ford should just go ahead and make a twin turbo 5.0

@TheGettyAdventures

7 ай бұрын

That sir would be awesome to see

@wethepeople1871

7 ай бұрын

❤️❤️❤️ hell ya, been say that for some time now. But make it a sleeved 5.0 and not one of the new oil burners.

@justingill5256

7 ай бұрын

​@@wethepeople1871 midnight performance took a 2019 rcsb 5.0 put on on 3 tt with his built trans and lowered suspension, ran 8's on the street stock motor handling 21psi

@brandonsolis2107

7 ай бұрын

Wouldn’t work out because of the coyote’s compression ratio. It’s 12.0:1 which is high. Adding forced induction would decrease the life span of the engine

@tylerking27

7 ай бұрын

@@brandonsolis2107they would lower compression to get more longevity. Besides that, you can strap a blower on a bone stock one right now and still have pretty good reliability. You can add a blower right from factory on any 2021 and up F-150 and get a 3 year warranty. So your comment is moot.

Tires make a huge difference! Tire weight, tread pattern, rolling resistance and unsprung mass are major factors in fuel economy. I have a 21’ F-150 w/ the 3.5L and with passenger AT (although looked more like highway tires) I usually got 22mpg. I switched to the same size tire although now an LT A/T tire and I losses on average 3 mpg due to the heavier more aggressive tread pattern.

@nick-gk4ue

2 ай бұрын

Truth. I went from the stock 255 Pirelli tires (about 40lbs each) to Cooper AT 265 (about 60 lbs each) and a leveling kit and lost 3mpg.

Great comparison video as always! The 5.0 truck was more of a base model trim, smaller 17 in wheels, 5.5 ft bed, etc. This truck with more options, bigger wheels/more aggressive tires, 6.5 ft bed will be heavier. Also the learning curve/programming of the truck's computers in how they've been driven in the past will play into fuel economy as well. I have a 2018 3.5 FX4 crew cab, 6.5 ft bed and the best it does on flat hi- way driving is 24 mpg in economy mode driving the speed limit feathering the throttle. Love the truck been 160,000 mostly trouble free miles with the updated phasers installed at 140,000 due to slight cold start rattle. Been my favorite truck so far!

@paulhunter9613

6 ай бұрын

This guy loves that v8, he has mentioned before in other vids that he is biased towards the 5.0. These two trucks were not the same as he stated, just close

I have a 3.5 Ecoboost. I live in MN and I noticed a 2.5 - 3 MGG drop when the gas stations switched to a winter blended fuel in late October. In the summer months, I've gotten 24.5 MPG on road trips when keeping the speed under 65.

@TheRubicon01

7 ай бұрын

Same with my 2015 3.5 ecoboost

@fl_atv_riders4455

7 ай бұрын

Is this at the pump mpg because my ford would read up to 3mpg over its actual fuel economy. Iv heard the 2022 and up are more accurate.

@MichaelJacobson

7 ай бұрын

@@fl_atv_riders4455 I checked it a few times at the pump and it was close enough so I stopped checking. It's been a while, maybe I should check it again..

@MichaelJacobson

5 ай бұрын

@@fl_atv_riders4455 this is with the trip computer. I normally don't check it with the pump anymore because the trucks computer has been close enough. I just checked on my last tank and it was within 1/2 mpg.

I have 190k miles on my 2013 and it has strangely never made the cam phaser noise or even ever given me a problem . That’s with 10 years of pulling boats, small tractors, ect. I will add that it has had mobile 1 full synthetic at 5k miles intervals it’s whole life.

Thanks for doing this real world test!! Kinda tired of all the bloat some other people do in their videos. This is straight to the point and shows real world testing. Definitely helps my upcoming buying decision!

Awesome video! After installing a closed cold air filter and a catch can, I easily make 24+ mpg at various speeds. Hill climbing with turbos is still expected lower mpg's. '17 xlt 2nd generation 3.5L EB 3.55 rear. 203k mi. No extra tune and replaced water pump.

Love that you are covering F-150s in such detail! It would be amazing if you could please address the transmission at some point. Big issue, both in terms of people having major mechanical problems and problems with excessive whine noise.

I own a 2021 3.5L EcoBoost, maintaining an average of 22.5 MPG. Utilizing the GasBuddy app, I track every refuel and mileage entry. The highest recorded MPG reached 24, though that was a one-time occurrence, while the lowest was 18 MPG. With 62k miles logged since day 1, my lifetime MPG stands at 22.5.

@nick-gk4ue

2 ай бұрын

What rear end gear?

@WALL-E559

2 ай бұрын

3.31 rear end.

Need to do the 2.7 next

I enjoy your informative channel - keep up the great work! My 2021 F150 3.5 Ecoboost gives me a consistent 11.5 to 12 l/100 km. Mileage got better after 30,000 km. My truck does have a cap, so might be a bit better aero. My 2018 was more efficient with 18-inch wheels vs. the 2021 and the 20's. Dropping down to 18 in h winters seems to help fuel efficiency 😊

@TheGettyAdventures

7 ай бұрын

Thank you sir! I think the hilly terrain had a big impact. If I had 100km of flatter highway I bet the ecoboost would be way closer to what you are seeing around 11L/100km

Absolutely love your reviews!!! Awesome explanation on how Turboes work and how they consume ( guzzle) fuel when loaded or when the turbo is needed! As far as the tires affecting the fuel economy, those BF Ko's will knock the efficiency down lots!! Whenever I switch to mud terrain/all terrain tire my fuel economy drops not just a little, but lots.

