|
|
Posts: 921
| Hey Guys,
Any of you out there towing with the 3.5 v6 Eco boost? I've heard the mileage day to day is better than the 5.0 v8, but the mileage really drops while towing whereas the 5.0 v8 doesn't take as much of a hit when towing.
Anybody with experience with either of these motors would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks - Midge |
|
| |
|
Posts: 49
Location: Gone Fishin | Ive had a 2014 5.0L for 3 months now. Im getting 17.5 mpg daily to and from work and 19.5 mpg on the highway. I got 14 mpg towing my 19' glass boat on the highway with plenty of power to pass when necessary. Im loving the truck so far. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1660
Location: central Wisconsin | I've got a 2013 5.0. I recently pulled my camper up to Vilas, average pulling it was 10.5 coming home empty the average was 22.4. Camper weighs about 7500#. Plenty of power with 360 hp and 380 torque. I have no complaints with the truck you can get some great deals on the 2014's now. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1000
| Towing shouldn't really make a difference because its going to take the same amount of energy to pull regardless of what engine it came from. The difference would be in normal everyday driving where the 5.0 might use more fuel than the ecoboost. I run the 5.0. The ecoboost is a good way to get a lot of power with more everyday economy than the equivalent V8. I'd get it if I needed it.
For what it's worth, I think the 5.0 sounds better lol
Edited by tolle141 6/1/2015 10:08 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 117
Location: Northern Illinois | Make sure you look at the new 2.7 ecoboost, it is a TANK! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 921
| Awesome guys, this was the feedback I was looking for.
Thanks! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 194
Location: Lake Elmo, MN | I own a 2014 SuperCrew FX4 with the 3.5 EcoBoost. After many years with the 5.4 V8 I will tell you this truck is much, much more capable than that 5.4liter. This truck pulls a large heavy boat (Ranger 620) with absolutely no effort and I often find myself speeding when I am trying to stay around 65mph. This thing is amazing. BUT fuel economy is not much better than the 5.4. I figure 12-or so when towing the Ranger.
For trucks tho....I am a BIG fan of the 3.5 EcoBoost when I went in I was skeptical. This thing is terrific.
Edited by PSAGuy 6/1/2015 8:36 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1283
| I have a 13 5.0 and it gets better mileage then my buddies ecoboost and much better then my old 5.4. On the Hwy I avg 23mpg and 17 in town. I havent pulled my boat on the HWY but its gets the same 17 when pulling it to the local lakes. The 5.0 and 3.5 have pretty much the same HP but the Ecoboost has a lot more torque on paper. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 921
| Achotrod,
That's exactly what I was looking for. My 2004 Super Crew just died. I don't think I ever got more than 14 MPG on the 5.4. Pulling boat or sleds was even worse.
Thanks
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 173
Location: Green Bay, Titletown, WI | The Eco-boost Costs $1000 more too. It will take time to re-coup that difference. If you are towing 8000lb + loads on a regular basis, eco-boost is worth it. Towing a 4000lb boat every now and then, get the 5.0 . The power band on the eco-boost is what makes it a better motor for towing. Max TQ is available almost from idle. The 5.0 has to be revved up to almost 4000 RPM to get max power. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 194
Location: Lake Elmo, MN | Owning the 3.5 Ecoboost I can say I was leaning towards the 5.0 but then DROVE the 3.5 eco and I was sold in a heartbeat. If you have not done it....do it !! Then at least you'll know.
It is amazing. But the 5.0 is a nice truck too so it's hard to go wrong either way.
When I was buying it, I had (through business connections) access to Ford truck's engineering group. I asked a couple of folks in the department their opinion (given what I tow). They said "definitely if you tow, get the ecoboost". They also said "if you don't tow, the 5,0 is indeed a great choice."
Don't let anyone tell you the eco gets better mileage or the 5.0 gets better mileage or any of them do. They are TRUCKS. They get lousy mileage. Don't buy a truck for the gas mileage.
