And no 36 gallon tank with ecoboost.

http://media.ford.com/images/10031/2011_F150_Specs.pdf

 

Thanks, that's useful.

It seems pretty weird that Ford would not have a 6.5' bed available with the 6.2 liter.

Also, no 4x4 Crew Cab available with the 3.7 liter V6, no real surprise there.

3.5 liter EcoBoost is direct injection, which is definitely more efficient than traditional multiport injection. Lots of power to be had there. Too bad it's not E85 capable, which is strange, given that E85 has higher octane numbers.

The EcoBoost does not seem to weigh significantly less than the 5.0.

 

Thanks for this link. Now I can see it in print. It's a disappointment not to be able to order a 6.5 ft. bed with a 6.2 liter motor. I wish the 5.0 was available with max. tow, however, it is a huge improvment. I've waited 5 months because I didn't think the 5.4 would be strong enough, and new technology is a plus.
As you and another pointed out, the 3.5 should be great. I don't want to be a guinea pig, or wait until Febuary.

 

What an odd combination. Ecoboost and the heavy duty payload package. I wonder how many, more likely how few, dealers will order that combo. I don't see those as big sellers, not the heavy duty payload packages are high sellers in all previous years.

 

Curious if anyone noticed the 6th gear ratio for the 3.5L EB compared to the others?

 

Ford has done everything they can to squeeze the mpg's out of it, from eps, to small gas tank to the .61 ratio. Wonder what else is different? Oh, you can also get a 3.15 rear end

 

I didnt notice it till you mentioned it. Nice catch. Obviously, they are shooting for gas mileage. I am assuming that this engine can pull a higher gear due to what is probably a fairly flat torque curve. I cant wait to see the real world results.

I know a lot of people that resist change but I bet this will be a great engine. I just hope it holds up.

 

I'm extremely interested to see what the pricing difference between the engines will be.

Also, I'm having a lot of trouble with the 3.7. Its very similar to the 4.6 2v I have that has been serving me very well, but the idea of a motor with more hp than torque and the high hp peak is troubling to me. I actually think that motor is what the majority of truck owners actually "need" (people that use it mainly to commute occasionaly hauling for a home improvement job, hunting gear, etc) but how many will turn away from it for the reasons I stated above??

 

I hear ya. It makes good numbers on paper but in the real world how will the 3.7 under your right foot? My guess is a little bit weak until you get it spooled up. But, its a major improvement over the 4.2. So lets give Ford a little credit there. Who ever thought we would see a six banger with 300 hp anyway as a base engine?

 

I agree. I'm not at all critical and very happy with the specs as a base engine. I think it will be a big shift for many, myself included, to have a v6 be a suitable truck engine, with output better than many v8's of the past. This shift will be required for both the 3.7 and 3.5 EB.

 

The 3.7L is there mainly for fleet buyers and to help catch customers who are trading in their Rangers. Remember that the F150 is supposed to be the replacement for those compact pickups because it is capable of getting about the same fuel mileage.

It'll probably be a very good commuter and occasional hauler (what most people need a pickup for). And it will probably provide excellent fuel economy as well.

 

https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/9...e-pricing.html

 

I would gladly take a 3.7L powered 4x4 Scab if available.

 

And you base that assumption on what, Redneck Bible verse 3:16 that says "no replacement for displacement" ?