2.7 ecoboost full review please! A lot of rental companies have them 👍

Another great review from my favorite channel!

I can't wait until you get the chance to test the new RAM Hurricane variants and the interesting 3.6 gas-electric version...

Glad you did this test. The 5 liter would be my choice but was not offer in the transit ☹️

Bought my 2023 F150 with the 3.5 ecoboost in May of this year. Was constantly getting 9.2 to 9.5 L/100km. Had some 33x12.5R20 RT aftermarket rims and tires installed and fuel economy dropped to an average of 10L/100km. Still better than the numbers on sticker. Coming into winter, I'm still averaging 11.4 L/100km. I'm in Calgary, Alberta and winter isn't that bad this year. I'd say the weather plays a big part in fuel economy. Towing on the other hand sucked. Towed 9500lbs in October on the coast. Fuel economy went down to 18.2 L/100km with the aftermarket wheels. Power was phenomenal and didn't even feel the 9500 lbs unless I saw the guages. This is my second 3.5 ecobeast and absolutely love it. You have a great comparison video and love the way you explained it.

Gen1 3.5 Ecoboost checking in and we get 17.5 on highway runs (~low 70s mph). Our 2014 is a Lariat with 20" wheels and XL rated AT tires and 3:73s in the rear. Being a 2014 it's a bit heavier than the new ones and of course has the 6speed auto transmission vs. 10 speed on the newer gens. I would have thought the lighter, more aerodynamic body and more gears than mine would have improved mpgs by a few, but also understand the new one has much more hp/tq than mine as well. Still pulls very well when towing our travel trailer (~10mpgs) and with the 36Gal fuel tank has decent range towing or not. No cam phase noise to date, but waiting for the hammer to drop though. I appreciate the point of view reviews from someone that's in the trenches - Great job!

@danielmackey6594

Ай бұрын

My 2014 Gen1 is about the same. About 17 mpg with mostly highway driving at 65-70. Around 10 towing a travel trailer.

92K miles of driving my 3.5 eco boost, I have averaged 18 mpg overall. Best highway mileage was a TN to FL run (800 miles) and I averaged 21 mpg with cruise set at 70. At 80 mph it drops to 16 mpg and at 60 mph I get about 24 mpg.

I think the AT tires could certainly account for 2-3mpg loss pretty easily on their own…especially if they are LT rated all terrains. Also…it seems pretty common around here for guys to upsize tires even just one size up either to get a better “look” or because the upsized tire is slightly cheaper than the oem. I’d be curious if those 18” ATs are stock size. If not, that adds a whole other level of complication by throwing off the odometer and mileage calculations. But all that said, can’t say I’m surprised even if this was a true Apple-to-apple comparison. I’ve heard before about 3.5L owners being disappointed with fuel economy. But I also hear about the massive torque this engine seems to have….so it’s a trade off I suppose. I’ve said it before….I really enjoy these reviews and comparisons. Keep up the great content!

@specialperson170

7 ай бұрын

honestly i doubt the tires are making that much of a difference i went from factory tires to all terrain fairly aggresive tires for winter and didnt lose any fuel economy the only time you get a serious drop is when you swap on full blown off road tires that wont even last 10000 miles on the road

@WDunkin

7 ай бұрын

Agreed the weight and drag of tires are huge.

Temp, tires and other environmental factors such as wind can easily add up to 3mpg difference. Newest 3.5 eb I have had was a first gen 2012 with the 6 speed transmission. I would usually average about 18-20 mpg unloaded on relatively flat ground (central Kentucky, USA). Your reasoning is right on the money that turbos in a gas motor does not tend to give much if any mpg boost.

Tires are everything... Went from my 32k mile average MPG of 20.3 and did a front end level and larger more aggressive all terrain tires like the blue truck in your video (Yours also looks leveled) and it quickly dropped in less than 3 weeks to 18.9mpg and that's within 1200 miles of driving.

23’ F-150 Lariat 3.5 EB 5.5 bed - 3.55 FX4 w/ 275-60-20 tires. I’m showing 22.2 mpg for 4,560 miles (since brand new) Hand calculated @ 21.6 mpg. Haven’t towed anything yet. Extremely impressed and happy with mine.

I’ve had both and the towing experience pulling my camper through the mountains of West Virginia and Pennsylvania is much more pleasant with the 3.5 ecoboost. No high revs And my 2019 5.0 had a 355 axle with a ten speed. My 2015 3.5 with a 331 axle and a 6 speed just does the job so much more quiet and with ease. My 2015 has 140k and I just left it at the airport for two weeks. Started it dry and no rattle at all. When towing I use full synthetic every 5k, and normal driving I change every 7k. Do not stretch it to 10k or you might regret it. Ford told me 10k with synthetic oil on my 19 5.0. Oil consumption from the factory. Two quarts low at 3k. They did the TSB and it worked, however the 5.0 would rattle under low rpm up grades like a 1970,s car with the timing off and low octane gas. Couldn’t get use to it and was too cheap to put 93 octane in it. My 3.5 ecoboost runs on 87 and doesn’t make those rattling horrible noises. I’m old school and loved the exhaust notes from the 5.0 but you just can’t beat the low end torque of the 3.5 and how quiet it is. Mine puts out 420 pounds of torque and I think the 2019 5.0 put out 400. The towing experience is just undeniable better with the 3.5 but worse at the fuel pump then the 5.0. Both motors are still better than a lot of the competitors.

@CJColvin

7 ай бұрын

If the ecoboost is so good then how come Ford didn't put one in the Super Duty as a base gas engine?

