine for fuel use is in an application with lots of low speed use or lots of idle time, as the smaller motor will burn less fuel when it's not doing any real work. When you're using the power, it'll still burn just as much fuel. A friend of mine has found that his picks up a solid 1 mpg or so by running 93 vs 87, it's enough to equal out the cost from what he's calculated (and it makes a little more power on 93).
 
Messages
10,693
Location
Jupiter, Florida
I have both a 2011 supercrew Ecoboost and an 2009 supercrew 5.4L. The Ecoboost averages about 19MPG. However, I drive it carefully, nearly all highway. MPG really takes a hit when you start enjoying all the power the Ecoboost has. The 5.4L averages about 14.5. And, the EB accelerates much harder than the 5.4L, it's not even a contest. A side by side comparison has the EB truck very far ahead in seconds. About 20 truck lengths by the next block. I hear the 5.0 is more efficient than my 5.4, and faster than my 5.4 too. But, I'm not at all sure the 5.0 will return better MPG than the EB.
 
Last edited:
Messages
14,721
Location
Central NY
Originally Posted By: rslifkin
They don't do much better than the V8 trucks unless you really baby them, although the torque curve is really nice. The time where the ecoboosts shine for fuel use is in an application with lots of low speed use or lots of idle time, as the smaller motor will burn less fuel when it's not doing any real work. When you're using the power, it'll still burn just as much fuel. A friend of mine has found that his picks up a solid 1 mpg or so by running 93 vs 87, it's enough to equal out the cost from what he's calculated (and it makes a little more power on 93).
My parents came to the same conclusion. It makes more power and saves a tiny bit of gas. Plus, it'll save them money in a transmission build since the 6F35 isn't downshifting all the time. It only took a year of me hounding them to put premium gas in it.
 
Messages
530
Location
Deer Park, Washington
2012 F 150 Supercrew Lariat. I have gotten a high of 24MPG on the interstate doing 65 on flat land, and 17mpg in town. I also have a 3.11 rear end. 1700rpm at 65mph helps. Plenty of power. I don't tow anything so I went with the highest rear gear available. For me, it was the right decision.
 

JTK

Messages
13,429
Location
Buffalo, NY
I know a bunch of "truck guys" that own them and we have a few at work. No one is ever thrilled with the fuel economy, but like said, they run nice and have lots of power. If a 5.0L is less money, I'd go that route.
 
Messages
6,029
Location
Florida
Friend has a 2012 XLT extended cab 4x2. Gets in the 16s. About the same as my 13 5.0 XLT Screw 4x4. I'm sure I baby mine much more.
 
Messages
1,224
Location
Houston, TX
2012 SCrew FX4, getting just over 15 mpg since purchase. However, only 14350 miles as of the last fill up in just under 1.5 years. The heavy duty tow package and remote start probably do the most to kill the fuel economy. It is "my daughters" main vehicle. As she is 3, it takes time to load her in the seat and my wife avails herself of the remote start on a regular basis. I got it for pretty much the same price as the 5.0 and probably wouldn't own it(or any other truck) if it couldn't handle the acceleration needed for Texas style on ramp driving and merging.
 
Top