I sure hope the ecoboost equals that or is better.

BTW, good catch Mike

If it's "projected" to get 23, knowing Ford here lately, it could be 24 or 25. Either way, great news!

That's good for a pickup, but I'd be willing to bet that the city mileage isn't as surprisingly good.

For comparison, a 2wd Grand Cherokee clocks in at 23 mpg highway, but only gets 16 city. I'll bet that's the F-150's mileage too, or really close to it. I'd be willing to bet the F-150 will get 16/23, for 18 mpg overall, up one mpg from its current 15/21/17 mpg.

"That's good for a pickup, but I'd be willing to bet that the city mileage isn't as surprisingly good.

For comparison, a 2wd Grand Cherokee clocks in at 23 mpg highway, but only gets 16 city. I'll bet that's the F-150's mileage too, or really close to it. I'd be willing to bet the F-150 will get 16/23, for 18 mpg overall, up one mpg from its current 15/21/17 mpg."

You need to also realize that this motor is making 55 more hp on 87 octane (91octane figures will increase) and 60ft-lbs or more. All while getting better fuel mileage and a torque curve flat as a diesel. I can't wait to get one!

Great news Mike... Any news if the Ecoboost getting more power with premium fuel yet vs. regular unleaded?

@Hoolio this is the base V6... not the 3.5 Ecoboost.

yeah , I just saw that. The waiting game for the Ecoboost figures is killing me

Looks like mpg info is listed underneath the eco-boost engine? by the way my 1999 f150 4x4 ext cab 4.6 v8 (235hp but feels like 120) gets 21mpg hwy.

Wow...a 6 cyl single cab 2wd short box 23 mpg (projected)

My Dodge Ram 1500 4x4 quadcab,3.92 axle,HEMI gets 15.5-18 mpg average !! mix of city hwy driving...

Bet the Ford 5.0 will be the same as the 3.7 and ecoturd engine for average mpg ! Look around the eco-Boost in smaller lighter vehicles gets around 16 average mpg !!

My gripe about advertised mpg is that they use hwy not city. Where does most people drive EVERYDAY. That's right city.
who cares about hwy mpg anyway.

by the way my 1999 f150 4x4 ext cab 4.6 v8 (235hp but feels like 120) gets 21mpg hwy.
Posted by: terry | Sep 22, 2010 3:23:41 PM

And your truck is rated for 12 city / 16 hwy
source: fueleconomy.gov

This is just goes to show what i was saying before. You can get better than the advertised mpg.

I do mostly highway mileage with few city miles. My family and friends do about the same, mostly highway.

If you live in a city then why do you need a pickup truck? City folk can have everything delivered right to their door. Now for the rest of us out in the country... lol

Sorry Terry not trying to get on your bad side man but not everyone of us live in the city.

Wonder what the MPG would be like if they dialed the HP back to 200 or 250? This HP craze going on is killing MPGs that could be far higher.An F-pickup was EPA rated with 300-6 and overdrive at 28 mpg way back in 1981.Bet that engine with todays technology and a lighter,more aero truck could reach 30.

@Paul... some people only care about the numbers. I agree give me a bullet proof truck with mid range power and I will take it over anything else on the market. Sadly though when you do drive a higher horsepower truck then you realize what you have been missing. The one thing I will say about the 4.6L V8 (2v) is it is (for the most part) a bullet proof motor. You ain't going to win no tug of war or a race off the line with it but the damn thing reminds me of the old straight 6 300 of yesteryear.

"Great news Mike... Any news if the Ecoboost getting more power with premium fuel yet vs. regular unleaded? "

It will...they said as much last night at the PUTC / Ford get together...they didn't want to confuse the masses into thinking Premium fuel was a requirement so they're not releasing those numbers until later on.

Say what you want, but this is impressive. Full-size pickup trucks have never gotten this kind of gas mileage... and please, spare me the garbage about "my (fill-in-the-blank) truck gets 25 mpg." Maybe it does rolling downhill in neutral with a good, strong wind at your back, but this is the first time that a 300hp affordable full-size pickup truck will get 23 mpg hwy.

I can't wait to see the rest of the ratings. If the Ecoboost taglines are correct it should be the same as this with a 23 MPG rating (Thirst of a V6 with Thrust of a V8), but I have a feeling it won't be in this case.