I’ve been pretty happy with the fuel economy from my 3.5 eco-boost. It does better than the last three Rams i’ve owned with the hemi. I did notice that once I put all terrain tires on mine it dropped the fuel economy a mile or two per gallon. But it still regularly averages 20 miles per gallon.

Great video, good stuff. One consideration is altitude (air density), NA at altitude can't burn as much as a turbo can. Eco OR boost, not both. It's easier to stay out of boost when the vehicle that isn't a heavy brick as well. While it may be smaller displacement, that only counts when it isn't in boost. As much as I love turbos, they aren't 100% effecient. A 2.5L at 14.7 psi of boost isn't typically going to reach the power of a 5.0L with a gasoline engine.

@TheGettyAdventures

7 ай бұрын

Thank you sir! The highest point on that run is like 800ft above see level. It could have an effect but I would think nothing dramatic. And I totally agree the smaller displacement is only advantageous when the turbos are not boosting. Unfortunately when a 5000lbs truck needs to go up a hill the turbos are in boost lol

@Sl4ck3r84

7 ай бұрын

@@TheGettyAdventures I would be very surprised if 800ft above sea level is enough to explain that big of a difference. I am very curious as to what the efficiency would be if you locked out a gear (or two) and ran a higher RPM vs boosting in 10th. Would the smaller displacement and (in theory) less boost offset the higher RPM's?

@cjpayne677

7 ай бұрын

@@TheGettyAdventures Remember too, the 3.5 is supposed to start a couple MPG higher than the 5.0, so 3+ MPG below is really more like a loss of 6 "on paper" Altitude and tires can't make that much difference when the mechanics are nearly identical. Ford is likely more generous with the ecoboost numbers because they want to market it as being worthwhile. They're still great engines, but don't buy them thinking you'll get amazing gas mileage

Thanks for the video. Would love to see a comparison between this truck and the Toyota tundra non hybrid. Leaning towards the f150. Still have an 07 tundra that just rolled over 300,000 kms and may just decide to run it to 400.

I have always wondered at the gloriousness of a 5.0 with turbos vs the 3.5 EB. I have had both.

i have a 2013 f150 ecoboost and i usually get around 17 on the highway and 15 around town, i still love it though and has never given me any problems even after 10 years

@TheGettyAdventures

7 ай бұрын

My parts guy has a 2012 as well. Absolutely loves. Pulls sleds all winter and has never had a major issue

@tbonafied1742

7 ай бұрын

I have a 2015 3.5EB and mine gives me similar numbers. It’s given me no trouble, and has great power, but has never delivered great mpg.

It is the tires. I have a 2022 3.5 that was getting 22-24 highway every day no problem before I replaced the stock tires and switched to KO2s. Now lucky to get 17-18.

2023 3.5 xlt sport fx4 with same gear ratio. Easily get 24mpg on hwy. my overall (trip b) is at 18.8 and that’s a mix of hwy, city, and quite a bit of towing with a 12’ livestock trailer. Mpg towing is bad no doubt. Tires make a huge difference. There’s a very good article from years ago that shows the same truck with 4-5 different tires, from highway to AT’s to super swampers and there is significant difference in rolling resistance. Under inflated tires will also kill your mpg. Mine are rated for max 51psi, but came set at 34. I put them all at 38-39 in summer and easily get 24-25 or sometimes more on flat hwy with cruise control on

Something to point out on this test truck i noticed, is it has BFG A/T tires those tires will drop the fuel mileage a little bit, enough to notice, i lost 2 mpg when i ran them, on my 5.0

@c130aviator

4 ай бұрын

Upvote. I agreee with bigdogford1. I have run all the way up to 40 inch tires on various trucks. Any time you add weight to your tire and size, it will decrease your overall mpg 2,3,4,and more depending on how much they weigh. Its not just the size difference its the weight in my experience.

I have a 2015 3.5 ecoboost 3.55 gears 105000 miles on the truck at 75 /80 . I enjoyed 19 /20 in Missouri

I drove NJ to Florida with 2023 5.0 and a 2021 3.5 EB 6.5 bed. 5.0 made 24 mpg going avg speed of 75, eco boost 23.5 using mid grade fuel

My business partner's 2016 with the 3.5L averages 16.2mpg- with a tune, larger intercoolers, a 6 inch lift and 35 inch rubber.

Just returned from holiday weekend travel from Boise ID to Sandpoint ID (480 mi) with my 2023 3.5 Powerboost Hybrid. My average 95% highway with several thousands feet elevation change returned 19.3 calculated about 1 MPG different than truck reflected. Not sure if there is any hybrid assistance on highway as in town. Mixed mostly city I easily average 22-24 MPG because of Electric Hybrid drivetrain. Towing my 7000 lbs travel trailer it has plenty of low end power but same results you found towing with ECOBoost, Thirsty!

My POS 18 fx4 5.0 coyote with 108k only gets 16 now. It used to get 19-20 and not use a drop of oil, now the POS goes through 2-3 quarts in 3k miles, has lost power, used to never drop gears to pull the hills in central Texas, now it's dropping down to 8th on tinny hills.

I have a 2016 3.5 ecoboost. Going to work and back every day. I get 20mpg. On mountain driving on long trips, I average around 22mpg. On long trips to Florida mostly flat ground I get 24-25.

On my 21 5.0L 3.31 gears lariat with 4x4 I get about 18-20mpg. If I’m super easy on the truck I can push to 20-24. I rarely see 25 mpg and I do a 30 min commute with about 40 miles.

