Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

F150 with the 3.5L twin turbo eco boost

I was at the local Ford Dealer yesterday and the salesman I was talking to said that he went to Dearborn and drove the 2011 F150 Crewcab with the v6 ecoboost engine and got 29MPG. Has anyone else heard such gas mileage out of these engines?


  • n1chun1chu Posts: 1
    I spec'ed out a F150, 6 speed automatic, 4X4 with the V6 engine. I was looking for the EcoBoost but was told it would be later in the year for the particular vehicle mentioned here. The reason was one of parts supply to build the EcoBoost turbos. Exactly when they would be equiping the V6 engines was a question Ford would not or could not answer at this time.

    The fuel economy mentioned may very well be true, but I suspect it was exagerated a bit. Since the EcoBoost is a proven technology, Ford's intention to use it on just about anything they build could be a great asset to them. They have a good track record on the vehicles currently offered with it.
  • About a week ago my order was placed for a new F150 with the Ecoboost engine. Dealership states that it won't be done until Late February-Early March 2011. Bummer!!! But supposedly, the gas mileage is 20% better than the 5.0L V8. To my knowledge that would be about 19 city and 24 highway. It would be awesome to get 29 highway as one the previous posts, but only time will tell.

    Features: FX4 4X4, Steel Gray Metallic, SuperCrew, Ecoboost Motor, 3.73 gear ratio, Max Trailer Tow Package, Luxury Package, Navigation, 6.5' Bed, Moonroof.... I can't wait to get it...
  • Drove a new 2011 F-150 super cab 2wd yesterday. Had the 3.7 V-6. Excellent truck, much improved over my 2004 F-150. I'm going to order one this week, a Regular cab XLT, 5.0 liter v-8 2wd, 8' bed, with sync and most of the other options. (Just a nice work truck) I hoping to set the price at invoice, plus any rebates. Does anyone have any pricing info. for orders from the factory?
  • curt1234curt1234 Posts: 8
    edited January 2011
    I'll let you know on the pricing, all the dealers are pimping 5500 from the factory on 2010, not much on 2011, I am looking for a price on an extended cab 5.0 4wd, the sticker was around 35k. I am on the fence on he f150, esp if the price isn't right. My neighbor bought a new silverado with the 5.3 extended cab 4wd, z71, the sticker was 35,500, same as the f150 I asked for a price on that is on its way to the dealer so its like ordering from the factory.

    He got the 2011 Chevy Silverado LT, 5.3 4wd for 26,900 before his trade, 15/21 mileage thought I have heard as high as 24 unloaded. I like the idea of the 5.0 360hp versus 315, 5.3 but with weight differences between the two it might be a wash then its just a mileage comparo and the chevy will win that.

    There is no way the eco boost will be 29 on the highway even 2wd and a stick, I woudl like to see underhood temps on that engine too, I am expecting about 23-24 highway for the ecoboost auto and 4wd, now how much? and how long are the turbos going to last, not mileage as much as mileage plus time.

    Bottom line is if the chevys are selling this cheap and there are a good truck,it rode very well, even if its the oldest of the big 3 in design, maybe not quite as good as the ford but 6-7 grand less I am getting a silverado.
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    "..the EcoBoost is a proven technology.."

    Yes, but only if you are a "boy-racer", or are of that mentality.

    Any SuperCharged or TurboCharged engine cannot be made to run optimally, FE wise, except ON BOOST. For the majority of the buyers the Ford EcoBoost/TwinForce Gas-Guzzling Gas HOG engines run in detuned/derated mode, sub-optimal compression ratio 99% of the time.

    Ford may very well be off in the back room rethinking, as well they should be IMMHO, the overall EcoBoost marketing strategy.

