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

2011 F150 Ecoboost rated 15 -21 MPG

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
  #31  
Old 12-28-2010, 07:04 PM
johndeerefarmer's Avatar
johndeerefarmer
johndeerefarmer is offline
Cargo Master
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,658
Received 73 Likes on 55 Posts
Originally Posted by Evan92
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.
I didn't say anything was wrong with it, just pointed out that most people complain that they don't have enough truck. I very seldom hear "I bought too much truck" unless they were the diesel owners like myself that got ticked when diesel went higher than gas 5 years ago and never came back down.

Sure, if you are a meter reader or plumber, or carpenter and never plan on towing more than a small trailer, by all means go for the 3.7. After all It does have 300 hp!
 
  #32  
Old 12-28-2010, 08:42 PM
tseekins's Avatar
tseekins
tseekins is offline
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Maine, Virginia
Posts: 38,153
Received 1,221 Likes on 803 Posts
Originally Posted by johndeerefarmer
I didn't say anything was wrong with it, just pointed out that most people complain that they don't have enough truck. I very seldom hear "I bought too much truck" unless they were the diesel owners like myself that got ticked when diesel went higher than gas 5 years ago and never came back down.

Sure, if you are a meter reader or plumber, or carpenter and never plan on towing more than a small trailer, by all means go for the 3.7. After all It does have 300 hp!
I've been saying all along that the 3.7L is probably enough engine for the majority of us. I think it'll be pretty stout. I'm leaning hard towards the 5.0L though.
 
  #33  
Old 12-28-2010, 09:29 PM
MisterCMK's Avatar
MisterCMK
MisterCMK is offline
Fleet Owner
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Blue Hill Township
Posts: 24,705
Received 53 Likes on 43 Posts
What is "enough" for one person is not for another...
 
  #34  
Old 12-29-2010, 05:34 AM
tseekins's Avatar
tseekins
tseekins is offline
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Maine, Virginia
Posts: 38,153
Received 1,221 Likes on 803 Posts
Originally Posted by MisterCMK
What is "enough" for one person is not for another...
C'mon Chris, you know what I meant. For instance, I don't pull anything and I don't haul more than occasional building materials, mulch, top soil and stuff to the dump. In fact, I haven't had a pick-up truck since July and I've managed.

The 3.7L would work for a person like me but I'm giving the 5.0L more consideration since it's more of a want then a need.
 
  #35  
Old 12-29-2010, 08:14 AM
BLK94F150's Avatar
BLK94F150
BLK94F150 is offline
Postmaster
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: None of your business
Posts: 3,077
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Evan92
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.
I have heard this same thing over and over and it has never made sense to me. Compared to 2004 and older SDs, newer F150s have bigger brakes, better transmissions, more powerful and more efficient engines (close to 2v V10 power stock), in some cases integrated trailer controllers and are only a little lighter than a similar body style SD. The newer SDs are even better, but so are newer F150s.

It would seem to be the opposite. Unless you're towing over 8-10K everyday, you probably don't need the SD.

Mike
 
  #36  
Old 12-29-2010, 11:34 AM
postman524's Avatar
postman524
postman524 is offline
Junior User
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Evan92
In addition to what I said earlier, you have to compare it to a comparable engine in terms of performance. The 6.2l is the closest thing to it and it will blow the 6.2l out of the water in terms of economy.
Put this Eco-Toot under load and see if it still gets better mileage, also I will be driving my new 6.2 ten to fifteen years from now. Where will your high pressure and undersized Toot be then?? The only reason this engine is existing in the truck market is so Ford can try to meet their EPA fleet requirements not necessarily because it's such a great engine.
 
  #37  
Old 12-29-2010, 11:41 AM
postman524's Avatar
postman524
postman524 is offline
Junior User
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Benoit1967
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.
I just ordered it in SuperCab with over 6' bed, it's called a Super Duty. Ford has what you want, you just have to break away from their Eco-Toot line and go to the F250 like I did. I was going to go F150 all along but jumped ship when I couldn't get what I wanted with the F150. It seems as Ford is really trying to channel everyone into an Eco-Toot in the F150.
 