@robmd3851

7 ай бұрын

About 1-2 mpg better with 3.73’s, which I thought would be way worse on fuel than 3.31

Love the channel❤ but skip this 3.5 and can you find a new Ford f-150 powerboost hybrid to test? pls

Those newer F150s have boost gauges in the digital displays. Have you tried locking out one or two of the overdrives while in the hills? Although it sounds counterintuitive, raising the RPM of the Ecoboost will allow the engine to generate more torque without using boost, thus saving fuel. The RPM difference between 9th and 10th will be minimal but it should make a huge difference supposedly. Unfortunately I haven’t been able to confirm that since my truck is a 2012 3.5L with 3.73s and a 6 speed, not to mention is a lot heavier than the newer Fords.

I have a 19 xlt. 3.5 4x4. 3.55 gears. My mpg over 1.5 yeaes 30k miles is 15.2. . I pull an enclosed trailer about 15% of my driving in Michigan. If I'm careful I can maintain 19-21 mpg on a hwy trip. 17-19 on a freeway trip 75-80 mph. Readouts from bias adjusted dash.

The 3.5 EB is a very good engine. I'm on my 3rd. I've had 5.4L,GM 6.2L.....but never a 5L. I have had loaner 5L's few times....definitely a different feeling. My experience is towing the 3.5L EB is its probably the best puller....ability wise,but was harder on gas. The 6.2L/8 speed didn't feel bad....just not as effortless......but better mpg. Mpg empty.....I literally never get better than 13L/100km,at 110km/hr or faster. I can say that about any half ton I've owned tho. Speed,weather,terrain and wind(its always blowing in southern Alberta) all contribute to less mpg. Throw in aggressive and heavier tires....mpg just drops. 10L/100km.....never have I come close to that at highway speeds here with any half ton,maybe at 80km/hr I could tho. All in all the EB is great but if I do buy another F150 I think I'm gonna go 5L,just to try something different again.

@robmd3851

7 ай бұрын

Southern Alberta here also, running the 5.0 with 3.73 gears max tow package and heavy Goodyear duratrac tires and I’m getting 12l/100kms not even trying for fuel economy. Now with that said, towing, 21 l/100kms out of my 36 gallon tank gets me a lot further in range than my old 2012 3.5 ecoboost towing close to the same trailer. 5.0 for range and engine braking all day.

Heres what I average 2019 f150 STX with 3:55 gears and have average approximately 17 mpg with mostly highway driving to work. My tires are WILDPEAK A/T3W 285/75R17 and are 10 ply tires. Keep in mind that i live in the pacific NW and sometime drive from eastern Washington to the oregon coast through mountain passes and this number sometimes goes up to 17.5 MPG on my trips. Ive done this trip with OEM all season tires and usually achieved around 23 MPG. Also, I always use cruise control, always use 92 octane, and never use ECO mode.

I think rear-end gears have something to do with mileage and towing I have a 2014 ecoboost with 3:55 gears and towing package I have a 26ft travel trailer bumper pull and I get around 7 mpg empty in town I get around 17 to 20 mpg it does it job. No complaints but I don't a 3/4 ton pick up maintenance goes a long way

I am not surprised by your results! I sure hope Ford keeps building the 5.0 V8 for years to come!

2018 3.5 with 3.55 gear and roughly 33" A/T tires and on a trip I have had set for over 10,000km it is averaging right around 13.5 l/100km The truck you tested looks like it has BFG KO2's on it so that should be -.5 l/100 if they are stock size to -1 l/100 if they are bigger. I'm not super impressed by the fuel economy my truck gets and would consider a 5.0 for the next truck but I really have a hard time believing that any gas truck engine in a real world average is going to be much better on fuel

My brother's 2021 F150 4wd regular cab 5.0 gets 24 mpg average on freeway trips with cylinder deactivation, and 6000 lb trailer towing in hilly Pennsylvania still averages 14+ mpg. No regrets with the 5.0, but the 10 speed shifts down needlessly and that has to waste fuel.

My 2020 F150 XLT, 3.5 ecoboost, 6.5 bed, 3.55 rearend, 4x4 has averaged 20.5 mpg since new. When towing a car trailer with a honda civic on it I averaged 16 mpg on a 300 mile trip, going over 2 passes. If I drive 50 - 55 mph on level country roads I'll get up to 29-30 mpg.

Motor hummm in the 5.0 was enought for me to buy the 3.5 and so damn glad I did

2020 raptor. 1000 miles unloaded 18.5 mpg, the same 1000 miles in the reverse direction with a 19 foot bass boat 13.5 mpg. Love my eco boost. If you drive aggressively or take it off road expect 15mpg or less.

Also, what fuels are required by each? Guessing premium with the 3.5 to reduce detonation.

@TheAirSofterblaster200

7 ай бұрын

Nope just 87

My Dad has had one of these since 2017. He gets in the low 20’s mpg. Has gobs of power, it is meant to get up to speed and turbos shut off. Hills will kill the mpg as well as beefier tires. He has 225k miles on his with zero issue

I own a 2022 3.5. I get 22 mpg with nothing towing. I experienced the same reduction in mpg as you did when towing about 8,000 lbs.

I've got a 2018 Expedition Max with the 3.5 eb and it consistently gets 23 mpg on the highway.

Gots Silverado 5.3 17’ 1500 4x4 crew cab short box . I get 20mpg round trip 100 miles to my mothers . Put in deactivator : now same trip 18.5 mpg . Wrangler a/t ‘s . I use chevron gasoline. Best Mileage. Some folks said arco is loaded with alcohol. Less mpg . 🤔

My 2017 3.5 number s actually go down a little on the interstate . Especially if you exceed 70mph. Driving on rural roads I can get 22mpg. On interstates it goes down2-3mpg depending on how fast I go.