The 23 MPG rating should be good for the truck to sell as a Ranger replacement as a 4 cyl auto Ranger is only rated at 24, so most will admit the extra capability is worth 1 MPG sacrafice.

this is a new generation engine that gets over 30mpg in a mustang. i was hoping it would be higher. something like 25-27 mpg. remember, gas is only going to become more of a potential problem and just imagine what cars will be getting in mileage 5-10 years from now. so, i am hoping that the ford estimates are pessimistic compared to the real epa results. enjoy the event:-)

@pup - Thanks bud... if anyone hears anything else about the EcoBoost please let us know. I'm seriously considering it for my next purchase. I would love to have diesel like torque and V6 like fuel economy. I only tow a camper about 3 or 4 times a year so this sounds like the dream truck to me... for a half ton anyway.

"Thats it? All the (over) hype for a measly 23mpg? Ford fails harder and harder every day.

And for everyone going that the mediocre ecoboost engine will be close to that...I have some news for you:

The much lighter mediocre flex can only muster 18/21...almost the same as a Suburban. No f150...that's heavier and less aerodynamic...will come close to that....so once again we have a mediocre V6 engine that's very expensive and complicated that gets the same mileage as a cheaper, simpler, equally efficient V8."

What V8 P? And how is 420 lb ft of torque "mediocre?"

"P" rick - I'm not sure where "the equally efficient V8 "part comes from?

GMC - 15/21 out of a 5.3 with 320hp and 335 lb.ft. torque.
versus
Ford - 16/21 EB engine with 355 hp and 350 lb.ft torque.
You forgot to mention that the Flex with the EB engine is All Wheel Drive.

The EB engine is closer in power to the 6.0 suburban which gets 13/20.

What is the Suburban's MPG with all wheel drive?

If you want to talk about completely mediocre -

How about the Chev hybrid Suburban at 21/22.
10,000 worth of extra cost for what?

This is what AutoBlog had to say about the hybrid Sierra:

2010 Chevrolet Silverado Hybrid is all swing, all miss.

http://www.autoblog.com/2010/07/15/review-2010-chevrolet-silverado-hybrid/

Now that is mediocre.

You are typical of the fanboi twits that make GM/Chev look bad.

All BS and no substance.

LukeInCO, Dodgeboy is just scared (and rightfully so) that his Hemi is about to get blown away by a Ford V6. Go easy on the guy. lol

23 mpg? Yeah, thats not very imressive. I mean its not terrible but after all the hype I was expecting a higher number. Not very optimistic about the other engines now.

Ford V-6? What's the MPH (miles per head gaskets)? Ford blew it big time when they retired the 4.9L straight 6. Hopefully this new V-6 will be better.

Betcha that is the 3.5 Ecoboost EPA highway number and Ford simply wrote in 3.7 as opposed to 3.5.

Otherwise they wouldn't have typed in ECOBOOST so freaking large.

Hate to be a boner killer. Sorry.

@don theres a #4 before they say 23mpg and a 4 superscript after best in class fuel economy, its for the 3.7l

@tj

Check out the full size poster where it says, "Best In Class Fuel Economy"

It has that #4, plus it says, "Projected" in front of the phrase.
I think we're putting money on a dead horse.

If this is the new so called fuel efficient F150 that is said to replace the Ranger it has already a lower mpg rating of 23mpg than that of a 2010 Ranger at 27mpg.

I will not pay more for a V6 Eco Boost engine ! Have enough problems with existing techonolgie!

I visit new car and truck garages weekly in my business!
Ford Super Duty Trucks made from early 2000s to last year keep having Turbo Problems! This is also what EcoBoast is all about, turbo charged engines!

In business realiablty wins the day!!!!!

23 mpg with the 3.55 axle ratio and 3.7 V6 just sounds slow.
The 4.1 axle ratio, borrowed from the Raptor, is what the 3.7 needs to feel lively.

Considering that I had a 1999 F-150 4.2L V6 Extended cab short bed 4X2 with 3.31 rear ratio and it felt fine for light duty city use with it's ~200 HP and ~245 lbs of torque and 4AT, I'm sure that a 300 HP/278 tq 3.7L V6 backed by a 6AT and 3.55 rear ratio will feel like a freaking sports car in comparisson. YEs, the 2011 F-150 has put on a couple hundred pounds, but, that percentage increase in power and ratio more than offsets that smaller percentage wise weight increase.

