I have been waiting for the MPG figures and what I have read previosly here and elsewhere I was really hoping for the best. Some said they drove one and got 28-30mpg, others said 26-28 on the highway. So what happened?

Yes I am real disapointed that it is rated 16/22...

The new 5.0 is rated 15/21 and they have the same horsepower, V6 has more torque , same bed payload and towing is just about the same. I do not see ANY advantage with the V6. What a lot of hype to be really big time disapointed....

The real proof will be when this engine gets into the hands of the public. No body gets the same milage as the EPA. I like the torque curve on this engine over the 5.0 liter and the fact that it will pull a load at low rpm. Just like my Cummins.

the fuel economy in the chevy is 15/21mpg with 315hp 338T
ford 5.0l 15/21mpg 360hp 380T (but does not max towing)
dodge 5.7l 14/20mpg 390hp 407T
old ford 5.4l got 14/20mpg and was down on power
the axle that they used would have been the 3.31 or 3.55
the EPA uses the axle that it most like to come with
even the chevy xfe that get 15/22mpg comes with a 5.3l and 3.08 axle ratio only and that can not come close to tow what the ecoboost can
i wounder what the ecoboost E-85 hp/T and fuel economy will be like bec those numbers should be better bec of the turbos
16/22mpg 365hp and 420T is a start
what about a 3.0l v6 with about 300hp and 350T lets say 17/24mpg and tow 7,000-8,000 that would handle most american needs

I'm going 4x4, because I live where we get enough snow that you really want that. So, consider these numbers:

4x4 3.7L V6 302 HP 278 lb.ft. 16 city / 21 highway
4x4 3.5L V6 Turbo 365 HP 420 lb.ft. 15 city / 21 highway
4x4 5.0L V8 360 HP 380 lb.ft. 14 city / 19 highway

Makes the 3.5L Turbo look a bit more inviting than the 5.0 when you add 4x4 into the picture.

There was a lot of hype, but you have to factor reality into that, and I didn't figure they'd find a way to get the 3.5L V6 Turbo to do better than the 3.7L normally aspirated V6.

No doubt people really did achieve higher numbers on the trip computers. I wouldn’t be surprised to get 2, 3, or more MPG better under the right driving. With my car (DI turbo) rated for 32 MPG highway, I can get 36 if I drive it right, or if I blast down the interstate, I can get 29.

@ James
I agree with you. What ever the EPA says you never get. I have a 2003 F-150 with the 5.4 and the EPA says i think 12 and 16 and i get 17 on the freeway. They are close but never right. I also think that Ford will mess with it a bit because i mean its the first time its in a truck and there will have to be some changes and you have to know that will happen or atleast i hope it will. I was hoping more like 18/24 for the but i mean we will see what happens i bet it will change they do sometimes change the rating, i know they did on my 2003.

365 horsepower and 420 pounds-feet of torque !

That is very impressive. After all the article is about trucks.
The news should be about torque at rpm.

Anyway the EPA is out to lunch when it comes to torque.

What I'm wondering is if the Truck retains its maximum tow capacity rating with the gear being used for these fuel economy figures (I know what the article sais- it isn't clear). I know that the GM (with the same highway rating) does not. I can't wait for everyone to adopt the new SAE standard.
Then again, I would love to see the actual FTP data, before the EPA "fudges" the data as they see fit.

Congadulations to fords ecoboost for matching the half ton fuel economy champ, the Silverado 5.3 liter V-8. The Silverado 5.3 liter V-8 four wheel drive is rated at 15/21 and the Ecoboost has the same rating.

Silverdo still offers the best fuel economy with The silverado Hybrid at 20 city and 23 highway and yes that is a 4wdr.

Congradulations to ford for getting their ecoboost V-6 engine to match Silverado's 5.3 liter V-8. Hay, way to go ford.

I guarantee GM has something up their sleeve and will regain the best fuel economy with their new powertrains and put ford back to where they are used to being, behind GM and behind Chevy!

So let it be written, so let it be done!

Yep... pretty disappointed with these numbers.

