Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Oregon Road Trip Leg 4 - 707 Miles on a Single Tank - 2015 Ford F-150 Long-Term Road Test

Edmunds.comEdmunds.com Member, Administrator, Moderator Posts: 10,315
edited September 2015 in Ford
imageOregon Road Trip Leg 4 - 707 Miles on a Single Tank - 2015 Ford F-150 Long-Term Road Test

Leg Four of my summer road trip produced our 2015 Ford F-150's longest single-tank range of 707 miles, but fuel economy was still just 20.6 mpg.

Read the full story here


Tagged:

Comments

  • markinnaples_markinnaples_ Member Posts: 251
    Typical Ford getting less than the stated MPG. This is starting to get ridiculous.
  • ebeaudoinebeaudoin Member Posts: 509
    edited September 2015
    Sounds like a wonderful trip. I want a 2015 F-150 in the worst way. Tuxedo Black SuperCrew XL 4x4 6.5' bed, 3.5EB, FX4 Off-Road, XL Sport Appearance and 101A Packages, black platform running boards and 36-gal fuel tank. That's my perfect truck.

    I think the EcoBoost engines are fantastic if you aren't wholly concerned about getting the posted MPG. People need to understand that these engines invite spirited driving which increases fuel consumption. What's that old legalese saying? Oh yeah- "Your Mileage May Vary."
  • maxtitanmaxtitan Member Posts: 10
    Yeah...cruising along at the posted speed limit on the highway is spirited driving. Barely achieving the combine rating is disappointing at best.
  • diondidiondi Member Posts: 71
    Dan, have you had a chance to compare the LED headlights available on Lariat 502A and up models to the stock headlights that you have on this F-150? If so, what are your impressions?
  • metalmaniametalmania Member Posts: 167
    I have to agree. If you can't do it at a steady 55 mph, which is a conservative speed compared to what most people actually do for "highway" travel, and no other load in the truck, that's disappointing. I know this engine is plenty strong, but I wonder if it's needing to lean on the turbo a little too much to carry this large of a vehicle efficiently. Would be interesting to see if the 3.5 is actually better in real world results.
  • ramecofanramecofan Member Posts: 2
    As someone who just rid themselves of 2014 F150 Lariat 4x4 with the 3.5 EcoBoost I can verify that it got even worse mileage all the way around. I purchased a Ram 1500 Lariat with an EcoDiesel and have never been more pleased. Signed a long time Ford owner who was driven away by the EcoBoost engine. Drive a EcoDiesel and see what you are missing (including missing gas stations)
  • allthingshondaallthingshonda Member Posts: 878
    edited September 2015
    If you want a full size truck that sips fuel get the Ram EcoDiesel if you want a truck that pulls like a freight train get the EcoBoost. A 3.5 EcoBoost Ford F 1-150 can tow Edmunds' Ram EcoDiesel while it's connected to the trailer with the Acura Integra on it or about 11,000 pounds.
  • jerrry44jerrry44 Member Posts: 16
    Of the 36 2.7 liter ecoboost f`150s on fuelly, 15 are averaging 20mpg or better. I want to know why they can average 20 to 22 mpg, but you can barely get 20 under the most ideal of conditions.
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Member Posts: 19,306
    Over the weekend I looked at about 20 F150's. Locally, the 2.7 seems to be available in 2 flavors, standard 3.55 or a 3.73 locker. The thing is, the 3.73 is a completely axle assembly than the standard 3.55. It's a 9.75 instead of an 8.8. Couldn't nail it down, but it seems more like a super duty part.
    2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
  • g35bufg35buf Member Posts: 89
    Sounds like some of the Ford guys need to go RAM EcoDiesel and enjoy 20+ mpg at a minimum...I get 22+ in suburbia and a real 25-26 on the highway...and still have my 420 ft-lbs of torque. Standard EcoDiesel axle is a 3.55. EcoBoost has nothing to do with 'Eco'....
Sign In or Register to comment.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles