Ford F-150 V-6 Engines Outselling V-8s

Ford F-150 V-6 Engines Outselling V-8s

For Ford, six is greater than eight. In May, the company sold more F-150 full-size pickups with V-6 engines than traditional V-8 power plants.

The new 3.5-liter EcoBoost twin-turbo gasoline direct-injection V-6 engine made up 41 percent of F-150 retail sales in May, up 4 percentage points from April. Sales of the new 3.7-liter naturally aspirated six-cylinder were 14 percent of retail, for a total F-150 six-cylinder engine share of 55 percent, beating sales of F-150s equipped with the new 5.0-liter V-8 and 6.2-liter V-8 mills.

What's stunning about this news is the extremely high take rate for Ford's new six-cylinder engines. Toyota's and GM's V-6 sales are in the single-digit percentages.

What’s likely driving the small-displacement adoption in Ford's big trucks? Gas prices are more than a dollar higher than last year’s prices, at $3.77 a gallon for regular octane fuel, according to AAA’s Daily Fuel Gauge Report.

A two-wheel-drive EcoBoost F-150 carries EPA ratings of 16/22 mpg city/highway but can also tow up to 11,300 pounds when properly equipped — the same as the Ford F-150’s large-displacement 6.2-liter V-8 that's rated at 13/18 mpg. That makes the EcoBoost attractive to new-truck buyers looking for the right combination of power and frugality.

EcoBoost is also priced aggressively. It’s $1,750 more than the F-150’s entry-level 302-horsepower, 3.7-liter V-6, $750 more than the midrange 360-hp, 5.0-liter V-8 and $1,245 less than the premium 411-hp, 6.2-liter V-8.

[Source: Ford]

Comments

Mike: my friends titan gets 10mpgcity 18mpg hyw, no way will he even come close to my Eco-Boost in mileage or power!, the EB would leave him in it's dust, and past the 1st gas station to boot!, you need to slow down, do you have any idea what the fine on the Penn. tnpk would bee at 80mph, lets just say it would be worth about 4-5 fillups!

V6 in a pickup? Amazing, eh? Next, car/truck manufacturers will have an epihany over what I have saying for years which is to re-invent the pickup into a SMALLER, neatly styled 4 door with a bed that combines the utility of a subaru pickup and the utility of an avalanche. It'd be a winner for most people. I'll bet most people would snap them up.

Congratulations to Ford for the Ecoboost. The exceptional balance of performance and economy is exactly what I would like in a pickup. Whether due to pricing, marketing, or timing, people are buying them. Now let's just hope they are trouble free and long lasting.

By the way, I can't believe in 2011 there are still people who think low-tech + low engine speed = long life. If that were true every lawn mower would run forever, but since they're crap, they grenade after 150 hours. Most people don't run one that long. Saab was making turbo-charged 4-cylinder engines more than 30 years ago that regularly exceeded 200,000 miles.

Quality of design, quality of materials, quality of manufacture - that's all there is to engine life. Simplicity and engine speed have NOTHING to do with it. There is no reason Ford's Ecoboost couldn't outlast the 5.0 and 6.2.

Makes sense, light duty motor for a light duty truck.

@Lou, Scab is about what i'd call it. It mighjt get the job done powertrain wise, but the old supercab and Chevy ext cab are old on the way out designs. If I go to stretchout in the back seat to take a nap, or my wife wants to nap while I stay at the racetrack to see the very last race, she would have to shut the back door, then the front. From the back. The noise leval is higher in one of those too, harder to get the seal as good at highway speeds, not as safe, and the interior in my 06 Chevy ext cab creaked on the slightest imperfect road. Or parking lot. I wanted a 6 plus foot bed, not that itty bitty 5 and a half footer, and I don't want a big huge Ford SCREW 6.5 bed. Hard to park, slow turning radius, and the money. My Ram Quad has all the space me and my wife need. Maybe had Ford made a 6'4 bed with proper opening doors for the same overall length as my Ram, and the ECOBOOST was available 17-18 monthes ago, then I'd have considered it as I like torque and my skeptisism is less lately over the long life of that engine. But then I'd still have to get a Lariat to get some of the features Dodge puts on an TRX/SLT. Big $$$$$$ Glad Ford atleast makes the Crew available with a 6.5 bed for whoever REALLY NEEDS IT, tho.