2018 3.5 gets about 17-18 average. I'm up to 20 now since I upgraded downpipe, inlet pipes, intercooler (with hold and cold pipes) etc

I have a 2022 F150 Lariat with the 3.5 EcoBoost getting the same numbers as you 17.6 mpg. Odd my truck before this one 2018 F150 with 3.5 EcoBoost was getting 18.9 mpg same 3.55 gears, smaller wheels 18 in and my 2022 has 20in.

I get 25mpg avg on a 70 mile trip (all highway) on my 2011 f150 Ecoboost. This is only achievable in warm weather above 50 deg f and max speed of 60mph. In cold weather the best she will do is 21 mpg on the highway at the same speeds. Just my experience.

I have a 2015 super crew 4wd with 3.5 ecoboost and 331 axle. Wrangler LT275/65/18 Kevlar tires. I average 22 miles to the gallon. Towing a 22 foot ss rock wood roo camper I get an average of 9.2. I traded my 2019 with a 5.0 355 axle and got about the same on the highway with the ten speed. It had the factory wranglers. I put kenda lt tires of the same size and it dropped 2 miles to the gallon. However the 2019 would do better mpg towing the same camper, 11 mpg with the 5.0 and 355 axle.

'22 ecoboost in NC(piedmont). The combined mileage is usually 18ish. I have to fight for it, though.

2016 eco boost rwd gives great gas saving when not doing stop and go driving and also off the boost but the thing is when you live in a area where its country roads and you need to get around other vechiles youll see why the ecoboost is better and safer when driving past other drivers and farm vechiles, becuase trust me as a mechanic when climbing a hill and the car in front starts to go slow or something and you want to make a safe pass around when only 1 lane on each side, the ecoboost even without sport mode can pass like 4 vechiles easy while other hesitate knowing they cant or just dont bother, when in sport the vechile can easily pass like 3 trucks and in a matter of seconds ive done it and have tested it and seen many times with many other vechiles and the ecoboost by far blows the compition out the waters.....go to a country road where vechiles are going up and down hillls and see how many you can pass by safely on a one way road each side with farm vechiles in front and as well others...thats when the true test of these vechiles engine power and performance comes into play, yes i know my ford is not gas saving but it is safer when driving knowing that it can meet all road requirements i have to face daily that said i love my ecobooost. get the arp manifold and change the oil every 5 k regardless due to turbos also heating oil and making it lose vescosity faster then N\A engines just like diesels. make sure to change oil on time and keep up with tune up maintenance every 75k all oils and spark plugs, and every 30k on air filters. truck has 170km on it no issues at all only oil change and tune up have been done and break and rotors and thats it nothing else litarally engine wise but suspension if someone really interested il blow your mind with my setup.... :)

This is my first truck and I got a great deal on it. As much as i love my 2014 3.5L(95k miles) if i knew back then i would've gone the 5.0L route. Twin turbos w/ GDI are what cause the most problems with these engines. I've heard a lot of horror stories, but it also depends on what year. I'm a big believer in preventive maintenance so i did a full tune up(plugs, coolant, transmission fluid, diffs etc) at 75k. I'll continue to change the oil at 3,500 w/ a new filter and probably get a new tune up every 60k. With the car market the way it is now, I wanna keep this truck until it dies.

Hi, I would like to comment on the mpg. I have a 2018 F150 3.5 Turbo with 90,000 miles. I get a combine mpg of 19.0 - 19.5 . I'm not a led foot.

As the owner of a 2023 ecoboost with 20,000 miles, one the plains of the midwest in the USA I'm right at 20 mpg at 70 mph. When you get into town or in the hills you are down to 17 real quick. What I do like about the ecoboost is the low rpm pull, low drama makes for a relaxing ride. Wish the economy was better.

@CJColvin

7 ай бұрын

What job do you have and how much money do you make to afford this overpriced Ecoboost truck with ease?

@nevillemcnaughton6306

7 ай бұрын

Its a work truck@@CJColvin

@CJColvin

7 ай бұрын

@@nevillemcnaughton6306 Ok, if is so good then howcome Ford didn't put the Ecoboost in the superduty as a base gas engine?

@kdcarver

2 ай бұрын

@@nevillemcnaughton6306 @CJColvin has asked the same exact questions (",,, how much money..." and "... superduty as a base gas engine...." on several threads.

First off Alex ,13.5 litre per 100kms is 20.9 mpg imperial we dont use US gallon here in Canada. The colder temps,and heavier tires WILL MAKE A DIFFERENCE, along with headwinds. I bet if you did the comparison on the same day,same tires it would be different. I can tell you ,my experience with the 3.5 2nd gen Eco,I lost a litre per 100km when i added a heavy all terrain tire,and as soon as the winterblend fuels are out,I loose another 2 litres per 100km.I went from 12.3 mixed driving to 14.3 in the last month.Im in Nova Scotia

@themustardfarmer

7 ай бұрын

Ya, but what about rods to the hogshead? 1976 called, they want their Canadian colloquialism back. No one has used Imperial measurements for decades, and they never will again. 4.54 is dead, 3.79 is the only gallon still standing🏆

@jasonbrushett2005

7 ай бұрын

@@themustardfarmer nonsense statement

Need to test the 2.7 ecoboost next.

The best part of my coyote V-8 is the "murica" noises it makes!