@Mrknowitall: Here are the EcoBoost Max Towing Ratings:

4x2 3.15: 8,800 lbs
4x4 3.31: 8,600 lbs
4x2 3.55: 9,800 lbs
4x2/4x4 3.73: 11,300 lbs

WOW what a a huge FAIL. I am a Ford guy i have owned their trucks for years grewup that way from grandpa. But sorry that mileage for a 2 wheel drive truck down right SUCKS, not for that kind of money. I bet if you take that low tech base v6 truck it would equal that mileage maybe best it.
This much technology in a truck for today's standards and that type of mileage is just unacceptable. Isn't the point to having a 6spd auto is to have a deep first gear and a tall OD. This won't be a sales success with those MPG's, you argue the higher cost over a v8.

All you Old coggers who said this would happen, you were right. I got sucked into the Ford propaganda machine.

Folks, we are still pushing a 5000+ lb vehicle with relatively poor aerodynamics down the highway at 70mph, there is only so much fuel economy to be had by the laws of physics and thermodynamics. To push a vehicle along under these conditions requires X amount of energy, the only way to get more mileage is thru more engine efficiency, thus the 5.0 and EB being pretty similar and similar to other manufacturers.

I'll be though that the EB will be a lot more pleasurable to drive when hauling than the 5.0 due to its massive torque. Ford without a doubt has hyped up fuel economy, but hey isn't that the American way of BS marketing to a dumbed down average TV watcher?

Mike, Do you know which set of gears the EPA tested?

Old news. From reading the forums we found out the 4x4 mileage several weeks ago and the 2wd yesterday. It was official then because we saw the window stickers.

Tell us something about the truck that we don't already know. For instance what are the incentives going to be? Some say none for the ecoboost.

How well does it tow max load? how does it do on gas while doing this?

I would of expected better.
Guys probably can beat EPA ratings if they can stay out of the boost.
I think it will be a tough sell for Ford. The 5.0 has similar ratings without the complex hardware.

Matching or besting EPA ratings depends on how you drive. 2 years ago the EPA changed the testing criteria to be more "real world".

I can match EPA 16/18 with my 2010 5.4 long box supercrew 4x4, but I have to be gentle with the trottle and allow for some speed loss on hills.
I hope I can get better this spring as the truck will be broken in.
Winter is a lost cause for expecting decent MPG. (Unlike Mike - I don't live sunny SoCal. LOL)

@ GM BOB

I don't think i'd wanna put out the money for a hybrid truck to get 1 or 2 more miles to a gallon ( neither do most working Americans , keyword, most not all ) ... Nice idea, but not a true work horse. To be honest, I wouldn't tow over 10k with a 1500 series truck anyway, and I know for a fact the Chevy or the Ford can do it, just they'd be slightly overworked while doing so . Any other gas V8 , regardless who it is from, has to be revved to get power, all the while the EcoBoost can do the same work just musing along , almost like a diesel. I'm sure Chevy will follow suit with something in the next few years, but first, wouldn't you like to see a re-design for the entire truck ( it looked great and fresh from 07' to 09', but now, it's looking a tad dated, don't you think ) ? And as for fuel economy, EPA is always kinda odd, wait until the shootout ( which I am sure is coming up soon RIGHT MIKE ? ) for some real-world results . I'm far from starting a brand war here, so i'm just looking for input, not a bash. By the way, what kind of truck do you drive right now ? I have a 2008 F-250 with the 6.4 , XLT 4X4 with the 8 foot box, and I get 16 ( 18 on hwy if you're nice ) reliably anywhere unloaded, and 9-10 while towing most loads. No problems with it, and I have around 70k miles on it. I've tried the GM, and I also like it, but the IFS didn't appeal to me as much .

@Mopar21277,

Great post! You got it right.

@Carl,

3.15:1

I'm so tired of everyone being so upset that their damn truck doesn't get the same mileage as their Hyundai. It's a truck for crying out loud!! ANYTHING in the 20's as far as mpg is EXCELLENT! Trucks are supposed to be used for work! If you want a grocery getter you need a car. I have my F150 and I use it for hauling or towing and camping/hunting. Otherwise it sits most of the time while I drive a car to work and school. I think sometimes people forget how much better it is then just 20 years ago when if you got a truck for work, example: that they need it for work, and you didn't buy a diesel then you got a big block and then you where happy if it got 12 mpg on the highway and ecstatic if you did better then that. 365 HP and 420 lbs ft of torque and over 20mpg....I think that's awesome!

