By on May 31, 2017

[2017 Ford F-150 King Ranch, Image: Steph Willems/The Truth About Cars]

2017 Ford F-150 4x4 King Ranch

3.5-liter turbocharged V6, DOHC (375 @ 5,000 rpm; 470 lb-ft @ 3,500 rpm)

Ten-speed automatic, four-wheel drive

17 city / 23 highway / 20 combined (EPA Rating, MPG)

13.6 city / 10.3 highway / 12.1 combined (NRCan Rating, L/100km)

17.4 mpg [13.5 L/100 km] (Observed)

Base Price: $55,505 (U.S) / $67,099 (Canada)

As Tested: $68,250 (U.S.) / $82,469 (Canada)

Prices include $1,250 destination charge in the United States and $1,800 for freight, PDI, and A/C tax in Canada.

It’s better than a 1937 Nash Lafayette, though fuel economy — in real world driving — seems to be slightly less, if I’m to believe the results of the Mobilgas Economy Run.

I’m referring to my great-grandfather’s 1937 (or ’38) Lafayette, a fixture of my mother’s otherwise carless childhood in postwar Baby Boom Alberta. What brought up this unlikely comparison, you ask? What could a technology-laden 2017 Ford F-150 King Ranch pickup possibly have in common with a six-cylinder Depression-era sedan?

Running boards. In my mother’s earliest memories, the running boards of her granddad’s car were fixed, spanning the distance between two fenders dulled by Prairie dust and providing easy access to the spartan cabin of a long-lived touring car. In the Ford’s case, they’re electrically operated, lowering into place upon the opening of any of the pickup’s doors, then receding out of sight below the rockers, propelled by engineering ingenuity and cash.

It’s an option I’ve always found ridiculous, especially in a climate where road salt is a depressing reality. I like a fixed board. Nothing fancy. However, to my mom, who I chauffeured to a Mother’s Day meal in the King Ranch, that feature alone was enough to make her consider pulling a bank job to meet the truck’s MSRP.

With this particular truck, payload capacity and off-road prowess is an afterthought.

[2017 Ford F-150 King Ranch, Image: Steph Willems/The Truth About Cars]

Who else absolutely loved the King Ranch? Well, my sister, who delighted in the optional dual sunroofs (and aforementioned running boards). Frankly, everyone — myself included — appreciated the genuine wood trim, which glowed with the rich amber hue of aged bourbon and blended well with the vehicle’s Mesa Brown leather. To warrant its price tag, traditional luxury flourishes are a must, even in a truck.

Let’s not forget my two nephews, who made the SuperCrew cabin’s spacious backseat their own personal playground, leaving me in mortal terror of a pebble lodged in a shoe tread scoring the leather. This ain’t a vinyl-clad XL. Every jack and plug they could desire awaited them on the center console, had they thought to bring a laptop or tablet.

We could have made smoothies together.

Yes, crew cab trucks have come a long way since being the domain of construction workers and logging crews, and with good reason: the buying public demands it. If you can afford to fuel up the beast, who doesn’t want to command the road (and weather and terrain) from a lofty and plush pickup perch?

[2017 Ford F-150 King Ranch, Image: Steph Willems/The Truth About Cars]

To be fair, the King Ranch sits well below the summit of F-150 luxury (Platinum and Limited hold the No. 1 and 2 spots), though its U.S. MSRP of $55,505 (a whopping $67,099 north of the border) after delivery sits on the exclusive side of a significant price threshold. In Canada, where the price is currently subject to a $7,500 delivery allowance, the King Ranch trim is only available with four-wheel drive. This tester inflated the trim’s lofty price tag by over $14,000 CAD through the addition of almost every available option, topping out at $82,469 CAD ($68,250 USD) after delivery — basically, a Limited experience in J.R. Ewing-approved surroundings.

While some of those options — glass canopy, magic running boards and chrome, chrome, chrome — amount to non-essential ego food, a number of add-ons served a more useful purpose. First and foremost was an available powertrain upgrade that makes this vehicle a class-leader in technology.

