Topic Sponsor
2009 - 2014 Ford F150 General discussion on 2009 - 2014 Ford F150 truck.
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

Is this normal?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 01-27-2015, 11:07 AM
  #1  
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
mheath's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Is this normal? *Updated question

***Update - On my quest to understand this engine, I have a new question. Should I be able to hear a whooshing, rushing air noise, with my cruise control set between 55 - 75? No noticeable load on the engine just cruising down the highway?




Hey guys, I had a 2009 F150 SCrew, 5.4 FX4 4x4, 6.5 bed. I bought the truck with high miles and when I sold it I had 190,000 miles on it trouble free! I really liked the truck and decided to get a new one....

The New one I just picked up is a 2012 Ecoboost 4x4, 5.5 bed Lariat SCrew 3.55 gears, with only 8,600 miles. The problem is that my old 5.4 was 3 - 4 mpg better than this one on the highway and in town!

They are similar trucks, similarly equpped, and I am babying the ecoboost to try to match what my old truck could get.

What is the deal? Is the Ecoboost a step back for MPG compared to the old 5.4?

I know more power equals more fuel but I am babying this thing I would expect it to be able to match my 2009!

Last edited by mheath; 01-29-2015 at 11:23 AM.
Old 01-27-2015, 11:48 AM
  #2  
Member
 
wluttrell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 33
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts

Default

mheath, Sadly, it probably is just the way it is.

I had a 2001 4.6L V8, 2 wheel drive, supercab that I bought in 2003. It had 30,000 miles on it then. I drove it until last year and it had 218,000 miles on it. I consistently got 14.5 - 15 mpg around town, and 16-16.5 on the highway.

I bought a 2012 F-150 Supercrew Ecoboost 2 wheel drive in 2013 and I got, AT BEST 14.5 in town and 15.0 - 15.5 on the highway. Babied the hell out of it and couldn't get more.

I traded it in this year for a brand new 2014 F-150 SuperCrew 4x4 and it now has 15K miles on it, and I average around 14.5-15 mpg around town and have taken several 4 hour trips and never seen more than 16 - 16.5 on the highway (on cruise control at 70mpg).

All of these were stock trucks with no MPG mods or lifts. The 2001 had slightly bigger tires and still got better gas mileage than the ecoboosts.

As far as power, I'm 40. I don't hotrod around town so with everyday driving there is definately more power on the ecoboost, but not "hold on to your seat" kind of difference.

Just my take.. : )

Will
Old 01-27-2015, 11:52 AM
  #3  
Senior Member
 
kobayashi maru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 1,029
Received 165 Likes on 117 Posts

Default

How are you measuring your fuel economy? Not sure whether the 2009 has the same on-board fuel calculator as the 2012 but if you were calculating it manually before and just using the readout now then I would expect there to be some variance. The method of measurement must be the same. That being said, maybe the newer truck just is worse on fuel consumption?
Old 01-27-2015, 12:06 PM
  #4  
FX4RoadWarrior
 
tanked_darren's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: British Columbia
Posts: 3,816
Received 494 Likes on 353 Posts

Default

That sucks, I get great mileage on my Eco now, didn't really get better until after the second oil change. 18 or better now.

I can ruin it really quick by stomping on it though.
Old 01-27-2015, 12:16 PM
  #5  
Senior Member
 
coolride's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: SC
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 7 Likes on 6 Posts
Default

so whats the deal with these eco boosts? I thought the advantage was better fuel economy?? Seems like TV ads were saying 20+ mpg. But forums I read indicated they suck about as bad as an older truck. I have had several older ford trucks from the 70's to the 90's with the old inline 300 6 cylinder, and got 15 to 19 with all of them with exception of the last 94 I had, it ran 15 all the time. The carbed versions seemed better as long as things were working correctly. I haven't looked into where Ford is at with diesel engines in F150s but they better step it up if they want to compete with the RAM diesel, running around 25-28 in a half ton truck. I'm a Ford guy at heart, but I also like to keep my money somewhere other than my gas tank. Anyone having better luck with the eco boost? Or am I seeing what seems to be reality? Poor mileage?
Old 01-27-2015, 12:33 PM
  #6  
Member
 
keylo4life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts

Default

Always thought the bottom line for the ecoboost was for more towing capability.
Old 01-27-2015, 12:40 PM
  #7  
Senior Member
 
TX 5.0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Texas
Posts: 109
Received 13 Likes on 10 Posts

Default

Holy cow! I've got a 5.0, and my on board calculator shows a pretty consistant 17.8-18 mpg. Mostly city with a couple open stretches. Im pretty base with an XLT Screw, 5.5 bed, 3.31 rear, 2x4. I had a 2011 EB and got about the same in that with same configuration but 3.55s.
Old 01-27-2015, 12:57 PM
  #8  
Senior Member
 
OilFieldCash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Rockwall/Wichita Falls Texas
Posts: 1,500
Received 204 Likes on 154 Posts

Default

I've had a 5.4, never had an Ecoboost, but now I have a 5.0. I'd get that thing into a competent dealer as well as maybe looking into getting SCT and switching brands of fuel. Maybe someone can recommend something that can clean the injectors and fuel system that's safe for this truck. I have a 4wd 5.0 on 35"x13" tires, it has the bed full of junk. I can set it on 70 and the computer says it averages 17-18 mostly highway miles and I haven't even plugged in the SCT yet. Driving style can effect this drastically. How fast do you try to get to 90 miles an hour after your at a complete stop ? haha

Last edited by OilFieldCash; 01-27-2015 at 01:00 PM.
Old 01-27-2015, 12:58 PM
  #9  
Junior Member
Thread Starter
 
mheath's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by kobayashi maru
How are you measuring your fuel economy? Not sure whether the 2009 has the same on-board fuel calculator as the 2012 but if you were calculating it manually before and just using the readout now then I would expect there to be some variance. The method of measurement must be the same. That being said, maybe the newer truck just is worse on fuel consumption?
I had the on board mpg calculator with the 2009 5.4 but verified it manually, it got 16 - 18 mpg on road trips doing 70 - 80 mph. The 2012 ecoboost is getting 14 - 16 on the same road trips. I would say that it is enough different that it isn't just variations in wind, temp, ect. I owned the 09 for 2 years and it was pretty consistent on the highway.

Maybe I should have gotten the 5.0....oops

Last edited by mheath; 01-27-2015 at 01:01 PM.
Old 01-27-2015, 01:04 PM
  #10  
Senior Member
 
OilFieldCash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Rockwall/Wichita Falls Texas
Posts: 1,500
Received 204 Likes on 154 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by mheath
I had the on board with the 2009 5.4 but verified it manually, it got 16 - 18 mpg on road trips doing 70 - 80 mph. The 2012 ecoboost is getting 14 - 16 on the same road trips. I would say that it is enough different that it isn't just variations in wind, temp, ect. I owned the 09 for 2 years and it was pretty consistent on the highway. Maybe I should have gotten the 5.0....oops
That's just asking for a million posts of men behaving like 80 year old bickering women^ As said above, not to insult your intelligence, but make sure the tires have the correct pressure. Maybe swap brand of fuel. Winter blend also sucks! I've always used seafoam, I'd make sure it's safe for the ecoboost or if there's something similar. I've seen posts saying that Seafoam is bad for turbos and boost hurts mileage. I call bs on both, everything I've owned until now has had atleast one turbo if not two.


Quick Reply: Is this normal?



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:24 PM.