Thinking of Purchasing Ford F-150 - Some Questions

[Diamondpilot]

Actually, YOU need to read it again.
He said his average was 15.9 mpg not "13/14". The 13 mpg was in a 4x4 not a 2wd like yours.

Wow, a whole 2.5 mpg more than an 11 yr old V8 truck which probably had 100k more miles on it too!

All it took was millions in unproven technology and a special drivetrain designed to slip since the Ecoboost can't make low end power. Still unimpressed...

Any of the current big V8's make the same or more power with comparable fuel mileage and simple designs.

You don't even have 4WD and only average 15 mpg. What a joke!

On a side note, that "wimpy" V8 4.7l Dakota made 230 hp vs Ford's V8 4.6l making 220hp and the 5.4l making 250hp.

Give it a break. You like Dodge, we know that. The 4.6L Ford and 5.4L both made more HP than you are claiming but HP is all that matters to you since that is all you talk about. Anyone who knows anything about trucks looks a TQ and where its built but we have went over that again and again and you still have not grasped the concept.

My fathers Eco with 13,500 has is a FX4 4x4 with the 3.73 gears. Its done high 18's since new. We do live in the country so not much stop and go. The dash computer he has said its never been off more than 1% and the two times I checked it was like .1 to .2 mpg off, accurate enough for me. Just like the dozen or so other Fords I have owned. Maybe its like he said above and its just Dodge that cant build a honest MPG computer.

Chris

 

[Dmace]

Explain.

its transmission's torque converter, which actively manipulates its lockup characteristics. When you whack the throttle to the floor when holding a fixed gear, it slips to let the revs soar so that the turbos can come on song.

http://blogs.insideline.com/straightline/2011/08/dyno-tested-2011-ford-f-150-ecoboost.html
I've built hundreds of turbo-charged engines. There is just no way to make a small displacement turbo engine make big low end power.

Give it a break. You like Dodge, we know that. The 4.6L Ford and 5.4L both made more HP than you are claiming but HP is all that matters to you since that is all you talk about. Anyone who knows anything about trucks looks a TQ and where its built but we have went over that again and again and you still have not grasped the concept.

And you don't understand the concept of GEARING! Torque means NOTHING!
Horsepower is measured and Torque is a calculated number based solely on rpms. I can make a lawnmower make more "torque" than your diesel truck but it won't pull a trailer as well.
This is also why the 8 speed HEMI with 400 hp will get better fuel mileage than then the Ecoboost plus pull better with a simple NA V8 pushrod engine.

It's not that I like Dodge, I use the HEMI for comparison as it's the best on the market now in my opinion. I love the Ford trucks but their drivetrains are horrible.

 

[Dmace]

The 4.6L Ford and 5.4L both made more HP than you are claiming

Really? Prove it...
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_Dakota#section_2
Dodge Dakota V8 4.6l 230hp
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_F-Series_tenth_generation
F-150 4.6l 231 hp 5.4l 235-260 hp

 

[B7510HSD]

Dyno-Tested: 2011 Ford F-150 Ecoboost
I've built hundreds of turbo-charged engines. There is just no way to make a small displacement turbo engine make big low end power.
And you don't understand the concept of GEARING! Torque means NOTHING!
Horsepower is measured and Torque is a calculated number based solely on rpms. I can make a lawnmower make more "torque" than your diesel truck but it won't pull a trailer as well.
This is also why the 8 speed HEMI with 400 hp will get better fuel mileage than then the Ecoboost plus pull better with a simple NA V8 pushrod engine.

It's not that I like Dodge, I use the HEMI for comparison as it's the best on the market now in my opinion. I love the Ford trucks but their drivetrains are horrible.

We run a small block twin turbo and shoot a 150hp shot of nitrous for a whole shot I believe it does real well with low end torq!!

 

[jejeosborne]

Actually, YOU need to read it again.
He said his average was 15.9 mpg not "13/14". The 13 mpg was in a 4x4 not a 2wd like yours.

Wow, a whole 2.5 mpg more than an 11 yr old V8 truck which probably had 100k more miles on it too!

All it took was millions in unproven technology and a special drivetrain designed to slip since the Ecoboost can't make low end power. Still unimpressed...

Any of the current big V8's make the same or more power with comparable fuel mileage and simple designs.

You don't even have 4WD and only average 15 mpg. What a joke!

On a side note, that "wimpy" V8 4.7l Dakota made 230 hp vs Ford's V8 4.6l making 220hp and the 5.4l making 250hp.

I will say it again, you need to reread the thread. The truck everyone is questioning that something is wrong is compacttractorfan's not thegoose's.
Even a 4x4 should get 19 or better on the highway.

