It doesn't matter what axle the window sticker says. Ford tests with the standard axle for each engine. For example lets talk about a SCAB. With the 3.7 engine and 4x4 standard axle is 3.73. All window stickers reflect that axle's mpg.
For the 5.0 in a 4x4 SCAB standard axle is 3.55. For a 4x4 ecoboost SCAB standard axle is 3.31. If Ford does the epa tests with the SCAB these are the axles that they use- they do not test each axle. Haven't you ever noticed that their are always only two EPA figures for each engine? One for 4x2 and one for 4x4? That is because they test only one axle for each. Look at the 2010 5.4. They only had two ratings 14/20 for 2wd and 14/18 for 4x4 and they had a lot more axles than that.

They are not even required to say whether they tested with regular cab, SCAB or SCREW. So they could do all tests with the regular cab, save about 500 lbs of weight and skew the figures up another mpg or so.

 

i'm in. the 4x2 supercab with 3.7 is 17 and 23.

 

[quote=Greg B;9731558]EB won't deliver the same fuel economy towing as the 6.2L. quote]

Speculation...

 

Not speculation. There was a thread on here with a link to a test with the 6.2L and EB towing 6K lb. and the EB came in at 9 mpg or there abouts and the 6.2L came in at a little over 10 mpg. The EB is just short on displacement to deliver good fuel economy towing. But a good programmer could change that like it has with diesels.

 

The problem thus far is that you can't get he 6.2L in a supercab nor can you get it in the crewcab with the 6.5ft box. I tow a small fifth wheel (5100# dry) and I need the 6.5 foot box. I currently own a 2004 Ford F150 FX4 with the 5.4L and it's OK but I want/need more torque/power.

 

What about the raptor's, special edition yes, but still a production truck with that setup.

 

I don't remember that test or thread on this or any of the other forums. As far I know no one has tested the 6.2 v.s. the ecoboost. If you have the link or can find it I would like to see it.

The only reference that I know of to the ecoboost while towing fuel economy, came from a guy over on PUTC that went to the BBQ dinner and ecoboost unveiling before the state fair. One of the questions on the list of questions that we asked to be answered was, what kind of mileage did it get while towing? The engineer's answer was "within 1 mpg of a V8" but he didn't specify whether up or down!

Either way, 1 mpg isn't a killer. Besides the ecoboost will do so much better unloaded than the 6.2 that you will come out way ahead. Honestly if I was towing everyday I wouldn't buy the ecoboost anyway, but I will not be afraid to load it to the max with cows or hay, cause that's what it was designed and tested for.

 

I don't have the link but I remember talking about it.

 

Is the N/A V6 even going to be available in a 4x4?

 

It is available now. See the new F150 brochure on the Ford site.

It's ratings are 16/21

 

If you tow everyday, you shouldn't be in a half ton unless you're towing a 2k trailer or something like that. Even with a 5k trailer I would feel more comfortable in a Super Duty if it was a daily tow. If it's just a weekend thing, a half ton is the way to go.

 

Yes, up to an ECSB in 4wd, ECLB in 2wd form. If it's a 4wd or Super Cab then the 3.73 axle is required.

 

The 3.7L is only going to give us a 2 mpg advantage (as per EPA estimates) over the 5.0L. It is worthy of consideration.

 

Depends on how much you want to tow, the 3.7 is limited to around 6k max, the 5.0 is 10k max. So you lose 2 mpg but gain 4000 lbs in capability. If you drive 15k miles a year it probably wouldn't cost you more than a couple hundred extra a year for gas (I didn't calculate it just guessed)

 

But for someone who gets a 2wd RCSB and doesn't really tow or haul a lot, just wants a truck, it will be a great engine. Also, for a fleet that needs trucks but not necessarily a lot of capacity, the 3.7 will be great because it's $1000 cheaper and will probably get better mileage. In a fleet of 10 trucks that's $10k initial plus fuel savings. It just depends on application.