Notices
2009 - 2014 F150 Discuss the 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014 Ford F150
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by: Moser

Got to drive all the 2011 F-150 engines and this is my review!

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
  #1  
Old 12-07-2010, 02:07 AM
640 CI Aluminum FORD's Avatar
640 CI Aluminum FORD
640 CI Aluminum FORD is offline
Fleet Mechanic
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,311
Received 6 Likes on 5 Posts
Got to drive all the 2011 F-150 engines and this is my review!

Ok! So I was presented a chance to drive a 3.7L Powered F-150, a 5.0L and a 6.2L F-150, As well as an Ecoboost.

This came about threw a family member that Works at one of my local Ford Dealerships. He called me up and told me that they now had several 2011 F-150's on the lot and Ford was up there with an Ecoboost letting people try it out. So I jumped at the chance to go drive these trucks and see how they really drove. I'll lay it all out for everyone here.

2011 F-150 3.7L V6 STX Regular cab 2WD 3.55 Rear End

This was my first drive of the day. Upon starting it up the 3.7L growls to life nicely. Pulling out on the road the first thing I did was a WOT acceleration and I was quite surprised by the 3.7L's willingness to build speed, by all accounts I feel as though (Unloaded) the 3.7L would give a similarly equipped 5.4L a run for its money in a drag race. Down low Torque was better than the 4.6L 2v and mid to high range was better than the 4.6L 3v and even slightly better than the 5.4L (Though I'm sure this will change when towing). The Engine accelerates smoothly and loudly I must say. This engine sounds very much like a V6. It’s got 6 cylinders and it’s proud of it. Though its not a bad sound, for a 6 banger it actually quite pleasant. But still not as cool as the 5.0L or 6.2L in my opinion. The truck actually handles quite nimbly as well, seeing as it was in fact a regular cab short bed; I found it at least as easy to park as my current truck (2003 Ford Ranger) Turning radius is surprisingly sharp! And the Electronic steering also worked nicely. I must admit It does feel a little different from traditional boosted power steering, But it’s definitely an improvement. I also got the opportunity to take the truck on a 10 minute highway drive. During these 10 minutes I drove as easily as I could to try to achieve maximum MPG. While cursing at 70mph on the highway at the end of the 10minutes the final readout was showing 24.1mpg however it should be noted that it was still climbing quite easily by the end of the highway loop. I personally feel had I been given a little more road, I would have been able to achieve 25+mpg. For the most part everything else was like 2009 and 2010. The 2011 interiors are a little plusher but not much else is notable.

2011 F-150 Extended Cab XLT 5.0L V8 4WD 3.55 Rear End

This truck was the closest to being optioned out like I an going to option out my new truck. The first thing I noticed about this truck was the sound. Upon starting it up it had a deep baritone V8' sound. It does in fact sound very impressive. As with the 3.7L the first chance I got I did a WOT acceleration with the 5.0L and it was far faster than the 3.7L. Many people have worried about the 5.0L's relatively high peak HP and Torque numbers and I can dispel those worries here. The 5.0L felt at the very minimum as strong as the 5.4L off the line, But it easily had waayyy more power in the mid-high range when compared to the old 5.4L. And I imagine with a 3.73 rear end this feeling of power will only grow. I have to assume that towing with the 5.0L should be no problem, I feel quite confident that it will out tow the 5.4L in every possible way. Despite being 4WD the Electronic steering did not feel any different than it did in the STX 2WD. By the end of my 10 minute fuel economy loop I managed to achieve 22.6mpg however it should also be noted that it to was in fact still climbing at the end of the loop. I do believe 25mpg can be achieved with the 5.0L if driven gingerly. One of the most impressive factors of the 5.0L was that it produced surprising low end torque yet, it would freely rev all the way to the redline like nothing when asked to. A trait the 5.4L lacked. There is no comparison to either of the 4.6L's or even the 5.4L really. The 5.0L simply blows all three of them out of the water in terms of performance and fuel economy.