The F-150’s 3.5-liter Ecoboost V6 has received a power boost for 2017, upping horsepower to 375 and torque to 470 lb-ft — more than enough for serious towing, which this vehicle was outfitted to do. Harnessing that power is a new 10-speed automatic jointly developed by GM and Ford. The 10-speed is one smooth unit, delivering multi-cog downshifts without abruptness or hunting, and upshifting quickly (while always skipping 2nd gear) in a bid to seek out elusive fuel economy. Poking about at 20 miles per hour, the F-150’s tranny has already achieved 6th gear. At 40 mph, it’s in 8th. The lofty 10th gear can be accessed at speeds as low as 44 mph.

(Does the wide gear ratio spread actually result in improved fuel economy? More on that later.)

[2017 Ford F-150 King Ranch, Image: Steph Willems/The Truth About Cars]

While gee-whiz luxury items are nice to have, it’s the gadgets designed to keep you out of trouble that hold the greatest value. Among the options on this tester were blind spot monitoring, adaptive cruise control, and a 360-degree camera with split-screen display (among a myriad of standard safety aids) — all designed to keep insurance adjusters at bay.

If all those exterior views, plus the massive split side mirrors, aren’t enough to guide you into a parking spot, Ford’s Active Park Assist will take over the job. To date, no pickup feature wows quite like a seemingly possessed steering wheel. Out of sight below the pickup, the optional FX4 Off-Road Package quietly kept the King Ranch’s vulnerable (and expensive) underbelly shielded from angry rocks.

One person particularly enamored with the King Ranch was my godson’s dad, who, on the first day I had this tester, compelled me to haul a 15-foot T-Rex in its 5.5-foot bed. You get requests like this the moment friends hear you’re no longer driving a compact car. It’s just the way it is. However, the optional side steps and Ford’s available pull-put tailgate step came in handy for this awkward task, as did the airport runway-levels of available lighting sources.

The laws of science demanded our dino friend overhang the bed just a wee bit, as you can see below.

[2017 Ford F-150 King Ranch, Image: Steph Willems/The Truth About Cars]

On the road, the King Ranch performed admirably when I wasn’t monitoring dinosaur tail positioning or answering “What does that do?” Power was plentiful and, thanks to the slick tranny, I wasn’t left waiting for that kickdown punch. Nor is the Ecoboost slow to spool up its turbines.

That said, the start/stop system, given the size of engine being jolted to life, made itself more conspicuous than desired. A kill switch allows anyone to remove this fuel-saving annoyance from their lives. I kept it activated. Suffice it to say, Ford’s Sync 3 remains light years ahead of past Blue Oval infotainment systems, and the pickup gets top marks for logical button and switch placement, as well as the instrument cluster display’s ease of use.

[2017 Ford F-150 King Ranch, Image: Steph Willems/The Truth About Cars]

No driver who finds themselves behind the wheel of this particular truck will want for comfort. Frankly, I find it difficult to believe anyone could be unsettled on this infinitely adjustable leather. While the worst roads did make themselves felt in the cabin, the suspension adequately tamed the rest. I should point out that while the aluminum body exhibited no rattles, creaks, or groans, the far-right dash-mounted vent cover kept up quite a squeaky symphony. Irksome, that.

Unfortunately, no opportunities arose to test the King Ranch’s rock-crawling abilities or hill descent prowess. And, at over $82,000, I’d probably need a white pill with a name ending in “pam” before attempting such a feat. I did journey down a remote Quebec logging road, however — the sole instance the pickup’s transfer case found itself in four-wheel high — with zero drama. Not that you’d expect any in truck-friendly environs like that.

[2017 Ford F-150 King Ranch, Image: Steph Willems/The Truth About Cars]

In fact, the only real surprise turned out to be the fuel economy. This particular tester carried an EPA rating of 17 miles per gallon in the city, 23 on the highway and 20 combined. After a week of highway-heavy driving, and with at least half a mind on frugality, the combined mileage returned was 17.4 mpg.

For all the wizardry going on below the hood, that’s a touch disappointing. To compare, the King Ranch’s standard 5.0-liter V8 is rated at 15 city/21 highway/17 combined. At least the Ecoboost takes regular unleaded.

While this rig’s lofty sticker price is far removed from the average buyer’s budget, its content and capabilities show just how far the domestic truck has come — and just how far automakers are willing to go to satisfy every whim of the buying public. Trucks make money, and high-zoot models like this rake it in with meatier hands.

It’s too bad about the fuel economy. Still, buyers with easy access to 80-plus grand aren’t likely to find themselves concerned with the cost of filling a 36-gallon tank. In King Ranch country, the drivers are also more than likely to have something small and sporty on the side. I believe, in J.R.’s case, it was an Allanté.

