F-150 - Ecoboost MPG Figures

[2002 Maxima SE]

Originally Posted By: VNTS
BG's pictures with the borescope say otherwise, their dynoe figures say otherwise and their MPG drop says otherwise.

Why would anyone want the hastle?? Also 25 mpg highwayin a Tuarus is nothing to brag about.


In the Taurus, the EcoBoost is more of a performance piece (power of a V8 (365HP) and the MPG of a V6 (25 MPG)). Not too shabby.

EcoBoost will be in every model by 2015 (believe that is right) to mirror that models top of the line engine but provide better fuel economy. For instance, the new Explorer has a V6 as the top of the line and will receive a Ecoboost 4 that matches the HP but delivers better MPG.

Other models, like the Focus, have a performance Ecoboost engine that don't necessarily get better MPG. I believe (not totally sure) that on models like the Focus and Taurus they will eventually get a smaller Ecoboost that will provide the same power as their top of the line (non-Ecoboost) engine but better MPG.

Make sense?

 

[SLCraig]

2002 Maxima SE you set the record for numbers of times saying "Ecoboost" in a single post

For the record, I think its a sweet design, but I would not be lining up to buy the first model years with this new engine.

 

[VNTS]

You could by a Challenger or Charge with a Hemi and get the same milage and not worry about the DI hastle?

No if this ecoboost returned 30+ mpg in the Taurus and it cost less and it idnt have the DI and associated potential problems it would be something to talk about

Also when said ecoboost is 10 yrs old and it is time to change the oil and coolant feed and return lines to the turbos,good luck

 

[unDummy]

Eco-sludge
Eco-crud
Eco-failure
Eco-joke
Eco-farce
Eco-marketing
Eco-nuts
Eco-mpg
Eco-slavery

Pretty simple to eco-improve the eco-mileage in the eco-boost. Just eco-drop the 3.5L down to 2.8L, lose a 100 eco-ftlbs and 60 eco-hp....

Guys, its not about eco-MPG. Its about who has the biggest eco-balls..... No way was eco-Ford going to eco-install an eco-twin-turbo V6 with smaller eco-ones compared to the eco-V8's out eco-there. My ECO is bigger than your eco.

All eco-engines will eventually go eco-DI. There is no other eco-way to eco-squeeze out every last ounce of eco-MPG and reduce eco-EPA eco-emissions

Toyota's eco-approach is better but more eco-expensive. D4-S twin eco-injection fuel system combines both, eco-DI with not-so-eco-MPFI, which doubles the eco-injector count, and doubles the not-so-eco-wiring/programming/fuel plumbing which doesn't sound eco-friendly for the eco-accounts or eco-backyard eco-mechanics .... But, under not-so-eco-MPFI mode, eco-twin-infection can eco-clean the not-so-eco-side affects of not-so-eco-clean DI.

A small diesel would've been better. But, DPF, DEF, EGR, PCV, NOx, lower CR, low exhaust temp..... make every effort to kill the diesel benefit.

 

[ryansride2017]

Originally Posted By: unDummy
Eco-sludge
Eco-crud
Eco-failure
Eco-joke
Eco-farce
Eco-marketing
Eco-nuts
Eco-mpg
Eco-slavery

Pretty simple to eco-improve the eco-mileage in the eco-boost. Just eco-drop the 3.5L down to 2.8L, lose a 100 eco-ftlbs and 60 eco-hp....

Guys, its not about eco-MPG. Its about who has the biggest eco-balls..... No way was eco-Ford going to eco-install an eco-twin-turbo V6 with smaller eco-ones compared to the eco-V8's out eco-there. My ECO is bigger than your eco.

All eco-engines will eventually go eco-DI. There is no other eco-way to eco-squeeze out every last ounce of eco-MPG and reduce eco-EPA eco-emissions

Toyota's eco-approach is better but more eco-expensive. D4-S twin eco-injection fuel system combines both, eco-DI with not-so-eco-MPFI, which doubles the eco-injector count, and doubles the not-so-eco-wiring/programming/fuel plumbing which doesn't sound eco-friendly for the eco-accounts or eco-backyard eco-mechanics .... But, under not-so-eco-MPFI mode, eco-twin-infection can eco-clean the not-so-eco-side affects of not-so-eco-clean DI.

A small diesel would've been better. But, DPF, DEF, EGR, PCV, NOx, lower CR, low exhaust temp..... make every effort to kill the diesel benefit.


Well, that was about the most annoying thread I've ever read!

 

[MrCritical]

Pretty much what I expected.

$700 over the premium you already pay for a 5.0? No thanks.

The dealer isn't going to want to stock it because of the price premium. The customer who shops it vs. a 5.0 at another dealer will get a smart salesperson who will tell Mr. Customer that Ecoboost in a truck is a fad, could be worth less than the 5.0 come trade in time, and Mr. Customer is going to keep his $700, and buy the 5.0

Then Ford will pressure the dealer. "Mr. Dealer, you'll have to order X number of Ecoboost trucks to get XX number of 5.0's."

That's the way that Ford rolls.

 

[Ben99GT]

Originally Posted By: VNTS
BG's pictures with the borescope say otherwise


They hardly say otherwise.

EcoBoost @ 37K (before and after cleaning)

Audi FSI @ 2K after a cleaning

that had it looking like this:

VW 2.0 @ 28K (with catch can and meth injection)

GLI @ 100K

 

[2002 Maxima SE]

Originally Posted By: SLCraig
2002 Maxima SE you set the record for numbers of times saying "Ecoboost" in a single post

For the record, I think its a sweet design, but I would not be lining up to buy the first model years with this new engine.


Ecoboost!

Agreed with your point on lining up to buy the first one. I've been following threads here on DI engines and I'm waiting until the carbon buildup issue is resolved. It's obviously a problem for several manufacturers.