    It is clearly a mistake except for certain buyer categories, Mustang, say.
  • I was also looking to purchase an f-150 with eco-boost. How close to invoice were you able to get on your order?
  • when i sat down with dealer, price was $46k... waiting for deliver to work out rebates and financing... i have looked at other trucks with the same features and they have all been closer to $60k plus rebates.... i think i am getting the most bang for my buck....

    i am debating on leasing and buying... weighing heavier on buying due to resale value.... my dealer called yesterday and said that Ford is starting the build.... estimated deliver is end of February beginning of March.... Now I just have to wait...
  • 46k for an F150?? What options are on this truck. I would be looking at Super Duties and the New Chevy HD in that price range, that's way too much for the ecoboost, thats creeping into Diesel territory price wise, the Chevy HD with a Durmax is on the lot for 50k before rebates dealer discounts, you guys must be rich to buy F150's for 46k, my neighbor was right getting a Silverado for 26k lol, no way you will save 20k in gas mileage difference, in fact I bet the 5.3 will get better gas mileage, its down on power to the eco boost, nothing a Air Raid and chip wouldn't fix though for about 500 bucks...

    A Supercharger on the 5.3 and its around 450HP to the wheels and get better mileage than the ecoboost for about 7 grand installed.

    IN 10 years the eco boost won't be worth more than a few hundred bucks than the average Dodge Ram Hemi or Chevy , might be worth less as reliability concerns over time not just miles driven in a short period of time, wake UP people, stop drinking the Koolaid.
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    The more EcoBoost/TwinForce gas-guzzling gas-hog engines Ford sells/ships the lower their FE fleet average declines. Ford wants the positive publicity of the "boy-racer" mentality aspects of BOOSTED engines, but not the fleet average FE declination.

    How to solve the riddle...?

    Price/option/market limit (FWD ONLY for the 2011 Ford Explorer with the I4 Ecoboost.....a FWD only Ford Explorer SUV...just how UNREAL can this get...?) the EcoBoost versions out of reasonable range of the average purchaser.
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    edited January 2011
    According to the Ford Flex pricing structure you should expect to pay a $6,000 premium for the EcoBoost/TwinForce gas-guzzling gas-hog engine if you choose a lower end F-150 version on which that option is available but as little as $3,000 if you choose a high end F-150 version.
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Central CTPosts: 12,029
    on a Tundra site regarding the tear down of the 'Torture Test' Ecoboost. It's comical.
    There weren't any complaints when the proof of toughness was a truck towing a trailer up a ramp surrounded by fire for 2 minutes.
    2017 Ford Fusion SE 2014 Ford F-150 FX4
  • Dealer will come about 3500 off sticker on the 5.0, special order the 3.5 and not as much off sticker, he said lets build it and I can tell you the price.. Waiting until the autoshow to see what delas are out there, the Dodge and Chevy are my top two, not sold on ecoBoot.
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Central CTPosts: 12,029
    How about helping us out with what other gas vehicles have 350+ HP, 400+ Torque and are rated at 16/22 mpg?
    2017 Ford Fusion SE 2014 Ford F-150 FX4
  • None, but the 5.3 matches it mileage(will beat it, 24MPG on a 5.3 4wd with extended cab 6 speed) and two tweaks and its right there powerwise and cost about 10k less average option for option, so buy the F150 with the superbooster and I'll buy the Chevy, longer warranty(100K) and pocket 10k, easy.

    50hp for 10,000 na, I'll pass, Ford Finally has powerful engines, I can buy a 2000 Chevy that still has a strong motor... 500-z71.html
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Central CTPosts: 12,029
    Like you posted 'None'. Good job. :P
    2017 Ford Fusion SE 2014 Ford F-150 FX4
  • I'm objective, not a ford nuthugger, I like the f150, I like the 5.0, I don't like the price, Chevy has the Ford on Price BIG time, 5.3 is a good motor and for me, its enough, dealer coming over 8500 off sticker, ford 3500 on the 5.0 and actually talking about sticker price on the 3.5, no way, all the 3.5's are 40k plus, the all star chevy is about 27k, 5.3, extended cab, 4wd, which has an auto option, best in the class, set it forget it, skid plates, heavy duty trailer/tow/cooling pack. So hmm, lets see 40k for the ford and 27k for the chevy and they are rated same mileage?? 50hp, I don't need it, chip/k&n I got it or close for about 500 bucks and even better mileage.

    The only reason I would get the ecorooster is to chip it and run it even harder, but Ford has such a short warranty, why bother.

