Topic Sponsor
2011+ Engine Related Questions Sub-Forum to the new engines that debuted in 2011.
View Poll Results: Does your average fuel economy fall within the EPA Expected Range For Most Drivers?
Yes, my average falls within the EPA Expected Range For Most Drivers
83
83.84%
No, my average falls outside the EPA Expected Range For Most Drivers
16
16.16%
Voters: 99. You may not vote on this poll

Yes/No - Does your mileage fall within the EPA Expected Range For Most Drivers?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 12-04-2011, 11:40 AM
  #11  
Boost :)
 
TJPlatinumEB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Austin TX
Posts: 2,329
Received 440 Likes on 328 Posts

Default

My sticker says 16/22 and I get 17 in city and 21.5 highway. I'd say mine falls right in the range
Old 12-04-2011, 11:51 AM
  #12  
COME TO BUTTHEAD
 
Brad92's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 896
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by EBinMT

low of 12 city, high of 25 highway.

12-18 city
17-25 highway

personally I have seen 18city and 24.5 highway on my MPG indicator actually hypermiling. I did not have to stop once on a 6 mile city run after filling up by planning ahead for stop lights. speed varied from 5-45mph. My wife promptly ruined that average before I could build on it by idling the truck in the driveway the next morning for 5min. My 24.5 highway was during break in. I was using the hills to vary my speed between 50 and 80mph for a 20 mile stretch. I will not do those numbers everyday. I consistantly do 16-17 city, 19-20 highway on the lie-o-meter. My wife however is the main driver and can't touch my numbers. The truck mostly sees city... wait, I will change that to Town driving. We have 4 stop lights with max speed of 45. Lifetime average on the Lie-o-meter is 16.
I understand the numbers. I just think its stupid because no matter what, you are gonna be in the range because its so broad.
Old 12-04-2011, 11:56 AM
  #13  
Race Red '12 XLT SCrew EB
 
EBinMT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: MT
Posts: 738
Received 12 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Brad92
I understand the numbers. I just think its stupid because no matter what, you are gonna be in the range because its so broad.
That is why it a broad range. No two trucks are identical and no two drivers drive the same. My example shows how my normal driving is more economical than my wife's. My economical driving is above the posted range. Where my wife's driving economy is sure to be much better than some other people's economy.
Old 12-04-2011, 12:18 PM
  #14  
Senior Member
 
Deerhunter4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Amarillo, TX
Posts: 889
Received 54 Likes on 48 Posts

Default

I get about 15-16 mpg city and 17-21 mpg highway (depending on wind). My lifetime average at 10k miles is 16.7 mpg. Almost right on with the average on the sticker of 17 mpg. I will say that my averages have been going down since the weather got cold, but I guess that is to be expected.
Old 12-04-2011, 12:43 PM
  #15  
COME TO BUTTHEAD
 
Brad92's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Texas
Posts: 896
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by EBinMT

That is why it a broad range. No two trucks are identical and no two drivers drive the same. My example shows how my normal driving is more economical than my wife's. My economical driving is above the posted range. Where my wife's driving economy is sure to be much better than some other people's economy.
Right, I get that. But a 13 MPG swing is a bit much IMO. Unless you either floor it all the time or hypermile.

No vehicle I have ever owned or driven has been near the low or high end of the range, unless there was a defect such as a faulty oxygen sensor or something
Old 12-04-2011, 12:49 PM
  #16  
Opinionated Blowhard
 
Kenferg1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Knoxville, TN
Posts: 1,007
Received 165 Likes on 104 Posts

Default

Yes. 200 mile round trip on Interstate 40 between Knoxville, TN and Cookeville, TN. 70-75 mph uphill & downhill - averaged 18.4 mpg from a full tank. 3.31 gears 4x4. I'm happy.
Old 12-04-2011, 02:51 PM
  #17  
Senior Member
 
ken75ranger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Troy, NY
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by Brad92
Right, I get that. But a 13 MPG swing is a bit much IMO. Unless you either floor it all the time or hypermile.

No vehicle I have ever owned or driven has been near the low or high end of the range, unless there was a defect such as a faulty oxygen sensor or something
These truck can vary quite a bit as well.
I would expect a 2wd regular cab 3.31 geared truck to fall on the high end of EPA numbers and a loaded SC 4wd with 4.10 gears and AWD to be on the low end.
Old 12-04-2011, 03:44 PM
  #18  
Senior Member
 
sranger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Kennesaw, GA
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

People can argue these MPG numbers all they want. However, it will not change the fact that the ONLY way these trucks will get good City/HWY miles is if they live in a mostly flat area with little stop and go traffic and you keep HWY speeds below 65mph.....PERIOD!!!!! The damn thing still weighs nearly 6000lb and is as aerodynamic as a brick...

Also with the ecoboost, you get horrible mileage while it is warning up. If you make a buch of short local trips you can easily see 10-12mpg consistently. They tend to drink gas at an alarming rate when towing a heavy load (more of a drop that the V8's)...

The thing that I have noticed about the Ecoboost is that you cannot significantly improve your MPG with good driving habits the way you can with a V8. I have been able to best EPA numbers with every vehicle that I have ever owned except for this Ecoboost truck. I think that is what is so surprising to many people who have owned V8 trucks in the past...

The ecoboost seems to have good power on par with the big 6.2L V8. However, in real world (not completely flat & traffic) I do not see how it offers all that much more economy (maybe 1-2mpg at best).

Based on my own personal experience, the Ecoboost is mostly about "boost" and very little about "Eco". I think Ford would have had far less dissapointed customers if they had simply called the engine "TwinForce" like they originally planned to call it...

Last edited by sranger; 12-04-2011 at 03:46 PM.
Old 12-04-2011, 03:53 PM
  #19  
Senior Member
 
TwinTurboFx4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 4,249
Received 117 Likes on 103 Posts
Default

Hell no. Idc it's still a nice, comfortable, powerful truck. If I was looking for good mpg I would buy a car. Either way only avg 15mpg I'm still saving money over driving my diesel. Unleaded is 80 cents cheaper than diesel fuel, only use 7 qts of oil instead of 18qts. Pretty much a no brainer.

Last edited by TwinTurboFx4; 12-04-2011 at 03:56 PM.
Old 12-04-2011, 04:03 PM
  #20  
Race Red '12 XLT SCrew EB
 
EBinMT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: MT
Posts: 738
Received 12 Likes on 11 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by TwinTurboFx4
Hell no. Idc it's still a nice, comfortable, powerful truck. If I was looking for good mpg I would buy a car. Either way only avg 15mpg I'm still saving money over driving my diesel. Unleaded is 80 cents cheaper than diesel fuel, only use 7 qts of oil instead of 18qts. Pretty much a no brainer.
So 15mpg is that highway, mixed or city? I ask because the only way that doesn't fall in the range is if that is highway MPG.


Quick Reply: Yes/No - Does your mileage fall within the EPA Expected Range For Most Drivers?



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:52 AM.