@danielmackey6594

Ай бұрын

You're not wrong. The v8 makes a MUCH better sound. However, the turbo spooling and blow off (w/vta mod) also sound really good! Exhaust note... blah

That's literally my 2022 F150 minus the 18" chrome wheels, I have the 3.55 and the 20" wheels. 9.4l/km(25.02mpg) is the best average I've seen so far(29000km). My 2016 with the 3.5eb and 3.31 best was 8.9l/km(26.2mpg). The issue is of difference in mpg, is the ability to feed more fuel at the lower rpm. That 3.5at 1500rpm makes just over 400lbft. The 5.0 is just over 250lbft. To make power requires fuel. Torque is the only force, HP is calculated from torque x rpm ÷ 5252. 400lbft at 1500rpm is 114hp 250lbft at 1500rpm is 71hp. That 5.0 need to drop a few gears to match the torque output of the 3.5

@TheGettyAdventures

7 ай бұрын

Very true. The ecoboost makes an incredible amount of torque at 1500rpm. I honestly was surprised at how much difference there was in mpg between the two engines but I think my terrain favoured the 5L much better. I like both engines. But the ecoboost is an animal when towing. It's in another league.

@robmd3851

7 ай бұрын

Hey, if it makes so much toque so low then why does it downshift to go up a hill? My 2012 did that all the time to be near 2400rpm, the new 5.0 with 3.73 will go down to 9-8 gear from 10 and not burn nearly as much fuel for some reason.

@jnk26

7 ай бұрын

@@TheGettyAdventures it's an animal all the time.

@jnk26

7 ай бұрын

@robmd3851 fuel useage is based on many factors. Number of cylinders, air charge(N/A vs Forced Induction), stoichiometric is combustion is 14.7:1. You can push way more air into a 3.5 than sucking into a 5.0. The 5.0 makes decent torque for its size, but like Alex said in other videos, it doesn't have the bottom end(below 3000rpm) that the 6.2 has(5.7 and 5.3 are worse down below 3k). That 2012 3.5EB peak was 420lbft at 2500rpm, the current truck peak is 500lbft@3100. With more than 90% of that peak available at 2000rpm(450lbft) the reason you current 5.0 seems better is that 3.73 axle ratio. Doing the math for torque to the wheels. The 3.5 at 1500rpm makes 400lbft(100% load) in 10th hear (0.63:1)the torque going down the drive shaft is 252lbft. After the differential(3.55:1) its about 894lbft. The 5.0 in the same gear with the 3.73 would be moving slower, but the lower torque output of 250lbft x 0.63 x 3.73 = puts 587lbft to the wheels. Drop to 8th at the same road speed, now you have more rpm and a better ratio(manipulation) before the axle. At 60mph (96 km/h) the 3.73 axle makes the engine turn 1438rpm in 10th 1552rpm in 9th 1940rpm in 8th 2282rpm in 7th With the 3.55 it's 1368rpm in 10th 1477rpm in 9th 1846rpm in 8th 2172rpm in 7th The 5.0 in 8th @1940rpm(3.73) is putting maybe 280lbft x 0.85 x 3.73 = 892lbft to the wheels. So in order for the 5.0 w/3.73 to move the same load as the 3.5 with a 3.55 axle the 5.0 needs to drop to 8th(0.85:1). That smarter thing would be to have the 3.5 and 3.73 axle and be able to put down 1426lbft(at the same road speed, and driveline) 450lbft x 0.85 x 3.73 =1426lbft. Looking at an HO 6.7, with a similar axle ratio(3.55), at 2000rpm the HO puts out 1150lbft x 0.85 x 3.55 = 3470lbft to the wheels. Not that you would have to push one that hard to move a similar load as an F150, but that is where the MPG advantage comes in for a diesel.

As always, the video was enjoyed and appreciated. But this is one subject i will definitely elaborate on. I remember it was said when ford came out with it…there ain’t nothin eco about boosting. And hey thats ok, i would rather the ecoboost in the f150 as opposed to the 5.0 which belongs in a mustang, not a truck. I have had the 5.0 in my f150 in years past, and it was reliable, but thats about it. It had to be revved out to get anything out of it. Now with cylinder deactivation, it should be a boat anchor. While ecoboost is more complex, it seems to be a better engine suited for truck use. We have an expedition with it and it is a blast to drive. Ridiculous fast with one hell of a pull in sport mode. I say if you are buying a truck get it thru your head, they are built to work. Go get into the electric or get you a smart car if fuel economy is your concern. Burning fuel is the nature of the beast whether its a rice burner or oil burner, you got to pay for fuel. Rant over.

@CJColvin

7 ай бұрын

If the Ecoboost is so good then howcome Ford didn't put one in the Super Duty as a base gas engine?

What Octane fuel was used for these tests? And to anyone else, what octane fuel are you using in your 3.5L Twin Turbo Ecoboost?

@michaelsheets6851

7 ай бұрын

I run 85 octane. For says in the owner's manual that is all you need to run.

Did your trucks have the same tires? This truck has pretty aggressive tires…. What tires did the 5 liter truck have?

2023 King Ranch 3.5 turbo, i filled up last night. Truck said 17 something, math said 15 something. Granted, I just hit 3k miles and still have original oil. I hear it gets better once factory oil is changed.

my son has a 23 stx 4 wheel drive 4 door 5.6 bed 3.31 dif he gets 24 at 70 mph in southern new england sometimes 25 with the 3.5

@TheGettyAdventures

7 ай бұрын

Strange, I expected north of 20mpg but I suspect the hills and valleys hurt the mileage. Probably much better suited for the 5L.

