now we are going to talk about aerodynamics when it comes to trucks? if you want 25 mpg and aerodynamics go get a car. If ford just put decent power and decent mpg's in their f150 we will all still buy them. We all need to stop kidding ourselves trucks are trucks mpg's are nice to dream about but lets get serious. Buy a car to do your daily driving and buy a truck to do what it was intended for work and playing hard. not trying to start an arguement but come on now. Just my .02 worth

 

Like I said before, highway mileage is not a function of the engine size, but the truck. Whatever you use for the powerplant, you still need to overcome the same amount of aerodynamic, friction, and rolling resistences.

The only advantage of a smaller engine is less parasitic losses from few moving parts, and higher thermal efficiency due to a smaller combustion chamber. That's why in an identical truck, the difference between a 4.2 V6 and a 5.4 Triton is minute. You'll notice Ford's mileage claims for EcoBoost is fairly minor.

My argument was that a 3.5 under boost can be made to PERFORM like a 7.0. I would not expect it to give significant mileage gains - 20% at the most. It won't make the truck go from 17 mpg hwy to 25.

 

I completely agree; using an F150 for what it's designed for would be ideal indeed. Unfortunately, it's nearly impossible due to our culture.

For some bizzare reason, North Americans think driving a pickup for no reason is "cool". That's why we're the only ones in the world to have "luxry" trucks.

I read something funny in this month's "Men's Health" - when it comes to picking up women, a "pair of jeans and a pickup" was rated 2nd place out of many other options, including Jags, Ferraris, Caddilacs. The only one to beat that combo is "pressed shirt and a BMW".

So, no one's going to give up their pickup truck fashion statement for a while, and the only option left is to make them more fuel efficient when guys try to hit on ladies with their 9000 lbs F450 in the middle of LA.

 

In fords press release they said that they did mention the diesel and the ecoboost would make their debut in 2010 for the f150 no further mention on the displacement of the motors. Or at least that I saw anyways.

 

No where in my comment did I say these trucks should be more aerodynamic. Did you bother to read everything here? Wind resistance (drag) is a big part of why we get such poor MPG. a 3.5 or any other engine is not going to improve our mileage that much. A diesel engine in these trucks is very capable of getting 25 mpg IMO but it won't happen overnight. If each revision we would get 1 mpg we would be near 25 MPG right now.

Are you wealthy enough that MPG is of no concern? Congrats if you are. The rest of us will happily take a 1 mpg improvement because it means more money in our pockets.

 

I completely agree that the mpg's could be alot better and they should be. The only reason you don't see a truck or even several cars that get 50 60 mpg's is not technology it is the big three are in the pocket of the oil companies. We are just the POOR saps that get stuck driving what we want and what we need and pay the cost for it. I did not want to start a pissing contest over this just that aerodynamics is not a word I thought I would ever see in a truck forum. Ford could make a diesel and put it into the F150 without all the ecoboost and hybrid crap and get 30 mpg's if there was enough money in it for them to make up the difference they would lose from the oil companies. Oh and no I am not rich enough to not have to worry about mpg's but don't we all wish that was at the bottom of our list of things to worry about. lol. Ford needs to quit the horsepower war and go for economy, they simply can not meet the competion let alone beat them.

 

in the deep ***** the big 3 are financially, they would all gladly drop this relationship with the oil companies that you're so sure of (got any evidence?) in turn for some killer selling 60mpg car.

the reasons we don't have those kinds of cars is simple. EPA mandates they choke the engines so they don't pollute. the gasoline sold here is much less efficient than gasoline sold in other parts of the world, so bigger engines are required to make similar power. our cars are heavier due to higher safety ratings required. our speed limits are higher than most other countries (yes, i know someone will bring up the autobahn, check out every other road in europe... 40km/h - 25mph speed limit in the city is quite common).

it's not the man trying to keep you down, it's not some big conspiracy against you wanting to pay at the pump, it's the tree huggin' hippies and global warming advocates that are making you drive a 14mpg truck...