Lets face it, that 3.7L v6 6AT combo will be more useful and efficient than the entry packages from any of the competitors. GM can either keep the 4.3L OHV v6 (if they still bother with it) or continue to push their castrated 4.8L V8 on an unsuspecting audience, Dodge still has their 3.7L which pales in comparisson and they appear to be walking away from their 4.7L V8. Toyota has the 4.0L V6 in their Tundra which still can't match the power or economy of the Ford 3.7L. That base 3.7L has win written all over it. I'd mention Nissan and the Titan, but even they don't know what they're going to do in the future. They are still pushing a 5.6L V8 that gets barely more HP than the 3.7L (but decent torque) but won't even come close to matching the economy.

And, no, I don't expect the EB 3.5L V6 setup to get the same economy numbers as the base 3.7L v6 in comparable configurations. The EB gear (turbos, intercooler, etc) has both weight and drag on the engine to throw into the mix. However, when compared to the 6.2L V8, I do expect the EB 3.5L to get 15-20% better gas mileage all the while presenting a torque curve that is more useful lower in the RPM range and being within 5% of the 6.2L in power and torque throughout the powerband. Under load, I still expect the 3.5L EB to be slightly more efficient given the reduced weight of that configuration compared to the 6.2L and the better parasitic drag characteristics of the EB engine.

Click on the 4 engines watch the 3.7 video and towards the end of it it says its estimated 16 mpg city and 19 mpg combined for the 2wd. So that makes sense with it being 23 mpg hwy. Thats better than a 2010 Toyota Tacoma v6 2wd! The taco only gets 16 city 18 combined 21 hwy!

Here is the link:

http://www.fordvehicles.com/trucks/f150/2011/experiencef150/

I'm not sure why everybody is all excited about the EB in the 2011's? If you look at the poster it has a #3 after the EB tag line and #3 says coming winter 2011. To me that means 15 months from now, so in the 2012s. If its going to available in Jan of 2011 then it should say winter 2010, should it not?

try to sale a v6,to a real puller guy.....huuumm better have a good advertising.....no matter what the horsepower..

@riderrob - my winter starts in 1 1/2 months.

@NOLA:

"The EB gear (turbos, intercooler, etc) has both weight and drag on the engine to throw into the mix."

Please explain how a turbo creates "drag" on an engine. Neither the turbo nor the intercooler requires any hp to operate. The turbo uses exhaust flow to spin an impeller which in turn spins another impeller that forces compressed air through the intercooler where it becomes denser and then into the intake manifold. The exhaust flow on a non-turbo application is just wasted energy.

@ Lou

My winter starts in a month and a half too, but its my 2010 winter!

Winter 2011 can mean Jan - Apr 2011, or Nov - Dec 2011.

@john: In this case, it's Jan - Apr 2011

@Mike - thanks for clarifying. I new Ford wouldn't have this PR blitz for a release almost a year away.

@ those complaining about high horsepower...

Efficiency comes with power. Usually you will not see them separate. When manufacturers reach the limits of fuel efficiency with a design, the next step that yields more efficiency will naturally lead to more power. Asking for less power in a large vehicle will result in poor fuel economy.

These are the rules.

I just live by them.

I just bought one (3.7 4x2) I'm getting 20 to 20.5 around town. I hit 23 on the highway. The 3.7 has no problem moving the truck. I traded a S-10 in for it got a smaller v6 with 110 more hp go figure with better mpg to boot (win win). The truck is really nice glad I made the move.

I have a 1997 4.6 with 200,000 miles on her, still runs great I compare this motor with my old 1979, 300 cu sraight six F-150 she has over 300,000 miles on her and also still runs great.
The mpg and power rating of the new 3.7 V-6 sounds good,but I think I will wait a few years and see how it works before I retire the 1997.
Altough the new 5.0 V-8 sounds like a great motor also.
Anyway you look at it Ford has been doing their homework and all with out your tax dollor.

Support the country you live in or live in the country you support. BUY AMERICAN.

T. Leigh-

Amen to that!!!

I have a 2011 f-150 4x4 regular cab with the 3.7 v6 in it. I get 17.5 mixed and when I finally get on the highway I get 21 to 23 depending on wind and if I have anything with me.

Daniel-

That sounds great! Congratulations on your Ford!

It would be better if it wasn't the 4x4 and right now I have a k/n air filter and cherry bomb glass pack. I'm hoping that bbk will release a trottle body for the truck soon

You can have so much more fun with a 4X4, though.

Oh I did this weekend at the cost of my nice new paint on each side of the truck. Let's just say I made a trail just wide enuff for a for razor as wide as my truck