You were wrong on your assumptions of my dodge. I purchased the truck new in 2011 and traded it in last year. It has 77,000 miles on it when I traded it. I am surprised you feel that it would have been worn out and getting poor mileage at 100,000 miles though.

I am happy getting 15.7 with my driving habits in town. As I said, much larger truck getting better mpgs.

 

[jejeosborne]

http://blogs.insideline.com/straightline/2011/08/dyno-tested-2011-ford-f-150-ecoboost.html
I've built hundreds of turbo-charged engines. There is just no way to make a small displacement turbo engine make big low end power.

And you don't understand the concept of GEARING! Torque means NOTHING!
Horsepower is measured and Torque is a calculated number based solely on rpms. I can make a lawnmower make more "torque" than your diesel truck but it won't pull a trailer as well.
This is also why the 8 speed HEMI with 400 hp will get better fuel mileage than then the Ecoboost plus pull better with a simple NA V8 pushrod engine.

It's not that I like Dodge, I use the HEMI for comparison as it's the best on the market now in my opinion. I love the Ford trucks but their drivetrains are horrible.

How many did you build from the castings up, direct injection, variable valve timing, etc? I guess you are saying the ford engineers figured out something you couldn't in "hundreds" of attempts.

You are completely WRONG in your HP and torque comparison. You have it completely backwards. Maybe now I understand why you are often misquoting and not grasping this. A dyno measures torque. HP is calculated from this torque number. The formula is HP = (torque * rpm) / 5252. If you look at a dyno printout, HP and torque are always equal at 5252 rpms. This is why your beloved hemi makes more HP but less torque than the ecoboost. The hemi is revving high to produce HP and the ecoboost is producing torque at much lowers revs. The hemi will benefit with the new 8 speed by allowing the engine to stay at high rpms but who wants to listen to an engine run at high rpms towing all day. I am surprised you don't understand torque is measured and HP is calculated after your "hundreds" of engine builds.

The HP formula also explains why diesel engines HP to torque spread is so wide, very few can rev up to 5252 rpms. Diesel engines benefit from many gears because of their narrow rpm range. Torque at low rpms is good for towing and torque at high rpms is good for racing.

Here is a copy of the two dynos on the same scale. Unfortunately, the dyno isn't showing the hemi below 3700 rpms because that is where it flounders and the ecoboost shines.

 

[jejeosborne]

Really? Prove it...
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_Dakota#section_2
Dodge Dakota V8 4.6l 230hp
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_F-Series_tenth_generation
F-150 4.6l 231 hp 5.4l 235-260 hp

Comparing 2001 engines:
Dodge 4.7 liter 230 HP/ 295 torque
Ford 4.6 liter 248 HP/ 294 torque
Ford 5.4 liter 260 HP/ 350 torque

WTH was I thinking back in 2001? The f150 was better then too. Lol. I just liked the look of the Dakota quad cab and didn't look at mpg.

The point being, why is the 4.7 liter even offered in the ram when it gets worse mileage and less power? Answer: they have to have an upgraded engine it offer.

Here is what is being compared:

 

[TheGoose]

My EB gets about 19-20 on the hwy at freeway speeds (55-65 mph). At 70+ it drops down a little.

It tows really well, it feels like a diesel motor.

 

[jejeosborne]

My EB gets about 19-20 on the hwy at freeway speeds (55-65 mph). At 70+ it drops down a little.

It tows really well, it feels like a diesel motor.

Mine does the same based on the computer. I have yet to run a tank of gas through with the truck empty and not towing anything on the highway. In town I have gotten 17 mpg back and forth to work about 4 miles each direction if I baby it. I get about 15.5 with a heavy foot.

I am making a road trip at the end of the month but will be towing a camper with 3 motorcycles on it with my payload maxed out. Sometime I would like to see what it will do empty. I will be going through the mountains of West Virginia camping, white water rafting, and motorcycle riding. Anxious to see how it does towing in the mountains.

 

[Diamondpilot]

Really? Prove it...
Dodge Dakota - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Dodge Dakota V8 4.6l 230hp
Ford F-Series tenth generation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
F-150 4.6l 231 hp 5.4l 235-260 hp

Everyone knows the early version of these trucks motors made just that but the last versions made 300HP plus. While not at the top of the market it was respectable and always held the claim of making about 80% of the torque below 2,000 rpm.

As for the claim I am a Ford Guy, that is partially true. Right now today if I were to buy a 1/2 ton it would be a F-150, hands down. I currently own 3 vehicles and only one is a Ford and its 7 years old. Been trouble free. The other is a 2 year old BMW which is fun to drive but far from Trouble Free. The other is a 5 year old Nissan that has been 100% trouble free. Not even a light bulb in just about 60,000 miles.

Chris