Perrysburg Dodgeboy wrote: based on the love from the people who actually own one.
Well we had note the word had three vendors that deliver to my plant that have owned them. Only one still has his the other two couldn't what the dump them. Fords MPG rating was high and drops like a rock as soon as you put any weight to it. They sold people on them with their deceptive advertising. Running a truck at WOT around a track does not prove a thing. If they wanted to really test it they should have done a 24 hour stop and go test. The only thing that test proved was it can run at WOT. Hell my Cummins can do that and get better mileage doing it loaded or empty.
I hope all you Beta Testers didn't get taken for a $42,000+ ride for a half ton truck OMG. For that money (less really) you guys could have had a V-8
Don
Thats all you got? You misunderstood me, I wanted some C-R-E-D-I-B-L-E info? Mind you I do not have a dog in this hunt but I am sick of the misinformation campaign on this forum by a few malcontents.
* This post was
edited 05/22/12 08:36pm by fla-gypsy *
Jayco-noslide wrote: Believe me I have nothing against the new F-150 turbo V-6. No doubt a fine, powerful half-ton. But am I the only one underwhelmed by the gas mileage. What is it, about 22 highway I think. My 2007 5.2 V-8 Chevy will average a little over 20(that would go up to 21 or more if not 4WD) on interstate non-towing and get about 15 overall average. The advantage Ford claims doesn't seem all that impressive for 2 less cylinders. Certainly not enough better to be worth trading for or paying a lot for the option? Am I missing something?
Come back and talk to me when your chevy can do this:
The hypermiling mavens from CleanMPG.com have completed a 2,500-mile cross-country trip in a 2011 Ford F-150 SuperCrew using just three tanks of gas. They squeezed an astonishing 32.281 miles per gallon from the EcoBoost-powered half-ton.
CleanMPG drove a two-wheel drive model from California to Georgia with a conservative 3.15 rear axle for maximum fuel economy. That doesn't mean they didn't use the truck like it was meant to be used. There were five adults in the pickup for most of the journey plus a cargo box full of camping gear and supplies that pushed the F-150's gross vehicle weight to 7,120 pounds -- 20 pounds over its 7,100-pound GVWR.
Keep in mind the Eco is capable of this, and is a much better all around performer than your 5.3 GM. The only question left at this point is long term durability, of which the 5.3 has proven itself. The Ecoboost is on the same track so far, but only time will tell.
02 Ford Explorer 4.6 V8 4x4, prodigy and equalizer
07 Crossroads Sunset Trail ST19CK
and no payments
Perrysburg Dodgeboy wrote: based on the love from the people who actually own one.
Well we had note the word had three vendors that deliver to my plant that have owned them. Only one still has his the other two couldn't what the dump them. Fords MPG rating was high and drops like a rock as soon as you put any weight to it. They sold people on them with their deceptive advertising. Running a truck at WOT around a track does not prove a thing. If they wanted to really test it they should have done a 24 hour stop and go test. The only thing that test proved was it can run at WOT. Hell my Cummins can do that and get better mileage doing it loaded or empty.
I hope all you Beta Testers didn't get taken for a $42,000+ ride for a half ton truck OMG. For that money (less really) you guys could have had a V-8
Don
But don't worry, Don has no axe to grind, nor does he hold ANY grudges against FoMoCo. I think he is really a closet Ford Lover!!
I drove an EcoBoost for a 5 hour highway trip. I averaged 21 mpg at 70 mph. 3.55 axle, 4x4. I was very impressed with the power at all speeds -- from a stop, 50-70 mph, city, you name it. Impressive.
The mpg was what I would class as "Just OK", but the mpg given the power output brought it back into the impressive range in my mind.
It will be interesting to see what the 2013 RAM Hemi/8 speed gets for mpg with all the fancy doo-dads and comparable power.
2010 Cougar 322QBS 5er
2007 Dodge 3500 SRW Megacab, 4x4, 5.9L Cummins, 3.73, 48RE auto HYPERTECH MAX ENERGY or DIABLO PREDATOR tuning MBRP 4" Turbo back Scangauge2 for Boost, Coolant temp, Rail press & Trans Temp
Torklift Stable Loads
OH but Don does have an axe to grind, my back side still hurts from all the LOVING FoMoCo gave me when I too was a Ford lover.
"C-R-E-D-I-B-L-E info" that link Fordlover posted is C-R-E-D-I-B-L-E info? Please. "Ford Media Media especially for Ford" that tells me all I need to know.
You can read on any Ford owner site just how disappointing the EGO-BOOST is for most of Fords customers. Empty it's a race truck no doubt about that. But their high fuel mileage and this is according to Ford is only attainable with a empty truck and a VERY lite right foot.
Nope keep telling yourself you made the right choice so you can feel better about spending $42,000+ on a half ton truck and as non paid beta tester.
Don
* This post was
edited 05/22/12 10:57pm by Perrysburg Dodgeboy *
Perrysburg Dodgeboy 2004 Dodge Ram 2500 Quad Cab SLT Cummins HO
2005 Keystone Cougar 304 BHS
Chrysler the only one to pay back 100% of their loans from the Government. *The Old Car Company" still owes 1.6 billion. Is that better Chuckles
Jayco-noslide wrote: Believe me I have nothing against the new F-150 turbo V-6. No doubt a fine, powerful half-ton. But am I the only one underwhelmed by the gas mileage. What is it, about 22 highway I think. My 2007 5.2 V-8 Chevy will average a little over 20(that would go up to 21 or more if not 4WD) on interstate non-towing and get about 15 overall average. The advantage Ford claims doesn't seem all that impressive for 2 less cylinders. Certainly not enough better to be worth trading for or paying a lot for the option? Am I missing
something?
I think what it does is give you a 5.3 chevy V8 at light throttle and a 6.8 V10 when you put your foot in it. Mileage comparable and in one package.
Jayco-noslide wrote: Believe me I have nothing against the new F-150 turbo V-6. No doubt a fine, powerful half-ton. But am I the only one underwhelmed by the gas mileage. What is it, about 22 highway I think. My 2007 5.2 V-8 Chevy will average a little over 20(that would go up to 21 or more if not 4WD) on interstate non-towing and get about 15 overall average. The advantage Ford claims doesn't seem all that impressive for 2 less cylinders. Certainly not enough better to be worth trading for or paying a lot for the option? Am I missing
something?
I think what it does is give you a 5.3 chevy V8 at light throttle and a 6.8 V10 when you put your foot in it. Mileage comparable and in one package.
A tad better than the 5.3 because it has smaller displacement - 3.5l
Mind you, the GM 5.3 is one of the most beautifully optimized engines out there until recently.
To seriously improve Ecoboost mileage, what is needed is a software switch that basically turns off the high output features, using the engine to only make use of the turbo for efficiency vs. power gains.
Even so, the drivetrain is carrying around the weight / equipment needed for a 365 horsepower and 420 pounds-feet of torque setup, plus the weight from things like Maxtow.
Problem is, those who buy the Ecoboost seem to not be able to avoid using the power --- hence the much lower than expected ratings on mpg.
sharker6 wrote: I like Ford but I'll stick with my F-250 diesel. I just don't believe some of those Ecoboost claims made by Ford on this new 6 banger.
Give it 5 years for them to work the technology and get the bugs out of it, and also to see what serious long term durability issues there are out there.
Things are improving -- the new computers since 2008 and new owner agreement ensure that a used buyer can pretty much tell if the vehicle was used to excess, or tuned / chipped.
And yes, I am hanging onto my diesel (pre 2008) for the same reason.
Offline
