2018 F150: Top 3 MPG 1/2 TONS
12-07-2017, 10:31 AM
#1
2018 F150: Top 3 MPG 1/2 TONS
If you go to the fueleconomy.gov website, and cut through all the duplications, i.e. different payload capacities and identical labels, such as Sierra and Silverado, and just want to see which engine truck combinations give you the highest rated MPG possible, you'll find that F150 takes the top 3 spots. Even Ford's highest-billed engine beats any engine from any other brand in the class*. These are the highest rating possible for any 1/2-ton pickup truck engine currently on sale as a MY2018.
1. F150 2.7 Ecoboost 20 city, 26 highway, 22 combined. HP=325@5000, Torque=400@2750
2. F150 3.3 V6 NA 19 city, 25 highway, 22 combined. HP=290@6500, Torque=265@4000
3. F150 3.5 Ecoboost 18 city, 25 highway, 21 combined. HP=375@5000, Torque=470@3500
4. Three-way tie.
- Ram 1500 Penstar with 8-speed transmission 17/25/20 HP=305, Torque=269
- GM Silverado/Sierra with 4.3 V6 Ecotec3 and six speed transmission 18/24/20. HP=285@5300, Torque=305@3900.
- GM 5.3 V8 Ecotec3 w/eAssist (available only in crew cab and LT trim $44K and up) 18/24/20 HP=355, Torque=383@4100 RPM.
5. F150 5.0 V8 17 city, 23 highway, 19 combined. HP=395@5750, Torque=400@4500.
6. Chevy/GMC Silverado/Sierra 5.3 V8 Ecotec3 16 city, 23 highway, 19 combined. HP=355, Torque=383@4100 RPM
* Ecodiesel was not included, because they have not reentered this engine back in to the Ram 1500 lineup for MY2018. However, the EPA did let them sell the 2017 left on the dealership lots with renewed software and a reduced mpg rating. It's latest rating was/is 20 city (same as the F150 with the 2.7), 27 highway (one more than the F150 with the 2.7), and 23 combined (one more than the F150 with the 2.7). HP=240 @3600 RPM, Torque=420@2000 RPM. Ecodiesel starts at or about $35K, whereas 2.7 Ecoboost-powered F150 starts at or about $28.6K
In fact, if you were to compare F150 with the 2.7 Ecoboost to the compact trucks so far available as 2018s, it meets or beats every gas-powered engine truck combination on the market, including the 4 cylinder gas engines, and even the unibody Honda Ridgeline. It actually beats Toyota Tacoma with their newly designed 2.7 I4, which produces 159 HP @ 5200 RPM and 180 ft-lb torque @ 3800 RPM. The 2.7 is in a full size versus a Toyota compact. It's got over double the torque and double the horsepower, and gets a higher mpg rating. The Colorado and Canyon 2.5L 4 banger has 200 hp and 191 ft-lb torque and exactly ties the F150 with the 2.7 with a rating of 20 city, 26 highway, and 22 combined; just like the F150 with the 2.7 Ecoboost. The only compact truck(s) that currently beat F150's top fuel miser is the 2WD and the 4WD Colorado and Canyon with the 2.8L Duramax, which produces 181 hp and 369 ft-lb torque and is available starting at $36K, whereas the F150 full size truck with the 2.7L Ecoboost starts at or about $28.6K.
This coming year will certainly see some changes in the Ford dominance with respect to power train performance, capability, and fuel economy; but at this point and time, I can't think of another time when the segment let one manufacturer jump so far ahead. Tundra is last place with the 5.7L V8 engine. It has a max FE configuration of 16 mpg combined for the 2WD, and 15 mpg for 4WD. This means that Ford's most capable power train with 470 ft-lb peak torque at only 3500 RPM has a rating of 5 mpg higher than Toyota, and it's competitive with respect to performance. The next-worst engine/truck combination is the Ram 1500 with the Hemi V8. The Titan is all new, and it sits at only 18 combined. That's 3 mpg behind Ford's bigger Ecoboost and 1 behind Ford's reworked V8.
1. F150 2.7 Ecoboost 20 city, 26 highway, 22 combined. HP=325@5000, Torque=400@2750
2. F150 3.3 V6 NA 19 city, 25 highway, 22 combined. HP=290@6500, Torque=265@4000
3. F150 3.5 Ecoboost 18 city, 25 highway, 21 combined. HP=375@5000, Torque=470@3500
4. Three-way tie.
- Ram 1500 Penstar with 8-speed transmission 17/25/20 HP=305, Torque=269
- GM Silverado/Sierra with 4.3 V6 Ecotec3 and six speed transmission 18/24/20. HP=285@5300, Torque=305@3900.
- GM 5.3 V8 Ecotec3 w/eAssist (available only in crew cab and LT trim $44K and up) 18/24/20 HP=355, Torque=383@4100 RPM.
5. F150 5.0 V8 17 city, 23 highway, 19 combined. HP=395@5750, Torque=400@4500.
6. Chevy/GMC Silverado/Sierra 5.3 V8 Ecotec3 16 city, 23 highway, 19 combined. HP=355, Torque=383@4100 RPM
* Ecodiesel was not included, because they have not reentered this engine back in to the Ram 1500 lineup for MY2018. However, the EPA did let them sell the 2017 left on the dealership lots with renewed software and a reduced mpg rating. It's latest rating was/is 20 city (same as the F150 with the 2.7), 27 highway (one more than the F150 with the 2.7), and 23 combined (one more than the F150 with the 2.7). HP=240 @3600 RPM, Torque=420@2000 RPM. Ecodiesel starts at or about $35K, whereas 2.7 Ecoboost-powered F150 starts at or about $28.6K
In fact, if you were to compare F150 with the 2.7 Ecoboost to the compact trucks so far available as 2018s, it meets or beats every gas-powered engine truck combination on the market, including the 4 cylinder gas engines, and even the unibody Honda Ridgeline. It actually beats Toyota Tacoma with their newly designed 2.7 I4, which produces 159 HP @ 5200 RPM and 180 ft-lb torque @ 3800 RPM. The 2.7 is in a full size versus a Toyota compact. It's got over double the torque and double the horsepower, and gets a higher mpg rating. The Colorado and Canyon 2.5L 4 banger has 200 hp and 191 ft-lb torque and exactly ties the F150 with the 2.7 with a rating of 20 city, 26 highway, and 22 combined; just like the F150 with the 2.7 Ecoboost. The only compact truck(s) that currently beat F150's top fuel miser is the 2WD and the 4WD Colorado and Canyon with the 2.8L Duramax, which produces 181 hp and 369 ft-lb torque and is available starting at $36K, whereas the F150 full size truck with the 2.7L Ecoboost starts at or about $28.6K.
This coming year will certainly see some changes in the Ford dominance with respect to power train performance, capability, and fuel economy; but at this point and time, I can't think of another time when the segment let one manufacturer jump so far ahead. Tundra is last place with the 5.7L V8 engine. It has a max FE configuration of 16 mpg combined for the 2WD, and 15 mpg for 4WD. This means that Ford's most capable power train with 470 ft-lb peak torque at only 3500 RPM has a rating of 5 mpg higher than Toyota, and it's competitive with respect to performance. The next-worst engine/truck combination is the Ram 1500 with the Hemi V8. The Titan is all new, and it sits at only 18 combined. That's 3 mpg behind Ford's bigger Ecoboost and 1 behind Ford's reworked V8.
Last edited by gregsfc; 12-07-2017 at 10:52 AM.
The following users liked this post:
CurryBob (12-07-2017)
12-07-2017, 02:07 PM
#4
Are those Real World owner figures, or the fake EPA ratings?
12-07-2017, 02:28 PM
#5
Official HTT Greeter
12-07-2017, 02:47 PM
#6
Of course you know they are EPA estimations. As for real world, those numbers vary as much as there are drivers and configurations of trucks, and each person's driving technique. They are published for comparison purposes.
I can give you only my personal numbers. I have a 2.7L Ecoboost, 6 speed, 2015 model, std cab, 2wd, short bed XL and 3.31 rear axle ratio. It weighs approximately 4200 lbs. The EPA estimate for my truck (the sticker that was on my truck) says 19 city, 26 hwy and 22 combined. I have never measured city only or highway only. Only measured tank-to-tank, hand calculated, 60 tanks since I've owned my truck for 28,000 miles. I have corrected for the trip meter error. My average is 24.1. My lowest tank has so for been 21.7; my high has been 26.7. But most fall between 22.5 and 24.5. I use it mostly for commuting, but do use the truck for hauling light duty as I intended it for. I would say that overall, me in my truck, exceeds the estimate.
I'm fully aware that my numbers are not typical, but I can't control what version of this truck most people buy and then expect to meet estimates. It's the same with other brands and other engines. I can't control what other owners stick on the outside, how much extra wright they leave in the cab and bed, how they modify and add huge tires, wheels, etc, or, how much they unneccesarily idle, or how they drive. I live 100 miles from Oak Ridge National Laboratories, and I think they do a great job of doing what they di with fuel economy, and I'm very satisfied with what Ford has manufactured for F150 with repect to the 2.7 Ecoboost.
I can give you only my personal numbers. I have a 2.7L Ecoboost, 6 speed, 2015 model, std cab, 2wd, short bed XL and 3.31 rear axle ratio. It weighs approximately 4200 lbs. The EPA estimate for my truck (the sticker that was on my truck) says 19 city, 26 hwy and 22 combined. I have never measured city only or highway only. Only measured tank-to-tank, hand calculated, 60 tanks since I've owned my truck for 28,000 miles. I have corrected for the trip meter error. My average is 24.1. My lowest tank has so for been 21.7; my high has been 26.7. But most fall between 22.5 and 24.5. I use it mostly for commuting, but do use the truck for hauling light duty as I intended it for. I would say that overall, me in my truck, exceeds the estimate.
I'm fully aware that my numbers are not typical, but I can't control what version of this truck most people buy and then expect to meet estimates. It's the same with other brands and other engines. I can't control what other owners stick on the outside, how much extra wright they leave in the cab and bed, how they modify and add huge tires, wheels, etc, or, how much they unneccesarily idle, or how they drive. I live 100 miles from Oak Ridge National Laboratories, and I think they do a great job of doing what they di with fuel economy, and I'm very satisfied with what Ford has manufactured for F150 with repect to the 2.7 Ecoboost.
12-07-2017, 02:58 PM
#7
I have a coworker with a Ram that is getting 24 MPG, while my EB gets 17. My 14 EB got 21. My driving is no different, just that one was RWD with 3.15 and the 16 is 4WD with 3.55.
Real world http://www.fuelly.com/car/ford/f-150
Real world http://www.fuelly.com/car/ford/f-150
Trending Topics
12-07-2017, 08:11 PM
#8
Senior Member
For the 3.3 the numbers are really close. Eleven tanks, worst 20.8, best 22.82. All mixed. All in normal mode. Less than twenty miles in sport mode. Speed limit 75, I set my cruse at 70. Yea I'm one of them.Edit to add numbers are from fuel app. Truck shows 23.0 mpg for life of truck.
Last edited by 2018 reg cab; 12-07-2017 at 08:14 PM.
12-07-2017, 09:47 PM
#9
Senior Member
When I was searching for a new vehicle my sole consideration was the range of a single tank of fuel. My 2WD RCSB beats anything I could find (gas powered, non hybrid) and could not be happier with my choice. The next closest was a Camry hybrid.
12-07-2017, 10:45 PM
#10
Senior Member