 

[SteveSRT8]

The whole issue I have with it is it cannot defy physics. It is marketed as getting better gas mileage than an equivalent V-8 and all we've seen in the three models I have experience with is the same. Not better.

Great performer, and appears to be durable in Ford's commercials. But it's just not the revolutionary thing it's promoted to be. And there's no way that twin turbos are a recipe for longevity.

 

[VNTS]

go ahead and buy your ecoboost, you can clean your valves every 30K with what ever you choose, I will avoid the problem by choosing other engines without DI.

 

[boxer9512]

Just got a F-150 XLT with the ecoboost... was hoping to get somewhere of what they had listed for the 15/21mpg on the sticker.. but after a 500 mile hiway trip, half at 75mph and half at 65mph using cuise control, ended up with 16.3 mpg. I guess the only trucks that will be getting the 15/21 are going to be the ones with the really low rear ends, mine has the 3.73 so I am guessing that is what is making it so much lower. Towed a 4500-5000lb trailer 70 miles into the mountains here in Colorado, and got 11.4 mpg.
Not really impressed with the fuel economy (it isn't there), and second guessing myself for not getting a V-8, that probably would get just as good, if not beter HWY MPG. Think that Ford should do the MPG rating for the axel that they put in the truck, not just the one that gets the best MPG

 

[123Saab]

Right on on the gear ratio.

FWIW, the Ecobosst could have Been a [censored] of a combo in a midsize Pickup......like the Ranger xD

 

[boxer9512]

Well, just went over 2700 miles, still not looking very good. After HWY miles ended up with about 16mpg, towed my trailer 4000# fromm N. Colorado to Mt Rushmore about 700 miles round trip, was getting 8mpg with premium 91 octane gas, was down to 6.6 when I was running regular pulling the trailer, have averaged 12.4 for the 2700 miles city/hwy/towing mostly flat to rolling hills on HWY, and some mountain driving. Don't know what the "break in" period is, but hoping it gets better.

 

[Astro14]

Part of the issue is that the EPA test is done at up to 60 MPH on a dyno and "adjusted" for predicted wind resistance.

Most of Colorado has a 75 MPH speed limit, and while the air is less dense, I found that the same cruising speed in Colorado resulted in about the same MPG as that speed at sea level...

Once the break in period (several thousand miles) is over, throttle back to 60 MPH and I will bet you get close to sticker MPG value...hopefully, before you get rear-ended by someone going 80!

 

[IndyIan]

Originally Posted By: boxer9512
Well, just went over 2700 miles, still not looking very good. After HWY miles ended up with about 16mpg, towed my trailer 4000# fromm N. Colorado to Mt Rushmore about 700 miles round trip, was getting 8mpg with premium 91 octane gas, was down to 6.6 when I was running regular pulling the trailer, have averaged 12.4 for the 2700 miles city/hwy/towing mostly flat to rolling hills on HWY, and some mountain driving. Don't know what the "break in" period is, but hoping it gets better.

Can you show instantaneous MPG on the dash somewhere? If not, get a scanguage. It'll help you see which parts of your driving use alot of gas and then you can try to minimize them. Like Astro14 said as well, just slowing down will help alot especially with your axle ratio.

 

[SteveSRT8]

sorry to say but we have two older eboosted vehicles in the family as well as a good friend in a Taurus SHO.

They are nice motors, very smooth and powerful.

But they all average around 17 mpg!!!

 

[Gene K]

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
sorry to say but we have two older eboosted vehicles in the family as well as a good friend in a Taurus SHO.

They are nice motors, very smooth and powerful.

But they all average around 17 mpg!!!


Ouch! I average 26 mpg (mixed driving) in a 2011 5.0L Mustang and 19 mpg mixed in a 2010 RAM 1500 Crew Cab 4x4 with 4.7L V8. Buddy of mine averages better than I do in a 2010 F150 Supercab 4x2 with 4.6L V8 which averages 20.0 mpg. I can almost guarantee a new F150 with the 5.0L will get at least 20 mpg (4x4) or 22 mpg (4x2) in either of our hands.

Sounds like the Ecoboost might be another "built for the test" combo that disappoints in the real world like the Hemi. Hope Im wrong.

 

[Ben99GT]

Originally Posted By: Gene K
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
sorry to say but we have two older eboosted vehicles in the family as well as a good friend in a Taurus SHO.

They are nice motors, very smooth and powerful.

But they all average around 17 mpg!!!


Ouch! I average 26 mpg (mixed driving) in a 2011 5.0L Mustang and 19 mpg mixed in a 2010 RAM 1500 Crew Cab 4x4 with 4.7L V8. Buddy of mine averages better than I do in a 2010 F150 Supercab 4x2 with 4.6L V8 which averages 20.0 mpg. I can almost guarantee a new F150 with the 5.0L will get at least 20 mpg (4x4) or 22 mpg (4x2) in either of our hands.

Sounds like the Ecoboost might be another "built for the test" combo that disappoints in the real world like the Hemi. Hope Im wrong.


I have a feeling you and your buddy would see around 23 mpg in a 4x2 EcoBoost if you two are getting 19 from a 4x4 4.7 Ram and 20 out of a 2010 4.6 4x2.

I still think EcoBoost MPG is going to be very driver dependent, able to eek out really good mpg with the right driving style or really poor mpg with the right driving style.

 

[SteveSRT8]

well, so far we've seen 3 personally and a couple here, and not one broke 20 mpg.

Still waiting for more info on this one.

Personally, I think your daft if you think any 360+ hp motor is likely to get 20 mpg in any vehicle weighing well over 2 tons, but the Ford Faithful are hoping...

 

[panthermike]

There are a few guys on a Ford truck forum that have broken 20mpg.