GM bob the chevy with a 5.3l 15/21mpg with 4x4 forgot to mention that it only comes with 3.08 axle ratio and 315hp 338T
what is the tow rating on that good to go to homedepo with
the ecoboost with the 3.15 can still tow almost 9,000
lol GM bob
you need Torque with the lower axle ratios 338 not going to cut it just watch the videos and the 5.3l chevy has a higher axle ratio with higher tow ratings and still get owned be the ecoboost and dont even bring up the 6.2l in the chevy bec it only in a select half tons and eat alot of fuel just like fords 6.2l wich is better on the power side

@DDS1281,

People don't look at it that way. Only the wise will. They just want to rag on FORD for not posting 20/30 MPG for a full size truck.

I think it's great.

@Frank

At least there are a few of us out there that live in the real world! lol

wow, that is a huge let down. What does that EB cost compared to the 5.0? does not appear to be worth it at all to me. Ford proved it was a tuff engine, but what is the point of it now? more moving parts to potentially go wrong, more cost, (i think, i dont remember the rice of this thing) and 1 mpg better fuel economy? No thank you. However, it is probably a good start in the right direction and a good effort to be innovative. No doubt that Ford is being rewarded right now by comsumers for its financial perfornamce in the bad economy, but something tells me that they're going to get leap frogged by GM in the next couple years, just a hunch. As far as the new EB v6, im disappointed.

@ DDS1281

I dont think that it's that the truck doesn't get 30mpg, its that it is a V6 posing as a V8 that has more moving parts to potetially break, costs more, and doesn't get noticeably better fuel mileage. I'd have to ask you or Ford or whoever, what's the point? whats the advantage? In my opinion there is none, but maybe i'm wrong or missing something; anybody care to weigh in?

@DDS1281 - you make a valid point. I had the same 3/4 ton reg cab 4x4 for 15 years. I used it to go hunting, fishing, hauling toys, and winter driving. The rest of the time it sat in the yard. I rode motorcycles the rest of the time.

I tried getting by with a van for 2 years.
Sucked big time.

My wife and I both need transportation, so I drive my F150 and she drives her mini van. We do use her van more than my truck. Winter is a bit different. I've been taking the kids to school post heavy snow falls.

@ Frank - wasn't the previous Ford "ragging" about poor HP coupled with poor MPG?
Now it's - MPG should be better. Engine is too complex.
(mind you I expected better ratings from the EB 3.5)

@GM Bob

2011 Silverado Hybrid Max Towing 6100 pounds, Max Payload 1,553 pounds.

Even with cost aside, that sure rules out the hybrid for me.

And just for fun:

2011 Ford Ranger Max Towing 5800 pounds, Max Payload 1,560 pounds.

Hay tom334, no the 5.3 liter has two rear axle ratings, a 3.08 and a 3.42 and their both rated at 15.21. So don't give me this crap about it won't pull anything. The 3.42 axle rating will tow 9,200 pounds.

So big fricken deal that a V-6 engine with twin turbo's on it can match the V-8 of the chevy. It should match it, it's a fricken V-6 engine. Don't worry ford fans, gm's next truck engines will be direct injected and once again get better fuel economy of any half ton on the road. Fords new engines and new technology has only matched GM'S old technology for fuel economy. That is a big accomplishment for ford. NOT!

Hay tom, I could give a rats but what the Hybrid tows or doesn't tow. 6100 pounds is more than enough for most truck owners. If you need more than you buy something other than the Hybrid. Getting 50% better fuel economy in the city is something the other trucks can only dream of.

There is always trade offs. 20 miles to the gallon in the city is fantastic. I've drive a Silverado Hybrid on the highway and have seen 25mpg at 70 miles per hour in cruise control.

GM wins again and ford loses again!!!

Wow I'm totally confused as to why this engine is such a "let down" to so many people. I guess because it proved you so wrong so far you needed to be dumbfounded with the fuel economy. It's called physics, you cannot have a truck that has 420 ft.lbs of torque, shaped like a brick, weigh 5.5k pounds and expect 30mpgs.