2011 F-150 XLT Quad Cab Ecoboost 4WD Unknown Rear End)

This is probably the most contriversol truck here. But I will say that I walked away impressed. Though I'm still hankering for the 5.0L the Ecoboost was quite an engine. First thing about the Ecoboost is that it does not sound like you might expect it to. Its a lower tone than the 3.7L but certainly does not sound like the 5.0 or 6.2L. As with many the previous 2 engines first chance I got I did a WOT acceleration run. The Ecoboost has a ever so slight delay to it, in which I can only attribute to the Turbo, as I did not experience this delay with the 3.7, 5.0L or 6.2L. The delay itself only last about 0.5 seconds and then the truck really picks up and moves. Like the 5.0L from a dead stop it will literally draw smoke out of the rear fenders. It very much reminded me of driving a diesel (except for the lack of clatter). This engine sounds purely...Industrial. That's the best I can describe it. Its a strictly business exhaust note. But it does accelerate quite impressively, Its smooth and always in its power band which is nice. I think this will also be a great towing engine. During my fuel economy trip I was able to achieve a grand total of, 23.7mpg slightly better than the 5.0L but a little behind the 3.7L. And this was cruising at a steady 70mph for about 10 minutes. This is a completely new engine to this segment of truck. And after driving it. It really reinforces my thoughts that this is Ford's way of giving us a Diesel like engine without making us pay the premium for a Diesel engine.

(2011 F-150 Platinum Quad Cab 6.2L 4WD 3.73 Rear End)

Start up the big 6.2L and it sounds very old school V8, almost like it was pulled right out of a muscle car. It sounds similar to the 5.0L but has an even deeper tone. The sound is very impressive, and purely performance derived. At WOT acceleration I have to admit, I was a tad disappointed in the 6.2L as I honestly expected it to blow the 5.0L out of the water...It didn't. It only felt slightly stronger than the 5.0L and some of this can probably be attributed to weight as this truck was a Quad cab and the 5.0L was an Extended cab. But even so the 5.0L was at a gearing disadvantage with 3.55's vs. the 6.2L's 3.73s. None of this is to say the 6.2L felt weak by any means. I think I was just so impressed with the first 3 engine's I had really expected the 6.2L to blow them all out of the water and it was only slightly faster. Low end torque as expected is nice and rich. Mid to High range power is strong as well. The sound though, good god the sound, This engine could truly (on sound alone) scare some teenagers challenging you to a red-light grudge match. Off the line in 2WD it will spin the tires pretty good before TCS kicks in. This 6.2L powered truck is also the only one of the 2011 models to feature traditional power steering vs. EPAS. Steering feel is nice and smooth. Feeling pretty much the same as 2009-2010 models F-150's. On the highway fuel economy loop I managed to achieve 18.7mpg. Not terrible but the only one to get under 20mpg.

And that was it for the day. All and All I walked away very impressed with not only the power but the effiency of the new engine's as well. In the 2011 F-150's there is a little something for everyone. And I have no doubt these trucks will do great for Ford.

Hope you enjoyed reading as much as I enjoyed writing this.
 
  #2  
Old 12-07-2010, 04:38 AM
5 Star Tuning's Avatar
5 Star Tuning
5 Star Tuning is offline
Former Vendor
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 2,627
Received 63 Likes on 35 Posts
Great reviews and thanks for the post.
 
  #3  
Old 12-07-2010, 05:13 AM
River19's Avatar
River19
River19 is offline
Elder User
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Live VT, Work MA
Posts: 768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thanks

Nice post, thanks for the reviews and thanks for being consistent in what you did with each engine as it provided a good comparison.

I was originally hoping I could get a crew cab 4x4 with the 3.7L as I tow with a PSD F 250 but alas, the best I could do with the 2011 lineup was to deck out an STX super cab and it still hit 33K or so which is a joke for an STX.

I was happy to hear you hit low 20s in mpg on the highway with the 5.0L. I'm thinking an XLT crew with the 5.0L will be a replacement in a couple years for my wife's Outback.

I think Ford is rocking things now with the 2011s. Very pleased to see this.

Steve
 
  #4  
Old 12-07-2010, 05:35 AM
HAPPY_trails's Avatar
HAPPY_trails
HAPPY_trails is offline
Junior User
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Very nice review. I like how you were consistent with testing each engine the same way, which is kinda hard with such a short time span. Great job.

I am still hoping to order an FX4 but my finances aren't panning out like I thought they would, might have to downgrade to an STX 4x4. Still plan on ordering it with EB/max tow though.
 
  #5  
Old 12-07-2010, 05:46 AM
tseekins's Avatar
tseekins
tseekins is offline
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Maine, Virginia
Posts: 38,156
Received 1,221 Likes on 803 Posts
Tried to rep ya but got the message. Great job sir. I would call in sick to be able to drive all four in one day and I haven't called out in three years!

Very consistent and unbiased, great job and thanks again.
 
  #6  
Old 12-07-2010, 06:27 AM
juneau76's Avatar
juneau76
juneau76 is offline
Postmaster
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,050
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Got him for you, Tim. Thanks for the writeup.
 