My 2018 get 10.5 L/100 on daily driving and is better on long trips getting 9.6 L/100 , with the big fuel tank I will go 1000 km before filling up. been a good unit so far.

2023 F150. Between 55 and 60 MPH I get between 25 and 26 mpg. 60-65 23-24 mpg My normal 70-74 on the highway varies between 21.5 and 22.5 Towing 6500 lbs @ 70 mph I get 11.5

I have this same engine in my converted Ford Transit AWD HR, and I get 11.5 mph on the highway.

You ran one at -6 degrees and the other at 38 degrees? No affect?

I own a 2015 Ford F-150 3.5 Ecoboost 4x4 and usually get 20-22 mpg on the highway with it.

I travel long distances and go through hilly terrain, at 70 mph I get 20 mpg on my 2017 ecoboost. 157000 miles on the truck.

In 2020 i bought a low mile 2019 f150 3.5 4x4. If my memory serves me right, i averaged 18-19mpg hand calculated In north ga U.S.A.. I then bought a new 2020 f150 2.7 2x4, and it got 21 to 23mpg hand calculated combined. My first brand new truck was before the 19 3.5 and it was a 19 chevy 1500 2x4 with a 2.7 when the body style had just come out. It was the 348 tq engine and was rittled with glitches and new parts failures. It did consistently avg 22-24 hand calculated mpg and always beat its computer by 1-2 mpg. My last truck was a 2020 chevy 1500 5.3 4x4 with 60k plus miles i bought used. It averaged 19-22 hand calculated fairly consistently when i wasnt towing. My newest truck is a 23 chevy 1500 2x4 2.7 with 430 tq. I am not sure that it has hit 21mpg yet... maybe its the upgraded power or maybe it is the 20inch wheels where the other trucks were 17" to 18". I promise, im not bragging about all of these and am living paycheck to paycheck at the moment due to dumb decisions.. lol i say all of this just to compare and share my experiences to everyone elses. I also had a 2021 nissan frontier with the new 3.8l in it with 4 door and 2x4. It didnt average as good of mileage as the first 3 trucks i listed, but loved it for what it was.

@thomasdausch8557

7 ай бұрын

good comment,, question on the Fords is there a big diff between 2.7 and 3.5 v-6s , i will not be towing anything more than ATV weight , the truck will mainly be used as a highway run about , mainly looking to sit higher and a ride quality? tks for reading

@TheGettyAdventures

7 ай бұрын

Appreciate all the info sir! The 2.7L turbomax is a very interesting engine. Tows exceptionally well for what it is. But as you are experiencing the fuel mileage seems low for a 4 cylinder engine.

@calebferguson3930

7 ай бұрын

@thomasdausch8557 the ford 2.7 and 3.5 ecoboost are 2 completely different designs. The 2.7 has a compacted graphite block if I remember correctly, which is the same material that the 6.7 ford diesel block uses, with an extremely stout main girdle. the exhaust manifolds are integrated into the aluminum heads, which helps make the 2.7 such a power house due to less thermal type loses. They do fail, but I'm fond of them. The 3.5 is a monster as well, but uses a more traditional aluminum block design with aluminum heads. The smaller internal parts in both engines hold up well for their power output. For towing atvs, either engine will do it, they're both extremely fun to drive empty, and the fuel mileage isn't much different. I'd just do research on which engine and transmission combination is having the worst issues right now and pick the more reliable one.

@calebferguson3930

7 ай бұрын

@TheGettyAdventures yes, Like I said though, I just don't understand why the lower output chevy 2.7 did around 5 mpg better. That's fairly significant. I also remember my buddy and I 0-60ing my 19 2.7 chevy vs his 19 ram 5.7, and the hemi was obviously faster, but not by much. He was shaking his head on that one... lol

Could you do the 2.7 eco boost? thanks

Would loved to see the powerboost comparison.

@richardlively1666

7 ай бұрын

I have a 23 KR powerboost . It only has 2100 miles, but my average all around hand calculate is 22.7. I live in the ozarks, so no flat ground. Recent trip speed set at 67 gave 20.8. Im not impressed

@anthony1930

7 ай бұрын

@@richardlively1666Richard, sounds like the 3.0 duramax is your answer, it’s efficient and hills are a non-issue. Nonetheless, the powerboost is a great powertrain.

Have a 2023 F150 with the 3.5. Crew Cab, 4x4, stock tires, 2" Level, 3.55 Rear. It averages 18-19mpg

Wind, temperature an tires forsure! Father in law's 2016 3.5 eco 3.55 vs 2015 5.0 3.31 I was getting about one m p g better but he has better gearing

I think something is wrong with your 3.5 truck, I have a 2018 XLT 3.5 ecoboast 4wd and it always gets 23/24 mpg and in the city 20/21 ??

Differential is really what determines mileage?

I am in a 3.5L EcoBoost f150 right now for work. Driven many 400km trips. On the highway I consistently get 23mpg. Crew cab, tow package, 4x4. And that is not in eco mode that is normal mode.

my 2013 f150 with the 3.5 eco boost with 140,000 miles gets 13.8 MPG running 87 octane (according to the trucks computer). Hopefully this truck gets another 140,000 miles, but if it doesn't, I'll get the 5.0 next time.