@trx4tom - I didn't care for any of the extended cab trucks. The Ram is a bit bigger than the rest, but I much prefer the crewcab.
I am more skeptical about short term teething problems than with long life.
I bought a 2010 F150 SuperCrew with the 6.5 bed.
I don't care for 5.5 ft boxes.
I don't find the 157 wheel base a big problem. It took me a few weeks to adjust comfortably to the truck, but I went from a Ranger ext. cab to a small GM van then to the Ford.
I liked the 5.7 Toyota and Ram engines for power but I liked the Ford best as an overall package.
Last fall, I found the Ram and Ford trucks close in price. The Tundra was much more expensive due to the better rebates offered by Ford and Ram.

just found a 2004 gmc sonoma crew cab 4wd with 21043miles on it, has 4.3literv6 its been getting 20 t0 23 miles per gal, plenty power , gm sitting on a gold mine and dident realize it

quote "Take it from me, the Eco-Boost is going down in history as 1 of the greatist motors of all time? In my new F-150 reg.cab 8' 4X4 3.5, this truck pulls my Airstream 24' like it's not even there, I get 15mpg with the cruize set at 65mph, on flat hyw. an 12mpg pullin some pretty steep hills in N.H., (Kancgamangus Hyw), never had to floor it, heat not an issue, but it was only 6o% out side. If I had to pass, it woulda been no prob., but I believe in the speed limit. Slow down an enjoy the ride! I guess we'll be seein more 6cly with this technology, it's gonna be a nice ride!! P.S. the truck gets 22mpg hyw, 17mpg city, my average is 19mpg!! on the computer." unqoute

No you di'n't! Your airstream weighs about the same as my 29' Jayfeather, and there's not a chance in hell you were getting the numbers you've posted unless it was all cleared and re-calculated mileage on a down hill stretch with a tailwind of some 80 mph. I towed mine home yesterday and Manitoba's about as flat as a piece of drywall and all I had was a 30-40 kmh sidewind, not a hill in sight for a hundred miles, and damn if I could break 8-9 U.S. mpg. 10 if the wind was behind us more than beside. And that was at 100 kmh = 62 mph. Mine's a screw e/b 4X4 with max tow and 3.73's. I could sure tell it was there too. Swinging and a swayin'... I keep reading/hearing about everyone claiming "I can't even feel it!" BS. You can feel it. It stays in 6th in Tow Haul mode, that was impressive, once up and underway it didn't struggle at all...but you know it's there. It pulls smartly, but you can feel that little V-6 wanting or needing to work. My car sick kid felt it was worse (all the swaying and wiggling) than the '08 we just traded for it. 110 kmh (68 mph) was downright awful. I didn't even want to look. Pretty sure the '08 was better on gas pulling the trailer than this too. I averaged around 11 in a far stronger wind last year...and I could get between 4-5 hrs of driving time even in that wind...at 28+ liters per 100 km...wow, I'll be looking for a gas station every 3 hrs or so. Don't get me wrong, I do like the truck, it goes like hell...but you're just another one of those guys who can't do the math, just like every other guy I've ever asked how their pre 09 trucks did (Oh yeah! My '08 does 26 on the highway all day long! liars) or everyone spouting off how good their new EB's are...in that case I'll just post my best ever mpg, which was 8.9l/100 - 31 Imperial mpg, and say yup! That's what it gets! (never mind it was with a good stiff tailwind over a total of 10 miles. Turned left and it was at 14-16l/100...but that's neither here nor there...it gets 31 mpg! Whoohooo!) Even your average is beyond anything I've seen yet. Best tank of the 2 I've done by hand was 18, last tank was 16, and that's Imperial, so take 83% of that as what they REALLY get in REAL life. Guess we'll see if it gets better over time, the '08 didn't, not sure why I would expect this one to.

what happened to my post Mike? it was as respectable as the one I was answering, I type with 2 fingers so it took me a long time to answer that