[2017 Ford F-150 King Ranch, Image: Steph Willems/The Truth About Cars]

[Images: © 2017 Steph Willems/The Truth About Cars]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

97 Comments on “2017 Ford F-150 4×4 King Ranch Review – Southfork Living...”


  • avatar
    FreedMike

    Here’s your 2017 Town Car, folks.

    • 0 avatar

      Could you base a limo on a pickup design?

      I seem to remember the current Presidential limo is based on a truck chassis, so maybe that should be the new trend.

      • 0 avatar
        FreedMike

        If you bought a full trunk-style cover for the bed, this would actually make a sensational limo. Check that back seat.

      • 0 avatar
        05lgt

        Or just put a roof over the limo trunk, give it an aspirational name to make more people buy it … out-doorsy, athletic, capable … I know: Sports Utility Vehicle! Sell a luxed up version to a few rappers… rake in the money. It could work.

      • 0 avatar
        duffman13

        hey do make pick-up limos. We had one when I went to prom as a kid. We’re not from a redneck area either, we just thought it would be cooler than a towncar and the other SUV-based ones were all booked.

      • 0 avatar
        dukeisduke

        My daughter and I were driving back the other day from an all-state high school band competition in Austin, and she flipped when she saw a six-door Super Duty (it made such an impression that she mentioned it again yesterday). I told her I didn’t know who built it, but I assumed it was the guy in Oklahoma that builds “new” Excursions (including six-door models) using newer Super Duty chassis. She thought it was ridiculous. She tells me her first new drive after college will be a Jeep Wrangler, and she’ll be crushed if they drop the manual option.

  • avatar
    Big Al from Oz

    Were I’m currently working we have a fleet of aluminium F150 wunder trucks.

    We operate in a mainly urban setting and the FE we are returning is wanting.

    Also, the interior looks like some thing from China, real crappy plastic that should only be used for garbage bins and Tupperware.

    I really don’t know how the author can use the word luxury. Even a Ram has a far plusher ride.

    Mutton done up as lamb.

    • 0 avatar
      JohnTaurus

      Even the Ram? Wow. That’s an amazing observation, absolutely spot on, as usual. Nothing, and I mean nothing gets by you.

      The Ram has coil springs in the back, others don’t, genius.

      It pays for it in overal capability, but is complemented by the same people who in turn try to shame those who buy a big truck when they don’t “need” it (because everyone buys only what they need, not what they want, which is why the Kia Rio is the best selling car ever). And who would want a smooth ride in a truck? Someone who uses it to haul and tow his massive ego, but little else.

      I find it hard to believe you found things to complain about in a truck you hate and constantly lie and make things up about. Its totally unexpected. I bet your BT50 rides perfect, has plastics from and S-Class and will get 34 mpg flat out towing a house with an F-150 inside.

    • 0 avatar
      dwford

      Yeah, this interior just looks like the cheap plastics it is. Sad.

      • 0 avatar
        Big Al from Oz

        dwford,
        The exterior has grown on me a little.

        Worse than the F150 interior is the Expedition. It is trash.

        I can see why the “locals” mainly drive new Nissan Patrols and Landcruisers.

    • 0 avatar
      Michael S.

      I’m going to assume these work trucks are XLs or XLTs. If so, the plastics in the Lariats and up are of a higher quality. Basing your opinion of all F150 interiors on fleet specials is a bit dishonest. Even the Rams in lower trims have the cheap stuff.

  • avatar
    kefkafloyd

    Do electric / hiding running boards improve aero (and therefore fuel economy)?

    • 0 avatar
      Scoutdude

      I’m sure they do even if it is minimal.

    • 0 avatar
      zamoti

      If they do, you’ll end up losing later on when the board hardware dries out and they freeze into the down position. Pay note to Expeditions and Navigators and you’ll see many of them locked into the down position. My Navigator has struggled with them, but I suppose all you really have to do is smear some grease on the moving parts every three months and you’re good. A trip through the dunes got a lot of sand jammed in mine; the grease helped to keep it there.
      Those running boards DO draw a lot of attention from people who find them fascinating, but solid boards would probably be fine. I will admit I do like them, but the moving parts should probably be better protected from the elements.

  • avatar
    ajla

    Needs more 6.2L.