    Anyone that knows about turbos just look at bmw, the 335 first two years, ran SUPER hot, the turbos glowed, I'll pass, explorer tell us about your superbooster when it arrives, I am sure its a great truck, just not worth the bucks, the superduty or gm hd are better bets, even dodge with cummins.
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    edited January 2011
    Sorry, but my main point is that the very same V6 with a DFI "standard" compression ratio of 12:1 would easily have a HP rating of ~300 and a rather dramatic FE improvement.

    Ask yourself why the new 2011 Ford Explorer is available with a V6 but without DFI, 12:1 CR, and the cognizant FE improvement. What is Ford hiding behind the curtain..?

    Why does Ford think a turbo must be bolted to a DFI engine in order to get more reasonable, by today's "standards" FE...??

    Why not provide the public with the option, DFI V6 with 12:1 CR and decent FE, or the Gas-guzzling EcoBoost/TwinForce version with substandard CR in order to accommodate, RARELY accommodate, BOOST.

    Why run a DFI engine in detuned/derated mode, relatively POOR FE, 98-99% of the time...?

    How many of us, given the choice, would choose 300HP and stellar FE over 350HP and relatively horrid FE...?

    Why is the 2011 Ford Explorer with the EcoBoost/Twinforce Gas-Guzzling engine to be available only as FWD..?? Only way to compensate for the Gas-Guzzling effect and get relatively decent FE...?

    Ford Explorer, 2011, CASTRATED version.
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    "..Anyone that knows about turbos just look at BMW..."

    Even worse, look at Mazda's HORRID track record with the CX-7 turbo.

    Mazda, Ford's platform sharing partner, engineering know-how expertise sharing, cross-licensing, etc, etc.

    They are, or course, sharing in the extraordinarily HIGH driveline component failures of the F/awd Escape/Mariner/Tribute. Maybe Ford just wants to share in the turbo failure rate Mazda is experiencing with the CX-7..?

    Ford says they want the EcoBoost engine design to be used across their product line, 90%, within just a few years. Like that's gonna happen with their current marketing and pricing structure. EcoBoost available ONLY on the pricier/upscale product models, and even then only with a $3,000-6,000 option pricing.

    Yeah, now THAT's going to get the attention of 90% of Ford buyers, just not the type of attention Ford says they want.

    Like listening to X-VP Cheney speaking with "forked" tongue and twisted smile.
  • I would have to agree with (wwest), if i'm ordering a truck I would expect to be pretty damn close to invoice plus whatever rebates are available at delivery,I don't care which brand i'm purchasing. And the reality is f-150 has a terrible trade in allowance. I was looking to purchase a new 2010 f-150 with msrp at 44,500. But when I checked with kbb for trade-in allowance of that exact same vehicle with zero miles it came in at a mere 27,400. at the excellent end.
  • dieselonedieselone Posts: 5,727
    edited January 2011
    50hp for 10,000 na, I'll pass, Ford Finally has powerful engines, I can buy a 2000 Chevy that still has a strong motor...

    Not a 2000 5.3. I had a '00 Suburban and it was a DOG when towing anything and that was with 3.73 gears. My current 07 Expedition pulls up hills in 4th gear at 3k going 65mph that the burb would have to be in 2nd spinning over 4k rpm and barely over 50mph (6speed would certainly help). Then all that thrashing about. The 5.3 sounded like a scalded dog after a 2 mile 6 degree grade. The 3v 5.4 is not the greatest v8 in the world, but it's not short on torque, and it doesn't have to rev a bunch to produce it.

    It's about torque and gearing when it comes to trucks. That's why I find the Ecoboost interesting. I'd love to have a 1/2 ton diesel, but with EPA regs etc., it doesn't look like that's in the cards. Plus many I know with the latest HD diesels are having lots of problems (Ford, GM, and Dodge). I'm not an engineer, but it seems diesels don't take well to all the pollution controls.