I have a 2012 Ecoboost F150. 265 65 18 BFG Ko2s. 280k kms. Easily get 14 litres/100 km without trying. On a 200km flat run in Saskatchewan up to the lake I have had as low as 11.6 and typically 12.5 ltrs/100km. When cruising 100 to 110 km/h. Same experience with other comments - worse by 2-3 ltrs/ 100 in winter. But there again it is -30c 🥶

I had a 21 f150 with the 3.5 eco boost and I was averaging 10l/100km and summer I was as low 9L/100km and that was driving 110 all the time.

I have a new 2023 F150 3.5 with 3.55 rear end and I’m getting 23/24 mpg on interstate driving at 75mph. Getting a lot worse in town with stop and go.

@jaysson1151

7 ай бұрын

4wd super crew?

@popdaddyg

7 ай бұрын

@@jaysson1151 yes the 4x4 super crew

My opinion is there's no replacement for Displaysment

I have this exact truck. Following

i looked up the Gmc Serra with the 10 Speed on 10 speed it gear ratio is .63 to1

@motoxdudeNV-UT

7 ай бұрын

I just rented the Silverado with the 5.3 4x4 Quad Cab... got better economy with it doing 90 across the desert Southwest on a cross country tour than with my Toyota Tacoma 3.5 V6, 4x4 Quad Cab with a 6-speed manual! I just don't want the 5.3 and 6.2 lifter failures... GM has gone to CRAP! But when it runs well it does well... but it's still a ticking timebomb! During my trip I had to switch vehicles and got the F-150 4x4 Quad Cab with the Turbo 6 (not sure if 2.9 or the larger)... but it got comparable economy to the Silverado, but the turbo lag was annoying. That 5.3 could accelerate on the freeway to pass almost anything... it amazed me! Now on the other hand, my Tacoma is ANYTHING but exciting on acceleration or torque. It's given me ZERO problems, but it is gutless! It's a chick truck, not a real truck! I'm 60 and just need to slow down so I'm keeping it! My days of driving like a bat out of Hell are behind me... "most" of the time at least. 😇

So let's talk about that engine. I owned a 2019 Ford Explorer Sport with that engine and the 6 speed trans in it, all wheel drive. That thing drank fuel like it was going out of style. 19 was the best ever I saw and that's using premium. Typically 14 to 16 was average. And it really wasn't all that fast, the explorers were de rated to 369hp if you remember whereas I think the trucks were rated at 400. So it sucked, I hated it. We traded it in on a 21 Explorer with the 2.3 eco boost engine and all was redeemed. That engine is amazing to say the least. I can get 28 on the highway without even breaking a sweat and even though the actual hp numbers are lower (300), that 2.3 mated to the 10 speed will crush that 3.5 we had in speed, fuel economy etc. etc. It's also nice they went back to a proper rear wheel drive platform instead of using a Ford Taurus platform. Anyhow I hated that 3.5 eco boost but yet others love it. I guess it depends on what vehicle it's in and what you are using it for. Another great video, please keep them coming! Edit, I see why a lot of police agencies have moved to the new Explorers. They are fast as hell and super efficient. Might be a great idea for another video for you!

Once again: If an engine loafs it gets economy... it it struggles it drinks heavily! Reminds me of a test an Automotive Engineer friend undertook decades ago while working for Isuzu. This was the advent of OBD-2 and the development of Isuzu's Trooper and Rodeo with their 75 Degree V6. The Japanese execs flew over to partake in an evaluation (aka see the USA on the company's dime). They rented the comparable vehicles to the Trooper: Ford Explorer, GMC Jimmy, Dodge Durango I believe, but not sure, Nissan Pathfinder, Toyota 4-Runner and Jeep Cherokee V8 with fulltime 4-wheel drive. They set out on a trip across the US and drove in deserts, climbing mountains and just about anything a vehicle might experience. Each night the engineers evaluated the data collected on the laptops in each vehicle plugged into the OBD-2 port. The results were quite enlightening at the very least! Of ALL the vehicles driven over the same course, same speeds and exact same conditions... GUESS who got the best overall fuel economy? The Jeep Cherokee with the V8 and fulltime 4-wheel drive! It was largely tied to the throttle position readings. The underpowered Jap Crap had to engage more throttle and thus enter fuel enrichment mode, whereas the Jeep stayed out of it, made more power, better fuel economy and far less emissions! Ever since: I order the larger engine option in any vehicle I buy. Recently I bought a 2020 Toyota Tacoma 4x4 with a 6-speed manual. I rented a Dodge Ram 1500 4x4 quad cab with the 5.7. Drove 75 mph to Death Valley with 2 dirtbikes in the bed, 2 friends and all our gear with the AC on the entire trip. I got better fuel economy out of the Dodge than the Toyota and I have NEVER broken the mileage from the Dodge since... regardless how I baby the Tacoma! And it's not necessarily a fair comparison, but I have a V12 Mercedes SL 600. It averages about the same as the Toyota... go figure! Put any kind of load in my Tacoma or pull a trailer and I might as well be driving a 1970 Buick Electra with a High Compression 455 CID Engine as the fuel economy drops to that level... I'm NOT kidding!

I've got a 22 w/ a 3.5l eco and yes, on the hwy in eco mode (not towing!), yeah, Ive been getting 23+ mpg. I'm told starting from a stop is mpg crap, and they're crap if they don't get to warm up. But on a long freeway drive in California - which has of elevation changes fyi - I'm routinely getting 23+ in eco mode. Driving over 80 mph btw. I guess also, if I wanted great mpg, id get ome of them little clown cars.

Tires can KILL gas mileage. My wife's outback went from 33-34 highway with stock to 28 when we put on tires most suited to getting a little dirty ;) Same size.