Scab10

Why would this package not be available with the 2.7 base engine in the Lariat? Engine dependent? Anyone care to throw out a possible explanation?

"Confused in NY"

StonedGreen

because they want you to buy the bigger motor with the high end trucks

jcb206

Ford didnt think anyone buying a $60k truck would want the smaller EcoBoost...

Ford thinks that someone paying $60k doesn't care about mpgs....

Ford thought it would be funny...

Ford hired the wrong (complete imbeciles) people to put together packages that are available....

Ford doesn't care what we want....

Ford thought the engine would break down with a couple hundred pounds of more options...

Ford forgot...

Personally, I think they just hired the wrong people. Complete mistake.

Just like not being able to get the HD Payload Package with the 502A package, or at least a 501A.

And with the 2.7, why no 6.5ft bed on 4x4?

It's all just weird. Why not let people choose what they want and only not allow it if it would actually affect the quality/safety of the truck.

Will Ford take notice of the dissatisfaction? Nope.

They are selling. They think they are perfect.

It's still a great truck. We will just have to keep buying the options that Ford sets for us. Heck they have more combinations than all other manufacturers. Just don't understand why there are limits at all.

sircolby45

My theory is that the auto start/stop + all of the electronic gadgets is a little too much for the battery to handle. I don't know if that is true or not, but that is the only reason I could think of.

KYBuckeye

On a side note, at least Ford lets you buy their "premier" (3.5EB) engine in lower trims. You can't even get a 6.2 in a Chevy unless you buy the LTZ or above. Kind of a reverse philosophy compared to Ford. Both philosophy's suck.

jcb206

Yep

Forrest48

This is the main reason that I am waiting on the 2016 information to come out. I'm hoping Ford will offer more options for the 2.7 equipped F150. I really want the Tech. package. :-)

LyteFly

Personally, I think it has more to do with weight and fuel mileage than anything. The upper levels get progressively heavier and the 2.7's efficiency drops along with that.

jcb206

People are loading their family and luggage while taking trips and still getting EPA numbers. If you can load them down with 600-800 lbs and get 15-20% better than the 3.5 EB, then a couple hundred lbs worth of options shouldn't be the reason. JMO

The main reasons I eliminated the 2.7 was:
- higher trim levels,
- 2.7 payload package didn't seem available yet
- I figured a 3.31 geared 3.5 EB would get as good of mileage as a 3.73 geared 2.7 EB when they were "rated" at the same EPA mileage