Yes redstuff everthing I said was the truth, you have to drive in a very safe an conservitive manner to get the results, I was grossed out at around 14,000 lbs, I am not to familia with the Featherlight, but the aerodinamics of the Airstream is like a hot knife through butter! You just have to slow down an injoy the ride, try using the cruise control to the most effect, to excelarate and slow down one mph at time.

also my truck is a reg cab w/reg tow package, 3.55 limited slip, XL, it is the lightest 8' Ford p/u they sell, your super Cab w/ the hvydty tow an haul pack w/7lug wheels an 91/2" axcel wieghts probably 600lbs. more to boot, weightis the enemy of mileage.

so yes there is a (way in hell I can get those #'S)

It would be interesting to see a test of vehicle aerodynamics and accessories to improve them. There are tons of fairings and wings for pickups pulling campers but for the most part, I've heard they don't make much of a difference unless you go out of your way to get a good fit.

Aerodynamics have played a huge role in reshaping the design of transport trucks. I used to cringe when I'd meet one on the highway on my motorcycle. You don't even feel the buffeting (at least in the front) when meeting a rig.

I'd have to say that at least in appearance, the AirStream is more aerodynamic than a Jayco "JayFeather".

Yea Lou, an I've been thinkin of a cap, that would help too.

"Awesome news, looks like people are open to taking some new technology for some impressive unloaded fuel economy. The lack of a 36 gallon kinda got me, I ended up ordering a 2011 F-150 5.0L but I still have a ton of respect for the ecoboost. One day people will read back on a story like this and go "22 MPG highway? what a joke. we get 30mpg in the city in our trucks nowadays...." or so i hope.
----Are you kidding me?? 1976 is laughing at us in 2011---My 1976 Chevy 3/4 ton long bed 4x4 got 30 mpg until GM switched the carb then it got 12mpg. They know how to get 30 mpg they just don't want to..

I had a 5.0 a couple years ago, great engine. Recently test drove both the 5.0 and the 3.5 Ecoboost and the Ecoboost was truly impressive. Torque almost matches the 6.2, acceleration is great - would stomp the 5.0. In the end, a couple days ago I bought the Ecoboost Platinum, what a ride. Amazing truck.

At our dealership the Ecoboost's are all sold before they arrive on the lot, they can't keep them in stock.

PS: the new Explorer is great too - check it out if you're a SUV/Crossover type,.

Go for someone who makes you smile because it takes only a smile to make a dark day seem bright.

IS IT TO MUCH TO ASK FORD TO MAKE THE ALL NEW OR REDISIGNED DUAL TWIN SUPER TURBO 4-CYLINDER HYBRID F-150 THAT GETS 40 HIGHWAY AND 30 CITY WITH TOWING CAPACITY OF A DIESEL, 25000LBS OF TORQUE AND BUILT-IN WIFI?

NO CALLS PLEASE UNLESS U ARE VERY SERIOUS!!!
I own outright a Ford F-150 with85KL meticulously maintained (all paperwork. Truck's street value is bet. 14,500 and15,900. 85K Highway miles, runs/drives like NEW. Have pictures. All new firestone Destination A/T and all new brakes inc. rotors,(needed or not) plus all brake hardware. New Bully Bar w/ flood lights 4.6L 4x4 XLT Black truck. All records. Garage kept. Moving, have photos. Brand new Square-D frame mtd. hitch. Also new Truxedo bed cover and liner. An absolute crime to give it away at this price but I cannot keep it/ Need smaller car. Will accept 14,000 plus AR-10, (Bushmaster or Armalite 20"bbl. with solid stock. (NATO 7.62X51) MIGHT NEG, $amount. Only a bigger fool than me would fool to pass once you see this truck. Ask for pics.

I bought a 2011 Ford F150 eco boost in June
I was told by the dealer it came with a 136lt tank
WRONG---A 97 lt tank is standard for the 3.5lt F150 eco boost.
The advertising, which is still done promotes a 32 mile fuel comsumption.----Maybe on Mars
I have over 10,000ks on my vehicle average 90ks per hr.
Live in a small toen so little city driving. My inboard computor averages 18 lt per 100 ks. ???
If you buy a 3.5 lt Ford F150 eco boost--forget about the fuel consumption they say you will get, unless you get out and push it



The comments to this entry are closed.