  #38  
Old 12-29-2010, 11:44 AM
johndeerefarmer's Avatar
johndeerefarmer
johndeerefarmer is offline
Cargo Master
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,658
Received 73 Likes on 55 Posts
Originally Posted by postman524
Put this Eco-Toot under load and see if it still gets better mileage, also I will be driving my new 6.2 ten to fifteen years from now. Where will your high pressure and undersized Toot be then?? The only reason this engine is existing in the truck market is so Ford can try to meet their EPA fleet requirements not necessarily because it's such a great engine.
Instead of your opinion, why don't you give us some facts as to why the ecoboost is inferior, will not last, gets bad mileage, etc?
 
  #39  
Old 12-29-2010, 11:51 AM
johndeerefarmer's Avatar
johndeerefarmer
johndeerefarmer is offline
Cargo Master
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 2,658
Received 73 Likes on 55 Posts
Originally Posted by postman524
I just ordered it in SuperCab with over 6' bed, it's called a Super Duty. Ford has what you want, you just have to break away from their Eco-Toot line and go to the F250 like I did. I was going to go F150 all along but jumped ship when I couldn't get what I wanted with the F150. It seems as Ford is really trying to channel everyone into an Eco-Toot in the F150.
Good luck on the 6.2 getting good mileage in that heavy truck, loaded or unloaded.
 
  #40  
Old 12-29-2010, 12:00 PM
BLK94F150's Avatar
BLK94F150
BLK94F150 is offline
Postmaster
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: None of your business
Posts: 3,077
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by postman524
Put this Eco-Toot under load and see if it still gets better mileage, also I will be driving my new 6.2 ten to fifteen years from now. Where will your high pressure and undersized Toot be then?? The only reason this engine is existing in the truck market is so Ford can try to meet their EPA fleet requirements not necessarily because it's such a great engine.
I would venture to say that the undersized toot might still be reasonable to drive when gas is $5-7/gallon like it's going to be in the next couple of years.

Have fun with your same as the last thing but bigger, fuel drinking engine.

Mike
 
  #41  
Old 12-29-2010, 12:07 PM
Evan92's Avatar
Evan92
Evan92 is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by johndeerefarmer
Instead of your opinion, why don't you give us some facts as to why the ecoboost is inferior, will not last, gets bad mileage, etc?
Exactly. Even if it gets the same mileage as a 6.2 while towing, it will get way better mileage when empty, which is what the truck will spend the majority of it's time doing. Plus it's got torque way down low, rather than up high like the 6.2. Ford will stand behind this engine just like they have stood behind the new 6.7 diesel.

It's called technology, don't be afraid of it. The 6.2L is a nice engine, but it's only a 2V. Call me when it becomes modern. I would go for a 6.2L in a Super Duty any day because the diesel is expensive and really isn't all that necessary unless you're towing a lot of weight all the time. But in an F150 I'll take the EB or the 5.0l over the 6.2 all day.
 
  #42  
Old 12-29-2010, 12:11 PM
BLK94F150's Avatar
BLK94F150
BLK94F150 is offline
Postmaster
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: None of your business
Posts: 3,077
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I don't know why everyone thinks the 3.5EB is totally new and untested anyway. Nothing about it is totally new. VCT, DOHC, fixed geometry turbos, and high pressure direct fuel injection have been done for years. It's all proven technology finally being put together in a truck. Heck this engine in lower output form has been out for a while now as it is.

Mike
 
  #43  
Old 12-29-2010, 12:17 PM
Evan92's Avatar
Evan92
Evan92 is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It is relatively new technology for the truck market, though.
 
  #44  
Old 12-29-2010, 12:31 PM
postman524's Avatar
postman524
postman524 is offline
Junior User
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by johndeerefarmer
Good luck on the 6.2 getting good mileage in that heavy truck, loaded or unloaded.
If I were really concerned about good mileage, I wouldn't have bought a truck. I would have went with a Chevy Volt or something similar. With my F250 and 6.2 engine at least I will have a truck not a pretender.
 
  #45  
Old 12-29-2010, 12:33 PM
Evan92's Avatar
Evan92
Evan92 is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by postman524
If I were really concerned about good mileage, I wouldn't have bought a truck. I would have went with a Chevy Volt or something similar. With my F250 and 6.2 engine at least I will have a truck not a pretender.
A pretender? Have you not watched the torture test videos? The truck isn't even out yet and you're already judging it. When it comes out, drive it. See what you think about it then. Right now you're being an ignorant traditionalist. "If my truck don't got a V8 it's a piece of crap"
 


Quick Reply: 2011 F150 Ecoboost rated 15 -21 MPG



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:55 AM.