  #7  
Old 12-07-2010, 08:59 AM
powerstroke72's Avatar
powerstroke72
powerstroke72 is offline
Super Moderator
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: SW Virginia
Posts: 24,308
Received 35 Likes on 21 Posts
Originally Posted by tseekins
Tried to rep ya but got the message.
Got him for you. Excellent review.....making my upcoming decision even tougher.
 
  #8  
Old 12-07-2010, 01:35 PM
richterscale's Avatar
richterscale
richterscale is offline
Freshman User
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Great review,

btw, why were you "cursing" at 70 in the 3.7?

Just messin with you...thanks for taking the time to write this review. An ecoboost may be in my future.
 
  #9  
Old 12-07-2010, 03:25 PM
Emzee86's Avatar
Emzee86
Emzee86 is offline
New User
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by River19
Nice post, thanks for the reviews and thanks for being consistent in what you did with each engine as it provided a good comparison.

I was originally hoping I could get a crew cab 4x4 with the 3.7L as I tow with a PSD F 250 but alas, the best I could do hid headlight kits with the 2011 lineup was to deck out an STX super cab and it still hit 33K or so which is a joke for an STX.

I was happy to hear you hit low 20s in mpg on the highway with the 5.0L. I'm thinking an XLT crew with the 5.0L will be a replacement in a couple years for my wife's Outback.

I think Ford is rocking things now with the 2011s. Very pleased to see this.

Steve
Oh yea, looks like they really decided to step it up! Although I have always loved their trucks.
 
  #10  
Old 12-07-2010, 03:49 PM
YoGeorge's Avatar
YoGeorge
YoGeorge is offline
Logistics Pro
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Detroit
Posts: 4,509
Received 13 Likes on 13 Posts
Great review, 640. The only question I might have is how many miles were on all of these trucks? In other words, if the 6.2 had under 100 miles on it, it could still need some break-in miles to get the engine to full power and economy. Likewise with the others. If they were new dealer trucks, they probably all had very low miles like this, with the possible exception of the Ecoboost, which you mention that Ford had brought over (maybe this was a test truck with more break-in miles?)

Thanks for a great review,
George
 
  #11  
Old 12-07-2010, 04:39 PM
tseekins's Avatar
tseekins
tseekins is offline
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Maine, Virginia
Posts: 38,156
Received 1,221 Likes on 803 Posts
Originally Posted by powerstroke72
Got him for you. Excellent review.....making my upcoming decision even tougher.
Ain't that the truth!
 
  #12  
Old 12-07-2010, 06:51 PM
svt2205's Avatar
svt2205
svt2205 is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Sunapee NH
Posts: 1,195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
You lucky ....... But seriously, thanks for posting a great overview of all 4 trucks. This all just makes the decision on which motor that much harder. But then again, it really sounds like each will do an impressive job for their new owners.

Now I want a ?????????
 
  #13  
Old 12-07-2010, 07:50 PM
efx4's Avatar
efx4
efx4 is offline
Laughing Gas
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: South Jersey
Posts: 1,058
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I'll take my V6 with a side of twin turbos please.
 
  #14  
Old 12-07-2010, 08:24 PM
mtondreo's Avatar
mtondreo
mtondreo is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Pinellas Park, FL
Posts: 435
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
excellent review - Thanks, Mike.
 
  #15  
Old 12-08-2010, 02:57 AM
640 CI Aluminum FORD's Avatar
640 CI Aluminum FORD
640 CI Aluminum FORD is offline
Fleet Mechanic
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,311
Received 6 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by YoGeorge
Great review, 640. The only question I might have is how many miles were on all of these trucks? In other words, if the 6.2 had under 100 miles on it, it could still need some break-in miles to get the engine to full power and economy. Likewise with the others. If they were new dealer trucks, they probably all had very low miles like this, with the possible exception of the Ecoboost, which you mention that Ford had brought over (maybe this was a test truck with more break-in miles?)

Thanks for a great review,
George
Yeah I should have mentioned that but it slipped my mind. All of these trucks (Hold for the Ecoboost) had less than 100 miles on them. I can't remember exact numbers but I do remember making note that they all had less than 100miles. But yeah I'm sure with some more break in miles these trucks would have performed even better.

The Ecoboost was already up to almost 10,000. I assume it had already been trucked around quite a bit for testing and promotional purposes.

Man I really can't wait to order my 5.0 FX4!
 


Quick Reply: Got to drive all the 2011 F-150 engines and this is my review!



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:48 AM.