My dad bought a 2011 F-150 3.5L

[Oleozz]

Friend has a new King Ranch F150 Ecoboost, I've rode in it several times and it's a nice truck. He is getting about 16-17 around town and about 21 on the highway. I think the sticker price was about $48,000. To much leather for my taste but he claims his wife loves the feel!!

 

[rankrank1]

make no mistake, i'm not big fan of the GM 6.0 either. the Ford 6.2 is no V10 but would be my engine of choice out of the 3, with the Hemi being last. I have a friend who has a 2004 Dodge 4x4 with the Hemi and that motor SCREAMS with 8,500# behind it. my 5.3 is no stump puller itself, but it doesn't scream like that Hemi with the same weight behind it. granted that Hemi will blow my doors off in a race, but who cares?

I am sure other manufacturers do it too, but most GM trucks are handicapped with "torque management". The computer will not allow full spark advance timing or full fuel mapping until at least 2nd gear on most GM trucks. In most cases you can actually run faster times if you sorta roll into the throttle in 1st gear as compared to sticking it to the floor from a dead stop. When you stick it hard while in first gear the computer will actually go as far as retarding timing and reducing power. Primary reason why many trucks will not easily do a burn-out and why the v6, small v8, mid-size v8 all appear so similar in power from a dead stop - the darned computer limits the power sent to the tranmission and rear wheels so they all perform silmilarly in this 1st gear range.

Manufactuers figured out many years ago "torque mangement" greatly reduces their warranty claims which saves them money so it seems every model year of truck received progressively more intrusive levels of "torque management". I will admit that "torque management" makes the truck a little safer to drive on slick roads. (my 5.3 with only some torque management removed from the computer is totally different than it was stock - it can be a handful on a wet slick road though).

 

[timswi]

I am sure other manufacturers do it too, but most GM trucks are handicapped with "torque management". The computer will not allow full spark advance timing or full fuel mapping until at least 2nd gear on most GM trucks. In most cases you can actually run faster times if you sorta roll into the throttle in 1st gear as compared to sticking it to the floor from a dead stop. When you stick it hard while in first gear the computer will actually go as far as retarding timing and reducing power. Primary reason why many trucks will not easily do a burn-out and why the v6, small v8, mid-size v8 all appear so similar in power from a dead stop - the darned computer limits the power sent to the tranmission and rear wheels so they all perform silmilarly in this 1st gear range.

Manufactuers figured out many years ago "torque mangement" greatly reduces their warranty claims which saves them money so it seems every model year of truck received progressively more intrusive levels of "torque management". I will admit that "torque management" makes the truck a little safer to drive on slick roads. (my 5.3 with only some torque management removed from the computer is totally different than it was stock - it can be a handful on a wet slick road though).

Noticed the same thing with my '11 6.2....I can burn the tires at will, but if I pull out normally for about 20 feet and nail it...It sticks me in the seat. That torque management might not be a bad thing after all.

 

[Diamondpilot]

Actually I don't wish I had the 70 Challenger back, or the 70 Road Runner I had. They were very high maintance. It seemed like something always needed fixed on them.

You know, you sound just like my dad. I remember one time we were at a car show and he was saying, "I had one of them". I said I they sure did make great cars back then. He said "they were junk".

He later on explained how you changed the oil every 2,000 miles, plugs every 10,000 miles, points, hoses, coils, wires, shock, exhaust, belts, bearings, ect. He said he would take a modern car any day of the week for its drivability. If you don't get 100,000 miles out of anything made in the last 10 years without maintenance something is wrong.

Chris

 

[RobertN]

Material science has come a long ways in the last 40 years. Imagine 40 years from now...

He later on explained how you changed the oil every 2,000 miles, plugs every 10,000 miles, points, hoses, coils, wires, shock, exhaust, belts, bearings, ect. He said he would take a modern car any day of the week for its drivability. If you don't get 100,000 miles out of anything made in the last 10 years without maintenance something is wrong.

