Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
2015 Ford F-150 Long-Term Road Test - Wrap-Up
Edmunds.com
Member, Administrator, Moderator Posts: 10,315
2015 Ford F-150 Long-Term Road Test - Wrap-Up
We bought a 2015 Ford F-150 and drove it some 35,000 miles in just over 16 months to see how the new aluminum-bodied pickup truck would hold up.
Tagged:
0
Comments
Now just to touch on those who still are trying to insist on the crazy idea that a turbo charged gas engine is inherently unreliable for a pickup truck with no real life data to back up those claims.
2.7L Ecoboost vs. 5.0 Ti-VCT vs 3.5L Ecoboost MY2018
Torque: 400 @ 2750 vs 400 @ 4500 vs 470 @ 3500. Advantage 2.7L Ecoboost. In fact, the newest 5.0 has now gone from an average peak torque RPM in the segment for V8s (previously 3850), which was, even then, inferior to either Ecoboost from 2015-2017, to the highest of any naturally-aspired choice compared to any brand in the segment. Great for drag racing, but sort of worrisome to have this kind of specification in a work truck. By contrast, the 2.7 is damn-near diesel like. So especially those who drive easily for daily driving and commuting, light-load work, as a half-tons are designed to do anyway, and for those who take care of their trucks, and accelerate modestly for maximum mpg like I do, the 2.7L, with 90% torque as low as 1900 RPM, this engine will likely need to turn the least revolutions over time with equal gearing and curb weight of any of the engines, save the upcoming diesel. Big advantage here is 2.7L Ecoboost; hints towards high durability as long as it's a good design in other respects, and of course anyone who speculates on those other respects is simply being biased for no good reason.
Compression ratios: 10.3:1 vs. 12.1:1 vs. 10.3:1. Advantage Ecoboosts equally. All of these were raised with their last reworks, but the NA engines were drastically increased, and this super-high compression for a spark-ignition engine in a truck, at least, does not hint towards longevity when applied to all-aluminum engine blocks. These NA engines are now near motorcycle territory for compression ratios. Doesn't prove they won't be durable, but is somewhat concerning on paper.
Construction material: part GCI block vs. all aluminum vs all aluminum. Advantage 2.7L Ecoboost. GCI is cheaper than aluminum which results in more bang for the buck for the customer; meaning that Ford can offer more value for this engine to counter the extra costs of twin turbo charging and that's exactly what they've been doing. The result: We can get it for $1K premium over the base engine and $1K cheaper than the revvy 5.0L V8; and more than $3K cheaper than the bigger EB. Also, GCI is heavier than aluminum but due to it's smaller displacement and smaller turbos than the big EB, it still weighs slightly less than the 5.0 and considerably less than the 3.5L EB. Lastly GCI is much stronger than aluminum, as this material is used in diesels with over 18:1 compression ratios. So imagine how well this material can conceivably hold up to a modest 10.3:1 compression ratio.
FE estimate: 20/26/22 vs 17/23/19 vs 18/25/21. Advantage 2.7 and both Ecoboosts equally considering the performance and capability advantages of the bigger Ecoboost. Ford does have the highest FE, non hybrid V8, but just barely; as GM's 5.3L can be configured to reach 16/23/19 for 2018. Both Ecoboosts are far ahead of all pickup truck engines currently, the 3.5L even beats the others' base NA V6s. But if you don't need that extra boost from the 3.5, and you want to save more than $3,000 on a lower trimmed truck, especially if you're choosing one of the mid-level configurations where the 2.7L can stay off boost more often to reach it's potential mpg, the 2.7L Ecoboost may be a good choice. the 2.7L is not only the full size truck king for fuel economy, barely beating out it's sister base engine by virtue of a higher city rating, it meets or beats all gas-powered trucks in the market, including 4 cylinders with 6 speed manual transmissions in mid sized trucks. For example, the stripped, base model Toyota Tacoma with a four cylinder engine produces a peak of 159 horses and 180 ft-lb torque and gets a lower FE estimate than the standard duty, 2WD F150 with the 2.7L Ecoboost that more than doubles those numbers in a larger truck line. And this is Toyota's most economical pickup by far. The 2.7 also beats any Nissan Frontier pickup variant, any Honda Ridgeline, and is on par with GM's base four cylinder in their smallest and least capable truck.
When one looks at how easy this small engine makes usable power, it's low running RPM capability during periods of empty and light-load driving; it's value-laden price premium; it's sturdy design architecture; it's top-rated fuel economy estimate, and it's on-par-with-any-engine reliability track record so far; it seems to be the best choice for those with modest-duty needs in a half-ton pickup for the price. If for instance, you compare the 2.7L Ecoboost to the new base engine available in the lower trim levels, for $1K, you get four more gears mated to it; you get 35 more peak horses that are available 1500 revolutions lower on the tachometer; you get 135 more ft-lb torque available at 1250 RPM lower on the tachometer; and you get an estimated 1 mpg increase in the city rating comparing each in their most economical form and even higher advantage in 4WD and heavy package choices.
Might help with larger configuration with bigger wheel/tire combinations, etc.; but this engine is still not going to be optimized with all that added weight, drag, and roll resistance. The best place for this engine, at least for a fuel economy improver, is in the smaller, lighter configurations with high gearing with light utility needs. You know...like a half-ton truck or what one used to be.