Show me one engine with SIMILAR capability that even gets close to those figures? First of all there isn't an engine that has its capability and certainly no real V8 pushing those fuel econ numbers. .

Certainly the diesel would've wowed you with fuel econ but with the huge price increase a diesel commands it wouldn't make sense.

If you're not impressed then vote with your wallet. But don't piss and moan when a v6 passes you pulling a trailer up the hill all while getting better econ than your v8 all for and un-diesel like price of $750.

You guys don't deserve to own a truck if you can't see the advantage of a towing beast like this that gets 22mpg! We are talking diesel-like power, something everyone whines about. Here it is, and it only costs $750 rather that $6000 more for a diesel. And it does this on regular grade gas which is much less expensive than diesel. If you want a better mpg engine, buy the 3.7 v6 that beats everyone's mpg for a 6. This engine was designed for POWER while retaining good mpg, not to beat everyone's mpg. You guys are making fools of youselves with these comments expecting 28 or 30mpg all the time. Obviously you haven't shopped for a truck to compare what's really out there.

"DDS1281

I dont think that it's that the truck doesn't get 30mpg, its that it is a V6 posing as a V8 that has more moving parts to potetially break, costs more, and doesn't get noticeably better fuel mileage. I'd have to ask you or Ford or whoever, what's the point? whats the advantage? In my opinion there is none, but maybe i'm wrong or missing something; anybody care to weigh in?"

To Frank and DDS1281: This is the question most are probably jabbing at, for a V-6 to get a "slight increase" in fuel economy with MUCH more tech, like "Greg" said, what is the point. Don't class everyone into the category like GM Bob or whatever their names/alias is. I agree with Greg, and have owned several Ford trucks that have served me great including my current one. But, why crow about 2 measly MPG better and having to deal with turbo's, VVT, etc. The Hemi can get that mileage out of a pushrod V8, 16 valve OHV engine.

WHAT is the point of making a TTV6 that has power anf fuel economy of a V8? To brag that a V6 can beat a V8? Sure, it can.....it has Forced Induction. I think this is the "?" people are asking, and you guys are confusing it in your mundane fanboi drama.

Gm Bob:

The market doesn't see it your way, market says GM loses overall. Sorry to disappoint.

Hay is spelled "hey" BTW. I know it is nit picking, but you spell it this way under your aliases and it gives you away right quick. People can tell a difference between a problem in spelling and a typo, especially if the same word is "mis-typed" several times. Have a great weekend sir.

I think you guys are ignoring the engines it is compared to. Compare the Ecoboost the the larger small blocks as it is closest to them in performance. It beats them handily in mpg. Some of you are being selective. Citing the engines that are close and beat it that have no where near the tow rating or torque the Ecoboost puts out. But if you want to drive a 5.3L GM and get less performance for the same mpg who am I to argue.

Hey Red 4x4, Please tell me how a DI v6 has more moving parts than a V8 other than the turbos? And 2 said this ttv6 has the same power and econ as a v8? Could you please point out said v8 that Has at least 400lb tq throughout the ENTIRE rev range and has 22mpg? I'm dying to hear about it!!!!

People are forgetting the horsepower/torque to fuel mileage of the EcoBoost.

The EcoBoost is putting out about as much torque; as the old Ram 8.0L V10, Ford's 6.8L V10 & 7.5L V8, and G.M.'s 7.4L & 8.1L torque monsters. The EcoBoost IS putting out more horsepower than these big gas hogs. All the while the EcoBoost is getting 16/22 m.p.g.

How does that make the EcoBoost a failure?

You guys have to realize that we're participating in a grand test-market for the viability of mass-produced, forced induction technology in a working class vehicle. Here's what Ford needed to do:

1. Produce a V6 engine with V8 HP/Torque numbers while maintaining reliability.
2. Place that engine somewhere below the top of the pile (the 6.2), but higher than the entry-level V8 (5.0).
3. Tune the engine to be *just good enough* to be best in class with fuel economy.

