hydro

^ exactly, Ford is not playing "catch up" to toyota in the hybrid game. They are better. Even after the revision the Fusion still kills the camry hybrid in mileage. toyota showed even worse mpg drop after real world test than Ford. The Cmax is an all around better vehicle that the prius C or V, I don't know which one is bigger. Ford will now go after the regular prius with a dedicated hybrid model.

GearheadGeek

You undermine your valid point when you go too far. Consumer Reports (whose results, taken with the appropriate grains of salt, I generally find more useful than EPA estimates) found the Fusion Hybrid and Camry Hybrid to be very similar. The Fusion actually has a slight edge in city driving, the Camry does better on highway MPG. In CR's overall testing, they got 39 mpg from the Fusion Hybrid and 38 MPG for the Camry Hybrid, so it's definitely safe to say the Camry isn't more efficient than the Fusion, but you can't say the Fusion "kills" the Camry, either.

Wait, weren't we wondering about F150 engine numbers?

Ron AKA

No, Ford does the testing and submits the results to EPA. EPA does some occasional testing as an audit. I think Canada does their own testing and they are totally bogus. Not even worth looking at, as they way overestimate mpg.

Ron AKA

I have not kept up to where Ford is now with the Fusion. They made unrealistic EPA claims, and had to do some recall modifications. I recall CR measured a 1 mpg improvement from the mods. They were still short of their EPA claim, and they may have reduced their EPA number. If you want to get into the real detail, I believe Ford gamed the EPA test. They put in artificial intelligence software that keeps track of how you drive and tries to anticipate how best to optimize when to charge, when to start the ICE, when to stop the ICE, etc.. It is a good idea. However think about it for a few seconds. Guess what happens if you let this AI software "learn" how to anticipate the exact EPA test protocol? You got it. The software does a great job of optimizing mpg -- for the test! However in the real world that does not work so well. You don't drive the EPA test over and over again...

Matt_E_Salesman

All 2015 models in Canada will be tested by a new methodology similar to the US's. Unfortunately this is going to make the rated mileage comparison between a 2014 and a 2015 very difficult in Canada. The truth is it might actually look like it stays the same or maybe even worse according to the ratings, while real world can't help but be better. The comparison up here will have to be between the competitions 2015 ratings and the F150s 2015 ratings.

Ron AKA

I think there are very few differences between the US and Canadian models, and I go by the US EPA site for accuracy. You can personalize to display in L/100km instead of miles per US gallon. The other game that the Canadian rating played is showing the mileage in miles per Imperial gallon, which gives the appearance of even higher mpg...


http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find....34525&id=34526

Jeffyk

The 3.5 block from ford can handle up to 600 hp. There is a place in Michigan that is building them out.

Daytoman

While boosting its bawls off and sucking down ALOT more fuel.

Sorry new school, but there's no replacement for displacement.

OldFlick

If you seldom tow and are looking for empty fuel mileage then the 2.7 serves well overall. Tow more than a couple times a year and the small ecoboost is a looser(big one not much better). I towed a big load(truck & trl) in my 6.7 diesel and a friend w/3.5TT was also doing same. 700 miles from Del to Ky loaded I was 30% (dollars) cheaper on trip. Coming back empty 50% more dollars for me. I ordered 3.5TT, doing mostly empty due to health and age.

Ron AKA

Have a look at this presentation by Ford from 2011 when they were outlining where they were going with the EcoBoost technology. In particular look at slide 21 and 22 where they compare conventional and EcoBoost technology. BSFC or Brake Specific Fuel Consumption is a measure of how much fuel is used to produce power. In a conventional engine this is a relatively small area typically at higher torque and low RPM. The problem is that a smaller engine like the 5 L conventional needs to get up in RPM to make lots of power for towing. That takes it out of the small high BSFC area, and fuel consumption increases.

EcoBoost makes that high efficiency area bigger, and also produces more torque and power at lower RPM where there is higher efficiency.

So, I think there are issues with the EcoBoost (oil dilution with fuel, carbon deposits on intake valves), it is not going to suffer from lower fuel economy or lack of power.

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/vehicles...ich_2011_o.pdf