    None of them are perfect. When I've had Chevys, the engines were reliable, but the rest of the truck sucked and with Ford's I've had engine issues but the rest of the truck has held up. I can't win with either.
  • took delivery of my new f150 ecoboost... options: FX Luxury Premium Package, DVD, Leather, 3.73 limited slip, 4x4, 11300 tow weight, 6.5' bed, supercrew.... truck is bad a**... i have had it for 3 days.... all I want to do is drive... truck rides better than my 04 acura tl.... as far as power goes, i haven't trailered anything yet, hope too early spring... driving the truck to florida with my family... should be a great drive.... smooth on the highway...gas mileage is difficult to estimate since the remote start has been used several times since our weather has been cold and icy... guestimating i should get close to 20-24 mpg....
  • twwebertwweber Posts: 4
    I would love to hear what kind of mileage you are getting with the eco-boost. I have a 2010 FX4 and I am just under 16 combined. This new engine has the potential to be a game changer. While I have only seen a few out so it is hard to tell what kind of mileage it will get, it could be in my interest to swap a 2010 for a 2011 eco-boost. Sounds crazy but a combined 21 would be 30% increase. With gas more likely to be $4 a gallon for a while than $3, that's $600 per year on 10K miles.
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    Unless you happen to have a lead foot, or your operations are often, more than say, 70%, high in the engine power band the combined 16 MPG you are now getting will be a keeper. The hwy/cruise mileage with the detuned/derated EcoBoost Gas-guzzling engine will undoubtedly be worse.
  • twwebertwweber Posts: 4
    You may be correct. My hope is that Edmunds/CR/Car & Driver takes an eco boost and runs an extended road test on it. I want to see what it gets regularly for 5 - 10K or more in miles. My sticker was 14/18/15 and I am there at 9K in miles. The sticker on the new 5.0's is 14/19/16. In other words, no difference. The sticker on the eco boost (which is clearly a question mark due to the unknowns on the engine) is 15/21/17. No way I would swap for that.

    Barring something unexpected, my horizon is probably Dec 2011 to Apr 2012 before I would do anything. By then, the performance of this engine should be much more clear.

    I should mention that my employer has Ford as a client so I have access to the supplier discount. In the past, this has meant any F150 but the Raptor below invoice with rebates and offers on top of that. Those numbers make my math better, but not enough for 2 mpg.
  • dieselonedieselone Posts: 5,727
    edited March 2011
    15/21/17. No way I would swap for that.

    Considering the EB has nearly as much torque output as the 6.2 which only has a 12/16 rating. I'd say it's at minimum worth looking into.

    I'm open to the idea of an EB in my Expedition if it were to be offered. 80 ft-lbs more torque at 1k rpm lower, 60 more HP, and better FE vs. the 5.4. I'm definitely interested. The 5.0 is definitely sweet, but I don't know if it has enough torque at low rpm. It gets old having to rev an engine past 4k rpm all of the time for pulling power

    Sure, I'd love a diesel, but considering I'd have to go 3/4 ton spend nearly $8k more just for the diesel to get marginally better fuel economy (much heavier truck) then pay 50 cents or more a gallon makes something like the Ecoboost a viable option for those of us that tow 5-8k lb trailers on the weekends.

    For someone who tows all of the time, the diesel makes far more sense.
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    And keep in mind that "your" numbers are actual while those are EPA estimates.
  • ironjasperironjasper Posts: 21
    edited March 2011
    Hey wwest,

    The price for the ecoboost option vs. the 5.0 is $750.00 not 3k-4k .....

    Also, I purchased on about a month ago for about $400 over invoice ....

    I priced the chevy, and the deal wasn't any better ....
  • wwestwwest Posts: 10,706
    edited March 2011
    The base price of an F150, XL model, is $22,415.00.

    The minimum cost to get an F150 with the EcoBoost engine, $27,065.00.

    That's an extra $4,650.00 for the pleasure of pumping gas into a Gas-Guzzling EcoBoost engine.
  • dieselonedieselone Posts: 5,727
    The minimum cost to get an F150 with the EcoBoost engine, $27,065.00.

    The minimum price on a 6.2L powered F150 is $40,000 and switching to the "gas guzzling" ecoboost that will get better FE is $1,920 less on the same truck. So what's your point?
Sign In or Register to comment.