 

[JoeinTX]

"He is getting about 16-17 around town and about 21 on the highway...."

I've been curious about the Eco and I like hearing some real-world feedback. But, those numbers don't hearten me very much. I have a '10 Dodge 1500 with the 4.7l and my average fuel mileage for all driving is currently sitting at around 18.7 mpg per the info display. My driving involves a 20 mile round-trip five days per week to work and back, two 240 mile round trips per month, and nominal driving on the weekends. My city driving here in DFW ranges from stop-n-go highway traffic to normal city streets cycling through the traffic lights. Now, this pickup has impressed me with the mileage I've gotten over the last year or so that I've owned it I'll say.

My prior vehicle was a 2006 F-150 CrewCab with a 4.6l and it was, all in all, the best vehicle I've ever had the pleasure of owning. Rock solid son-of-a-gun it was and I had a very hard time parting with it when I traded for the Dodge. But, the Ford never managed more than 17mpg on the highway and drank a noticeable amount more gas than the newer Dodge I now have. Admittedly, it was a bit heavier.

In summary, I would like to think that losing 1 liter in engine size would yield better MPG than you've mentioned. The current Ford 1/2 ton design is an absolute beauty of a vehicle if they can just get the motors lined-out. The new Dodges are a clear improvement over the previous model (I owned two 2001-2009 models) and in my experience they've made some serious progress on engines and tranny combinations that my personal experience backs up. They're not quit up to Ford's overall quality, but, they ain't bad either.

I took up the new Dodge last year anticipating trading for an Eco-Boost in 2-4 years but if this is what I can expect..........maybe I'll be trading for another Dodge instead.

 

[Dmace]

In summary, I would like to think that losing 1 liter in engine size would yield better MPG than you've mentioned.

The thing is, Ford didn't design this V6 as a fuel efficient engine. They are making a hot-rod V6 that can compete with the V8's. The problem is it has the same performance and fuel mileage as a V8 yet is a TON more complicated, more expensive to buy, more expensive to fix and too complicated for the average garage mechanic to repair.

If this engine could make about 50-75 less HP, get 25 mpg empty and still average 12 mpg towing 10k max then I would be impressed.

That 4.7l RAM is a great engine, I have a good friend that runs E-85 in his and swears it performs better than with mid-grade unleaded and only pays $3.25-$3.50 per gallon vs. $4.10-$4.30. Plus, if he can't find an E-85 station he just fills up with 89 octane with no worries of mixing the fuels.

 

[Diamondpilot]

Dmace hit the nail on the head. The big difference with the 3.5L Ford and the 4.7L Dodge is tow rating. On average the Ford equipped with this engine will tow about 4,000# more. You have to pay one way or another.

For us its all about towing. My dad only tows maybe 20% of the time but my BIL and myself are way over 80% of our miles with a trailer behind us. He ordered this truck to our specs because my BIL usually ends up buying it off him after 2-3 years. He may have to fight me for this one though.

Chris

 

[dodge man]

Torque management is kind of a wet blanket on modern cars and trucks. Yes its put on them to add to the durability. Many modern vehicles are making enough power to hurt the transmission and drivetrain componets. On my 2010 Challenger, my wifes 300C and the 2007 Dodge Ram you noticed the torque management on the shifts. It backs off the power during and right after the shifts to take some of the shock off the drive line. On my Challanger I bought a power programmer called the Diablo Predator, and you can firm up the shifts among other things. Its like putting a shift kit on older vehicles. It will now often break the tires loose on the one-two shift.

 

[JESSE1]

My understanding of this engine is that if you drive it like a V6 it'll get great mileage but it has the capability of a V8 when you need the power for pulling. Naturally the mileage drops when you have to put your foot in it. The problem seems to be that the engine is such a great runner that few people treat it like a V6 so the mileage suffers.