Edited by PSAGuy 6/2/2015 5:31 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 20218
Location: oswego, il | A buddy of mine has the ecoboost and tows an 1850 crestliner with it. You don't even know it is back there. Lots of power. Sweet truck. Gas mileage is crap though, my old suburban with a 350 does way better on mileage. He could do donuts around me while I was going 65 though. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 143
| 2011 ecoboost here, right around 20 day to day when I baby it, get around 17 going 65 pulling my little 16 foot nitro. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 132
| I researched the heck out of this before buying my truck in 2012. The mileage reports on the 5.0 are very consistent with a narrow curve while the 3.5 has a wider gap. Some report 20's while others say they can't do better than 15-16 with them. I get 20-24 on the highway (depending on conditions) with mine and 12-14.5 towing my 1850 Reata. Others are right, if you're towing something bigger than a 4,000 lb boat, the eco is going to do better. Mine is a '12 Screw FX4 with the 5.0 and 3.73 rear. I have 52k on it and lifetime of the truck is 16.5. In the summer I get 17.5 daily and drops about 1.5 in the winter.
Edited by hunterjoe 6/3/2015 11:59 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 351
Location: Vilas County, WI | My goodness some of you do well. I'm not as lucky.
2011 SuperCrew F150 XLT with the 5.0
I run Mobil 1 Synthetic Oil and a K&N air filter. I only get 13/14 city and maybe 18/19 highway. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 20218
Location: oswego, il | My buddy gets about 13.5 pulling but he also out a performance chip in it. Painted the brake calipers go fast red, I am sure that doesn't help either.
Another of my good friends has a V8 tundra, lots of HP and about 13 pulling a boat.
Edited by ToddM 6/4/2015 6:55 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 194
Location: Lake Elmo, MN | I owned a 2005 F150 Supercrew Lariat with a 5.4 before my current truck. NEVER got over 12 mpg towing....EVER.
I am departing TODAY for Lake of the Woods Canada in my new 2014 F-150 Supercrew FX4 towing the exact same boat (Ranger 620). I'll set the trip computer in my driveway and report back when I get to Int'l Falls tonight. No mods....truck was bought new and now has 2,000 miles on it. It has a 3.5 eco-boost engine. I pack light so there is not a lot of ancillary weight. This should tell the tale. I'll be running up I-35 to Cloquet and then up 53 to I-Falls. A good mix of highway and non-highway (about 85/15 I think).
Edited by PSAGuy 6/4/2015 9:58 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1283
| Pulled my boat another 50+ miles yesterday got 17.4 mpg avg. Its like the truck doesnt even know the boat is there. My buddies Eco gets 13-14 with out towing anything. You really have to be light on the go pedal to get the claimed mileage in the Ecoboost. But like said the Eco has 411#s of TQ which is the same as the Raptors 6.2L engine so it can tow more then the 5.0. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 921
| PSAGuy,
I had the 2004 FX4 with the 5.4 and never got over about 13.5. So I totally agree with you. The guys that are telling me they can get 16 or 18 with the old 5.4 don't know how to do math. Or they are going 30 MPH downhill all the time.
I ended up going with the 5.0 I'm curious to see how it does. 36 gallon gas tank! Right now it's telling me the range is like 560 miles or something like that when full. I could barely get to 350 miles with a 30 gallon tank with my old 5.4!!!
Thanks for all the replies.
Midge |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1937
Location: Black Creek, WI | Wow... lots of contrasting gas mileages being reported.
My 2004 5.4L got 15 MPG all the time... whether towing my 18' Ranger or not.
My 2014 5.0L is getting 16.5 MPG all the time. Dropped to 16 MPG when towing my boat.
The difference in MPG between my two trucks is that I have a fancy computer showing me my MPG all the time in my 2014. With my 2004... I need a pencil, calculator, and gas receipt to calculate the MPG. 
