Absolutely great write up very good data thanks very much for all your effort and work.

 

Not quite. The app I use is called "Fuelio". It keeps track of mileage and will even enter the gas station if I have the GPS turned on (but I rarely do, because I don't particularly want anyone tracking my whereabouts). It also has a data export function.

So what I do is export the data, at which point it gives me a couple of options, one being export to my google drive. I do that, and it plops the data file into my google drive as a CSV file. The CSV can be opened directly in either google sheets or Excel. Easy peasy; I just select a column (like LOM MPG), and it makes a graph. A couple more steps are needed to add the trend line and the mileage, but it only takes a couple of minutes.

I enter the LOM data on the comment line, and it is "just" the LOM mileage, so it appears as just another data column.

 

I'm getting 22+ and my drive is 15 miles each way, part is at 60-65mph, then the last few miles stop and go. Driving a constant 62 nets above 26 on the lom, but my average tanks have run from 21.8 to 23. Supercrew 4x4 xlt, 2.7 with 3:55's. Love the truck and it gets better mpgs than my Edge awd with a 3.5 did.

 

I have a 2015 3.5 Eco with a lifetime average MPG on Fuelly of 18.1, which ain’t bad for a full size truck in my book. Before I bought it I drove a rental with a 2.7 across two states. It was what sold me on the Ecoboost premise. Personally I wouldn’t trade my power and torque for 1-2 more MPG and my commute is roughly 50 miles round trip daily.

One rule of thumb I’ve heard, and I don’t know how accurate it really is, is that a smaller forced induction engine is worth twice it’s displacement compared with a naturally aspirated V8. So by that measure, the 3.5 is equivalent to a 7 liter V8 and the 2.7 is a 5.4. I think a glance at the power and torque numbers, as well as the motors place in the engine lineup, more or less verifies this notion.

 

I've heard similar, but boost pressures, how fast the turbo can build pressure and so forth affect it too. Regardless, I'm pretty sure the 2.7 is more powerful than the old 5.4 at any rpm. Not saying the 5.4 was bad, but I've done enough timing chains and vvt components in them to know I never personally wanted to own one unless I had it from new to keep up with fresh oil changes to avoid the old cam phaser knock. I changed plugs in a 5.4 3v a couple years ago and every single plug broke off, thank God for the Lysle tool company.

 

No doubt, engines in general have come a long way since the 5.4 was in its prime.

Like me I said, the 2.7 I drove turned me on the the Ecoboost concept... it’s a great motor. Just don’t drive a 3.5 after, or you’ll always be listing after that extra power and torque, delivered buttery smooth right off idle.

 

I would not go by the mpg as fuel is the least expensive part of owning a vehicle. Going with the 3.5L Ecoboost adds $2,800 to the price of the truck and it would take a long time to recover that with fuel savings.

Where I tow there are short merging lanes and the ability to accelerate quickly up to highway speeds is critical and the rest is of little or now significance. I care about torque at low RPM's as that is what influences my 25 to 65 mph times.

Easiest way to improve fuel economy is to go slower. Trucks are about as aerodynamic as a brick and at 60mph the air drag is 4 times as much as at 30mph. I see guys going a few miles down the road at 80mph and have to wonder who buys their gas.

 

UGH No

 

I'd shy away from the Subaru. My wife's 2015 outback, which she paid 34K for new, uses a quart of oil every 3 weeks and getting worse. Buying Subarus are like playing Russian roulette. There were lawsuits ofer the oil consumption and Subaru had to pay out but apparently never fixed the problem so the oil use continues. The dealer's "fix" was to overfill the oil, btw.

 

I've been hearing this a lot lately so I've adjusted my theory. But the point is, there are plenty of 4wd / AWD SUV's on the market that do it well as the subies in terms of traction and capability.

 

Not trying to turn this into a Subaru thread - however my wife has a '17 outback and it has been nothing short of excellent. Has the 2.5L 4 cylinder and burns zero oil - Not a drop. My mother in law has the same car, couple years older and no oil issues. Only issue has been factory group 25 battery had poor reserve capacity and CCA - I upgraded to a larger reserve/cca group 24 from Costco and it has run like a top. It has more ground clearance than a ford explorer and the AWD system is absolutely amazing in the snow. Blows my truck out of the water.

The wife and I also happen to love wagons as an alternative to CUV/SUV so there will always be one in our family. It's too bad as America just lost another wagon option due to poor sales - Buick Regal Tour X. Our "pipe dream" family hauler is a C63 AMG wagon - HA right. Maybe someday.

My 5.0 on the other hand HAS been using oil. Scheduling time for the new TSB to update the PCM.

Anyways, sorry for as this has nothing to do with fuel economy of the 2.7 v 3.5 however my next truck will be a 2.7

 

Howdy,
I owned a 2013 Ford F-150 Screw 4x4 3.5EB with six speed transmission, straight highway at 70 mph I got around 21 mpg.

I traded my 2013 on my new 2019.

I’ve owned my 2019 Ford F-150 Screw 4x4 2.7EB with ten speed transmission since September.

I had the exact same questions as you.

I tow tow very little (occasional utility trailer, bass boat). I commute 80 miles a day to work. Strait highway I get 24 mpg with the cruise set at 70 mph with summer blend gas. With winter blend gas is around 22 mpg.

IMHO. I like the 2.7EB’s power, acceleration and MPG. I would buy it again. For me the big test is hitting the gas to merge into highway traffic... it still makes me giggle with joy!