Blackpony

Haha yeah I hear that a lot...


Kool so 1-2 mpg loss from where I'm at now.

bsboothe

Not that it matters, above is my completely stock '13 F150 4x4 with the 6.2L and 3.55 gears. When I went down to Alabama pulling my boat, I was getting roughly 12 to 13 mpg going 70 MPH. Around town, I get the dreaded 12 - 13 mpg's, but it does better going down the highway getting 18 mpg's the few times I was able to. Even though it doesn't get up and go like the Ecoboost that I use to have, it still pulls my boat with ease.

Snag

Black Pony you're on to something wanting to change out your 5.0 to a Boss 6.2 but the rarity of the Boss will make it difficult to find.

I know today's pickup driver won't believe this but the Boss 6.2 is a chameleon meaning it's capable of looking like a different engine on the fuel economy gauge depending on what performance you want out of it.

On my routine interstate commute, my Boss gets 16 mpg running 75 to 80 with work traffic. If I want to play with it and have fun, it gets 14.5 mpg on this interstate commute. Once in the city I ran RAISE the average fuel econ numbers in city driving by driving the speed limits.

I pull a high profile 7000 boat at 75 mph twice a year to Florida and averages 8.3 mpg per trip over several trips. And probably most amazing, on occasions I need to drive 200 to 250 miles in a day on rural two lane roads. If kept at 55 mph and driving for maximum fuel economy I can return home with 18 mpg.

Now for the truth: I CHEAT. I burn nothing but 91 pure dinosaur gasoline because the 87 ethanol doesn't provide the fuel economy or the driving pleasure of 91 octane.

For my 45 years of driving Ford products this is the best engine I've ever drove. It will stomp all the 351's, 390's and 428's of the muscle car era. BUT, this is an engine design the EPA wants to kill. The proof is the ripping the Boss took on the EPA testing which is contrary to my experience with the engine.

I mourn the death of the Boss in the F150 family.

wolfy53

My thoughts exactly. I stumbled upon mine and am truly glad I did. The feel of this engine is just like non other. I test drove a few 5.0L trucks and they don't feel near the same just seat of the pants as the 6.2! My truck does have the tow package so 3.73's Not sure what the 5.0l's I tested were.

Chad Walker

First off I will say, Roush output claims are exaggerated. Go hang out on the Raptor forums and you will learn that. Second, a S/C or TT option for the 5.0 will be easier and cheaper but I believe the OP is going for some originality points as well so talking about FI for the 5.0 is a moot topic.

mar1

My 2011 w/ 6.2 Over the last 15k miles ( 60 city/ 40 hwy) I'm averaging 13.3 mpg
..... And loving it

mar1

If you are asking an opinion.....

If your goal is to get an engine that can be a daily, handle work duty and have fun doing it with little modification, the 6.2 is a better choice.
If your goal is to tinker, add and invest to achieve the above because you enjoy doing it, go with the 5.0.

Neither is a bad choice, it ultimately depends on you.

Ssls6

For the last 800 gallons my average is 13.3. I would say 50/50 highway/city. Pretty much what the window sticker said the average would be. I'm at 40k miles currently on a 2012. My only gripe is Ford tunes it pretty lean under 2.5k rpm.

ATVJOE

My 2011 Limited has the 3.73 axle and I get around 12-14 at 70mph and 11-12 at 80+mph. 11 is what I get around town. Of coarse my truck has a 6" lift as well, so no complaints.

alpinestar1123

I'm pushing high 9.0 mpg with a tune leveled out. Since my tune it's really hard to stay out of the gas. I just hit 80k on my 2011 with only a few tranny issues but zero motor issues. The 6.2 is strong and dependable, not sure why ford would just dump it and go with the ecoboost. I'm a muscle kinda guy who loves the V8 power and sound. I maybe switching to the dark side when it's truck takes a dump. Either a gmc 6.2 or the new TRD pro tundra