Both trucks pull my glass boat just fine. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 483
Location: NE PA | When towing there is no other gas 1/2 ton that can compete with the Ecoboost. It is the perfect compromise IMO between stepping up to a diesel (and paying the $1.00 per gallon premium) and the traditional v8. As far as mileage goes, any turbo vehicle is very dependent on driver habits. If I am on the throttle I will get poor mileage, but if i'm light on the gas I get 16 around town, and 19-20 on the highway depending on speed. I have since added a tuner to the truck and it flat out hauls for a 6000lb truck with the aero of a brick. I wouldn't say it is fast, but it has gone high 13s @ almost 100mph in the quarter with just a tune and some better gas, which is quick enough to be entertaining..
I don't think that if you were to buy the 5.0 you would be disappointed, but if you first owned an Ecoboost and then transitioned to the 5.0 you would find it lacking and the downshifting excessive in comparison.
Edited by lennyg3 6/4/2015 3:06 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 719
| I'm with PSAGuy. I'm on my 7th F150. I just got rid of my 2010 5.4 Super crew and got one of the last steel 2014's left with the smaller V6 ecoboost. . I do not see much better gas mileage at all. Might be just me but the 2010 was a gas pig and this one disappoints on mileage alone. Lots of strength though. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | went diesel in 1999 and will never return to gas ever ... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1000
| The contrasting gas mileages have everything to do with driving habits. 5000 lbs of steel takes the same amount of energy to move, regardless of what engine it comes from. The most effective ways to improve your gas mileage are by improving your driving habits and lightening your load/resistance. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2687
Location: Hayward, WI | tolle141 - 6/4/2015 10:19 PM
The contrasting gas mileages have everything to do with driving habits. 5000 lbs of steel takes the same amount of energy to move, regardless of what engine it comes from. The most effective ways to improve your gas mileage are by improving your driving habits and lightening your load/resistance.
So a 5,000 pound 2014 with a 5.0 should get the same mileage as a 5,000 pound 1993 with the old 5.0 302?
I agree that driving style can make a huge difference, but I also believe that there is an acceptable range of HP, torque, fuel economy, etc. in engines. Not every single one will be alike, I don't think. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1000
| curleytail - 6/5/2015 7:30 AM
So a 5,000 pound 2014 with a 5.0 should get the same mileage as a 5,000 pound 1993 with the old 5.0 302?
I agree that driving style can make a huge difference, but I also believe that there is an acceptable range of HP, torque, fuel economy, etc. in engines. Not every single one will be alike, I don't think.
I got in this same argument (from your point of view) with my coworkers (former Cummins engineers). They corrected my understanding.
A 5000lb 2014 would take the same amount of energy to move as a 5000lb F150 from 1993. If extra gas goes unburnt, that's different. If the trucks don't weigh the same, that's different. If the driver lays on the gas harder because it's more fun in a 3.5 ecoboost, that's different. 5000lbs takes the same amount of energy regardless of where it comes from. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 194
Location: Lake Elmo, MN | Here are details from my trip (Round trip).
Vehicle: 2014 Ford F150 Supercrew with 3.5 Ecoboost 4WD. (2WD mode 100%)
Boat: 2009 Ranger 620vs with 250 Merc ProXS and RangerTrail tandem trailer (Maxxis 8008 tires).
Load: Boat 1/2 full fuel (25 gals = 150 pounds) + 4 Odyssey Batteries (about 320lbs) and average amount of fishing gear
Weather: Good...no rain.
Obeyed as close as possible all speed limits
TRIP COMPUTER POSTED RESULTS
765.1 miles door to door.
56.3 gallons of fuel burned
Avg MPG 13.5
Driving time 14 hrs 46 min.
That is REAL data over a trip that spanned interstates, small towns, state highways, and construction delays.
My old 5.4 Liter V8 got 11.1 so a small incremental improvement.