If this Turbo V6 gets a following, then Ford can get rid of the lesser V8s in the lineup, tune the range for higher mileage requirements, and market the F150 for two sectors, the V8 lovers and the hypermilers that want to drive a 5k lb vehicle.

They can't make the 3.5 that much better, no one will buy a V8! Give it a couple years.

The item that makes my eyebrows rise is the available torque at low RPMs... Diesel performance in a gas-engined V6? Lookout future, I think you might have just shown up.

Matt, I never said that it has the same flat torque curve as a V8, you pulled that strawman argument yourself chief. Now to the fuel mileage, you consider a 1 MPG increase over a 5.0 significant? "I am dying to hear about it" as you would say.

So, I guess a TT-V6 24 valve, twin overhead cam Twin variable independant cam timing engine would NOT have more moving parts than a, say....Hemi V8 for a bit more power and near same FE? Please, tell me more :)

I am not impressed with this engine, sorry. I own a 5.4L Triton engine 260 HP/ 350 lb-ft that musters a measly 14 avg, and 18 hwy and it is a 4x4. I cannot see buying a EcoBoost over a Hemi for a "whopping" 2 MPG and a few lb-ft of torque. I am NOT impressed with forced induction. Just extra parts to go wrong.

People need to stop comparing what they "get" to what the sticker. You have to compare it sticker to sticker, or get to get.

The 04-08 F150 4x4 was 13 city 16 highway in 4x4 and 14 city 17 highway in 4x2.

So EcoBoost is 5 mpg more on the highway than the last gen.

@Red_4x4

Do you not get it? Show me an engine with 356hp/420lb and gets 16/22 EPA. Also, This engines does it with ease, hence diesel like torque. Not only is the V6 TT faster, but has more horsepower and Mileage to boot the other V8s. So yea, FORD has a winner.

Which Dodge V8 are you referring too. Certainly not the 5.7L.

I know it get a measly 1mpg better but it's also has 50hp/85tq then the GM5.3L. GET IT!!!!

@GM Bob,

So GM is coming out with DI on their next Generation Trucks. Gee, I wonder where they got that idea.

Keith, Matt, and "Buy American or say Bye to America!" got it right. The mpg numbers ARE pretty good. The difference here is more internal to the kind capability you're getting with this truck in terms of torque: Mpg might not be drastically different than what we've seen lately, but now you're getting much more power-- 1) it's much more low end power for the fuel economy, 2) less cost for the capability, 3) you get a tough engine (as currently being demonstrated by Ford).
And right: Turbos don't mean much more moving parts.

All considered, this is a great package that is the first of it's kind.

Also, payload and towing is not the same. EcoBoost comes with the Max Tow Package. The 5.0 does not. You will get no less than 300 pounds more payload with Max Tow than without. In a Supercab, it might be 800 pounds more. This is huge. Payload is almost always the limitation for determining what half ton trucks can tow.

Ford850 : you don't worry about what I need to own, ok, I work for my money and buy what I want and get disappointed as I see fit.

I never expected 28-30, but I did expect better than 22, maybe 24 MPG on highway and at least 17-18 city. The fact that this website streams Ford propaganda just like you fanboi's do does not help the fact, and that had alot to do with why I expected better mileage.

I even seen a Ford fanboi type state they (testers) got 26 MPG out of the truck, now people are laughing because it is a 6 cyl that gets a measly mile to gallon better than their next offering, the 5.0L, and you have to PAY more for the V6. Just doesn't sit right with me.

I think the power numbers are great on all of Ford's engines lately, but I will not buy into the TTV6 concept. 5.0L sounds better for me right now, good mix of power and economy.

Okay Red 4x4 you got me on the push-rod engine but a V8 will still have two more moving pistons. But it's your choice if you want worse fuel economy and less power then by all means go save 750 actually more if you buy a Dodge (you know there's a reason why they're cheaper) you may save the money on the purchase but get nailed on resale.

And DON'T tell me I pulled a fast one this is a direct copy and paste from YOUR post "WHAT is the point of making a TTV6 that has power anf fuel economy of a V8?". I'm still waiting to see this V8 that has 420 ft.lb. of torque and gets the same mileage. Hell you can even show me one with peak torque, you don't even have to show me one that has that torque over 90% of the power range, because we all tow at 6000 rpm..... see how similar the fuel econ is at that.

