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

Solved the ECO MPG problem

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 03-18-2014, 05:56 PM
  #1  
Member
Thread Starter
 
Billy Mulek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 79
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts
Default Solved the ECO MPG problem

I traded in my 2013 eco with a rear 3.31 for a 2014 eco with a rear 3.73 and I can't believe the difference in the MPG. I had come to this forum many times before thinking I was one of the lucky ones who didn't have a MPG problem with my eco. Now I come to it and I am one of those who are getting lower MPG.

The gears play and big part in the MPG and I have to wonder if its worse on an ECO compared to the 5.0

For the record I'm not complaining just wanted to note this observation.
Old 03-18-2014, 05:59 PM
  #2  
Member
Thread Starter
 
Billy Mulek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 79
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts
Default

I guess I didn't really solve it but have a better understanding on why there is a difference in people's MPG.
Old 03-18-2014, 06:43 PM
  #3  
Senior Member
 
torinalth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 610
Received 171 Likes on 127 Posts

Default

gears always play a role. its a balance. too low a ratio and you will need to push the engine harder to accelerate. but generally yes, a lower ratio will yield better MPG while higher ratio will yield better torque multiplication for acceleration.... towing... simply turning the wheels. think of it as using a pulley system for a mechanical advantage.
Old 03-18-2014, 06:49 PM
  #4  
Member
 
KDD555's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 78
Received 5 Likes on 4 Posts
Default

What was the mpg difference ?
Old 03-18-2014, 06:52 PM
  #5  
Beer Gut Extraordinaire

 
HCFX2013's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Canada
Posts: 17,369
Received 2,102 Likes on 1,317 Posts

Default

Why would you trade a 2013 on a 2014?
The following 3 users liked this post by HCFX2013:
04black150 (03-18-2014), jedeckert1984 (03-18-2014), Ricktwuhk (03-18-2014)
Old 03-18-2014, 07:40 PM
  #6  
Senior Member
 
zx12-iowa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: midwest
Posts: 4,093
Received 646 Likes on 498 Posts

Default

WEll not for the better mpg. Lol
Old 03-18-2014, 08:52 PM
  #7  
Member
Thread Starter
 
Billy Mulek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 79
Received 6 Likes on 6 Posts
Default

I traded a supercab in on a supercrew. I saw about a 2 mpg drop in mixed everyday driving and a 3.5 on Highway miles.

The 3.31 and the 3.73 have no difference in acceleration, with all the torque the eco provides you don't notice a difference.
Old 03-18-2014, 09:03 PM
  #8  
Beer Gut Extraordinaire

 
HCFX2013's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Canada
Posts: 17,369
Received 2,102 Likes on 1,317 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by Billy Mulek
I traded a supercab in on a supercrew. I saw about a 2 mpg drop in mixed everyday driving and a 3.5 on Highway miles.

The 3.31 and the 3.73 have no difference in acceleration, with all the torque the eco provides you don't notice a difference.
Makes much more sense, not that you needed to justify anything.

It does make sense though that 3.73's will turn lower MPG numbers. The 3.73 turns a little higher RPM on the highway, which may cause the Eco to kick the turbos in more frequently. Boost = fuel. I had an Ecoboost with 3.73's and now have a 5.0 with 3.55's. I have driven many 5.0's with 3.73's and there really isn't a huge difference except maybe a bit in the low end. With that said, my 2009 Silverado with the 4 speed trans and 4.10 gears averaged 18MPG on the highway.
Old 03-18-2014, 09:07 PM
  #9  
Senior Member
 
jcain's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 3,595
Received 461 Likes on 310 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by Billy Mulek
I traded a supercab in on a supercrew. I saw about a 2 mpg drop in mixed everyday driving and a 3.5 on Highway miles.

The 3.31 and the 3.73 have no difference in acceleration, with all the torque the eco provides you don't notice a difference.
You also gained some weight from scab to screw config.
Old 03-18-2014, 09:09 PM
  #10  
Senior Member
 
Harps's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 200
Received 48 Likes on 36 Posts

Default

I am getting about 11 / 12mpg with the 3.73, 65% city and 35% highway.
Company pays the gas so I don't care and i stomp on the right pedal at every opportunity.
Love the power from such a big vehicle.

Screw with a cap
The following users liked this post:
OMAC (03-18-2014)


Quick Reply: Solved the ECO MPG problem



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:48 PM.