Edited by PSAGuy 6/10/2015 7:32 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1660
Location: central Wisconsin | That looks like a 20% increase in gas mileage over your old truck. And your truck is not broke in yet, it will get better. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 921
| It may look like a small improvement, but when you do the math, it's a 21.6% increase in mileage compared to the old 5.4.
I'm only at 455 miles with my new 5.0, but will report back after this next tank of gas. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 194
Location: Lake Elmo, MN | Yes but 20% is deceiving in terms of real value. It's like saying the temperature rose 20% when it went from 5 degrees to 6. Big deal !
The real value today of an extra 2 mpg is small.
Consider this trip. Assuming a gas price of $2.79/gallon , my savings over what my old truck would have cost me was only around $33. 20% fuel savings sounds good but in reality it takes a lot of miles to offset the extra option cost for the Ecoboost. I LOVE the engine (don't get me wrong). Simply LOVE it. But not for financial reasons. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 921
| You are exactly right. That's why I figured I would give the 5.0 a try and save myself $1200 that it would cost to upgrade to the 3.5 Eco.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 194
Location: Lake Elmo, MN | Yeah...the 5.0 is a terrific engine and you cannot go wrong there.
I LOVE the Eco tho.....great for the towing part. Man it has a lot of get up and go !! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 335
Location: Pulaski, WI | I wouldn't trust the mpg readout. Mine reports about 2 mpg higher than actual on my 2010 |
|
| |
|
Posts: 194
Location: Lake Elmo, MN | OK....don't trust the readout but simply do the math....you'll see the readout is spot on (unless you trust NONE of the numbers....which then signals another issue completely).
765.1 miles and 56.3 gallons burned = 13.58 mpg.
Sounds logical to me !
Edited by PSAGuy 6/15/2015 8:13 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 38
Location: Central Illinois | PSAGuy made a great point - it takes a lot of miles to offset the cost of improved mileage. I replaced my 2007 5.3L Silverado last year with a 2014 5.3L Silverado. I test drove Ford ecoboost and the new Dodge 3.3L diesel and liked both but went with the Silverado because the deal I got with the Chevy was significantly much better ($5k less than the Ford and $11K less than the Dodge). And in the end my 2015 is averaging just under 20 mpg compared to bit more than 17 mpg with the 2007.
My experience is the accuracy of the mpg readout on the dash varies truck to truck. On my '07 the dash readout was always half to one mpg lower than actual while my buddy's '07 was always fairly close. The estimated mpg from the dash readout on my 2014 is very close to actual. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 194
Location: Lake Elmo, MN | Again my point is....DO NOT buy the Ford F150 Ecoboost simply for mileage improvement. If you do, you most likely will be unimpressed. BUY IT for the ride and performance of that same Ecoboost. It is simply better than ANY (yep....any) V8 in a truck I have ever driven. This is tough for a big V8 fan like me to say.....but it's true.
Now I am not talking here about raw towing capacity, or thundering sound. What do I care if my Ecoboost is rated at 10,000 pounds and some diesel is at 12,000. (My trailer is only 4,000). I am speaking to the driving experience and ability to (within that experience) move my trailer. This is one terrific engine to drive. I really did not think that would be the case. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 52
| I have a 2013 F-150 Ecoboost and pull a 4000 pound plus tandem axle boat. I always run mid grade fuel around town, but when I am towing or on a long trip, I burn premium fuel. makes a 2-4 MPG difference. Seems like it is worth the extra 15-20 cents a gallon to me. Also my owners manual says to use premium fuel when towing. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 5874
| The EcoBoost makes the truck ride better? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 111
Location: Weyauwega Wi. | If you are looking at the Ford and you are a person that want's to put a snow plow on your truck. Beware I was just told at a Ford dealer you have to get the 5.0... You cannot put a snow plow on the others. Just an FYI. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 52
| I have a really nice Sno-Way ploy on my 2013 F-150 Ecoboost. I was told at the time they are the only company to accommodate the Ecoboost |
|
| |
Ford Ecoboost 3.5L versus 5.0 v8