A Slow Month, But Still Not Hitting Fuel Economy Target - 2015 Ford F-150 Long-Term Road Test
Edmunds.com
Member, Administrator, Moderator Posts: 10,316
A Slow Month, But Still Not Hitting Fuel Economy Target - 2015 Ford F-150 Long-Term Road Test
this long-term update to Edmunds 2015 Ford F-150 SuperCrew details the truck's fuel economy for April 2015 and updates its lifetime total mpg.
0
Comments
How about, stayed local, where the traffic is awful, AND THEREFORE is still not meeting fuel economy targets?
Does not seem logical to me to say, in effect, "even though we were in heavy traffic with lots of stop and go for the month, the truck still did not improve its fuel economy." Well, of course it didn't, under those conditions. Plus he did some towing with it.
Don't worry though, I'm sure I'll get the chance to hyper-mile the F-150 at some point.
#1. A trucks main selling point shouldn't only be fuel economy.
#2. It is OBVIOUS that if you are driving in stop/go traffic for the most part, your MPG will suffer. Especially with this engine as it will essentially always be in boost.
#3. I don't get awesome mileage with mine when driving in SF for example. However where I live (very little traffic, highways) it is EASY to obtain good MPG out of this motor.
It's a tradeoff.. do you want stellar MPG all the time? If so, probably not the truck for you. If you want to have a towing beast (3.5 moreso) while still having the ABILITY to get great MPG? Then yeah, this is probably for you.
Some cars really see efficiency gains from turbo engines but they tend to be smaller cars. First the weight savings of the engine is a higher percentage of the overall vehicle weight. Second, when driven conservatively, the turbo doesn't spool up as often so the engine consumes fuel like a smaller engine rather than a larger one. However, when you put a smaller turbo engine in a larger vehicle you lose both of these benefits. In real world driving they may have some fuel efficiency gains but not as much as the EPA test which must allow cars to accelerate 0-60 in 2 minutes or something.
There are people who might want this engine in their F150 for a variety of great reasons and that's fine. But there are some people who really want the best fuel economy they can get. And Ford and the EPA are essentially lying to these people. It's unfair to them and its bad for the environment. There are other trucks (and possibly other F150s) that would be more fuel efficient in the real world.
I stated clearly that the towing was in May, not April. You've based that criticism on a fabricated false conclusion,
Furthermore, you've created a textbook straw-man fallacy in your representation of my position in this post. I said only that the truck's best and worst fills and its best range remained unchanged for April. I said nothing about WHY its fuel economy fell short. Please don't put words in my mouth. What's more, your assertion that the truck fell short of its EPA estimate because it was driven in stop-and-go traffic is also false. It doesn't matter how the miles were accumulated. The F-150 has missed its EPA fuel economy estimates during all of its first 6,900 miles -- city driving is just the latest example.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
Review your vehicle
It's been established many times that you folks don't publish your posts in realtime, so you saying on May 7 that you towed "last weekend"does not definitively establish to any of us readers that you are talking about May 2 and 3, rather than April. I don't believe any of us will be surprised if your towing comparisons with the Ram, which will come over the next few days, have a lower odometer reading than the 6908 you show in this post.
You guys get together and do some shots this a.m.? You're kinda punchy.
I think Ford was smart - they are kinda gaming the EPA, but to the customer base for this F150, it's like those people reading the criticisms that the Mustang GT with the performance pack rides too hard, or that the BMW i3 when running on the range extender will hardly make it up a hill...they don't give a damn, because they didn't buy this truck for its fuel economy, the Mustang GT for its ride, or the i3 for its hill-climbing power.
Even within the half-ton pickup category, there are horses for courses. The Ram diesel gets way better fuel economy than the F150, but in exchange for that, the truck is way slower, with way lower towing and hauling ratings. Both are excellent choices, depending upon who you are.
And I fully expect Josh Jaquot to say just that in his comparison of the two, even though it will kill him to agree with me.