 

"it's not the man trying to keep you down, it's not some big conspiracy against you wanting to pay at the pump, it's the tree huggin' hippies and global warming advocates that are making you drive a 14mpg truck"

i would agree somewhat with your last statement. You are right that the tree huggers have alot to do with it. My big thing is that you can go onto any forum on here and you have everyone begging for more power, and then you have a small percentage begging for mpg's. As you know you can not have both that would be like getting you cake with frosting and eating it to. You have to admit though that the big three can make more mpg's out of these things if they want to but horsepower sells and that is what kills mpg's. Don't get me wrong I love a gas guzzling vehicle that has a ton of horsepower and torque also but where would the happy medium be? I have a little car that if I need mpg's I drive it but I use the crap out of my truck alot too. All in all it could be worse I guess, but thanks for the reply I love a good debate.

 

In my opinion the F150 has gotten so overweight that it needs a 280+hp engine just to be accepted by current owners.

What Ford should have done is lightened the truck back down to around 4500lbs. Installed an engine that would get 28-30 MPG. And point people that need 8000lbs+ towing capabilities to a Super Duty. I know you can buy a well equiped SD for less than a new f150 Screw 6.5'

People would be lined up around the block, trading Chev's & Dodge's, to purchase a 1/2 ton truck that gets 25 MPG+

I stopped at a Honda dealershipt today to see the Honda Fit. It's getting rave reviews in the rags. There's a 3 Mo waiting list to get a Sub Compact car that gets 33 MPG.

If Ford could bring the F150 back down to weight and get a true 25 MPG. They could have the same problem Honda is having with the Fit.

 

Well if you think about it those conspiracy claims about the auto co's and oil co's are a bit foolish. The proof of this is as simple as if ford released a truck that got 40mpg than not one other brand of truck would sell again. They would quickly put all the auto co's out of business. Also there are independent companies doing research on this. Did the oil companys get to them.

EPA regulations don't hurt fuel economy as much as thought. That was the case in the 70's when the de-tuned engines to meet emissions but that is basically a thing of the past.

One reason we get the poor economy is that we want everything. A read an article about the Honda CRX from the 80s. It got an average of 57mpg, which is better than the prius of today. What nobody realizes is that that car had about 60 hp no power steering, AC, airbags or other safety features. If they made that car today how many would sell? They wouldn't even be legal!!!

The manufacturers generally listen to what people want and respond accordingly. I certainly complain as do many others but they seem to listen to the majority. We complain about the size of tese trucks yet look how many people bought super duties in the past for nothing more than grocery getters. I've seen some that have never hauled anything!!! How many people buy the largest engine available even though it gets a few MPG worse fuel economy. Not many.... Think about it.

I have said before that if anyone thinks that we are goign to go from 17mpg trucks to 25 in one model revision is foolish. It will take time and is a progress, my problem is that they have been neglecting that process and instead going with power and towing capacity.

Where have you heard about this fuel in europe with more energy? I have never heard of such a thing and would like to see a source. You may be correct, it just doesn't make sense to me but I'll eat my words if you can show me a source of your info.

 

The fuel quality in Europe is better. Ours is so full of Ethanol, and other additives, that it's energy content is down. Compared to Europe's more pure fuels.

 

Thats interesting. I guess I can understand the ethanol part considering the corn crop we have. I would think europe would have a similar additive pack though.

 

I never thought of the quality of the fuel as being different. I guess that makes some sense though with all the ethanol and other crap that is in our fuel.

 

I agree! How about a mid size truck with a small diesel engine for those that dont need to haul or tow much but can when they have too.

 

Ford is just trying to please to many peeps with one product. They need to push the peeps that actually haul, to a SD. And get the F150's weight back under control

The whole future of the US auto industry depends on lighter, more fuel effcient vehicles. ACROSS THE BOARD.