Lastly just for reference Mercedes just released a brand new diesel in a car that is the same 3.5 displacement and has less weight and hell of a lot better fuel econ, less power and torque and they just barely made 28hwy mpg so put things in perspective people this engine is impressive.

Excuse me I should've said better aerodynamics in my post above referencing to the Merc.

Though I admit it seems a little disapointing for the Ecoboost to only be rated at 16-22 I agree that with the F-150's curb weight there is no one its going to be a 25-30mpg truck.

I'm really suprised no one has brought up the fact that Ford is planning a weight reduction for the next gen F-150's. The next gen F-150's with the 5.0L V8 and Ecoboost with say a loss of ohh between 500 and 700lbs should get slightly better milage than this. I would guess something more like 18-26 or so for next Gen Ecoboost and 17-23 for next Gen 5.0L. And the 5.0L has alot of unlockable potential, Ford can still add direct injection and twin turbos to that, which would not ONLY give the 5.0L that sweet flat torque curve like the Ecoboost V6 has. But it would also improve power and torque as well as fuel econmy by quite a bit. And the 5.0L is already a really strong engine.

Well frank to answer your question, yep GM copies all of fords ideas. according to you ford fan boys, gm has no ideas and is only in business today because of ford.

Seriously though, GM trucks will have direct injection on their next truck engines and no they didn't get that idea from ford. For the record the Chevy Equinox, GMC terrain, Chevy traverse, GMC Acadia all have direct injection engines.

The ecoboost better make more hp and torque than GM'S 5.3 V-8. it has twin fricken turbo's on it!!! I said Twin turbo's. you get it???? put one turbo on the 5.3 liter and it would be bye bye ecoboost.

GM Bob, would you like to see a video of the 5.3 vs the EcoBoost? :) I know I would!

Ok guys I have been trying to stay out of the fray on this one, but what the hell. Now those that are saying that 2 mpg does not matter think on this right now the national average for fuel prices is like 3.05 per gallon. (give or take) now if you figure in the national average is like 12000 miles per year those 2 mpg turns into $166 per year. or if you go off of the 5.4 triton it is closer to $370 per year. Now that means that the ecoboost is paid for prior to the end of the loan if you use a 5 year loan (which I believe is the national average.) And if you are like me and my wife were we keep a vehicle longer (8 years) then you save even more money. Now the ECOBOOST is aimed at people like me that really only need the max power rating once in awhile. If you towed all the time then yes get the big V8. It would then make more sense. The key here folks isn't how low the AVERAGE MPG IS! It is that this engine is improving the current line up of everyone else. We rarely think in the long run of our trucks. but this engine will reshape how we can get a powerful and efficiant engine.

Matt, Frank: Well guys, You have made your point quite well, and I am still not bought on the concept. Sorry guys, you have not sold me on the idea. If I were to sell my F150 today and buy a new truck, I have already got a better price on a Ram with a 5.7L here in my area...this may be what is not buying my in on the idea of a ricer V6 in a full size truck. I would gladly buy the V6 F150 if I was looking for FE, but not the EB. Just doesn't do it for me for a near 2K increase over their base V6.

I don't compete with my truck, seems all you guys care about is competiton. I am not in sales, I work in a chemical plant so a "torque monster" V6 is not what I need, so no....it does not impress me much for 22 MPG (especially with all the Ford propaganda floating around this site). Glad it gets you guys rocks off though, Ford has future buyers already line up from this site alone.

I have to make shift relief here about an hour or so, so you guys keep being impressed and most important of all, have a great weekend.

Justin

GM Bob-

Okay, put a turbocharger on the 5.3L (V8) and yes it will be bye bye EcoBoost (V6).

Afterwards, let's put a turbocharger on the Ford 5.0L (V8) and guess what...bye bye 5.3L.

Those mileage figures are not good enough for me to try out such a unproven engine/whole new style of engine. Im not hating b/c in a few years b/c if it does pan out to be reliable and as powerful as the figures say than those few extra mpgs will def be worth it