    I got to drive a 5.0L F-150 Supercab XLT last weekend. Zero chance I’d prefer the V6 options over that engine.

  • avatar
    427Cobra

    … saw a Super Duty at the dealership when I was walking the dog the other night… $78k… and it was NOT the top of the line. OOF. But whatever… to each his own. Last year, I bought a nicely-equipped 2016 Ram 2500 ccsb 4×4 with the 6.4L hemi for $35k. Still a lot of coin, but a pretty good deal comparatively. Yes, there are hard, cheap-looking plastics everywhere… but it’s comfortable, quiet, and roomy. I get about 11 mpg around town & 18-20 mpg on the highway… and that will likely improve a bit- only have 3600 miles on it at present. It’s easy to spend a whole lotta money… but with a little work (and a few concessions), a good deal can be had. A lot of people asked me why I got a 3/4 ton instead of a half ton… told them because I could get a better deal! Go figure.

    • 0 avatar
      Blackcloud_9

      Just out of curiosity, was that USD or CAD? Don’t get me wrong when I saw the as-tested price paired with the line “the King Ranch sits well below the summit of F-150 luxury (Platinum and Limited hold the No. 1 and 2 spots)” – made me do the “Really?” double-take.

    • 0 avatar

      The 6.4 ram 3/4 tons are a great deal and ride much better then the competition.

      • 0 avatar
        Dave M.

        Unless you inherit the infamous “death wobble” and expect your frame not to rust through. Happened to a family member with both his Rams. YMMV.

        While a KR would be silly for my daily 50-mile urban-suburban commute, you can bet I’ll take a closer look when it’s time to retire to Hill Country and I can mosey around town. I love the KR…

        • 0 avatar

          I’m guessing 2nd gen ram? The 3rd gens beds rot but I haven’t seen frame issues. Death wobble is pretty common on basically every 4wd with a solid front axle, real common on the coil spring super duties.

  • avatar
    30-mile fetch

    You can put King and Ranch in the name, you can give it a locking rear differential, you can adorn it in the costume jewelry of fake chrome, and you can coat the interior in leather from relatives of the cattle in the trailer being hauled behind you, but a real truck does *not* have a console shifter, am I right?

    Actually, I’d prefer the console shift. I don’t have any constructive criticism for this type of vehicle. I don’t tow, and my hauling needs are very minor. This is too big and pretty to be useful in the backcountry.

    • 0 avatar
      bumpy ii

      Truth. Floor shifter or walk.

      • 0 avatar
        Lou_BC

        Floor shifter? There isn’t a 1/2 ton made with a manual transmission. I prefer the column shifter with the 40/20/40 bench. I’m not fond of the huge centre consoles.

    • 0 avatar
      Blackcloud_9

      Not sure why you call it “fake chrome”. Chrome is chrome whether it’s applied to metal or plastic. Now, the chrome may not hold up as well due to the more flexible nature of plastic or if the chroming process isn’t as robust but it is still chrome.

      • 0 avatar
        30-mile fetch

        You got me there, you’re right. I do find the implied craftsmanship and durability of these huge ornamental chromed plastic grills to be somewhat disingenuous and ironic, though.

        • 0 avatar
          JohnTaurus

          They’ve been plastic since the 1970s on all trucks. What possible difference could it make, other than being lighter and rust proof today compared to the 1960s and previous?

          You can get the column shift and black plastic grill on a base model, or a body color grill with a column on mid-level trims. Why do you need one in the highest end models? You plan to haul 3 across up front regularly? That’s the only practical reason for not having a console shift.

          Don’t give me the “takes up too much console space” crap. Even with it, Ford’s console is more useful and holds more than a GM truck which sticks with 1978 column shifters, except made of plastic. I also don’t bump it when going for something like the vents or infotainment/HVAC like I do in my cousin’s 2014 Silverado. I’ve smacked my hand on it more than once, and he has too when he was driving. Its not a huge problem, of course, but the point is, a column shifter can get in the way, especially when it sticks out and blends into the rest of the black plastic on his LT’s dash.

          • 0 avatar
            30-mile fetch

            I’m joking about the shifter, it’s a thing around here.

            I was originally joking about the chrome as well, it’s not too bad on the half tons. The Super Dutys, though, are ridiculous. The grills are fifteen feet high and slathered up to look shiny and butch. I don’t like the aesthetics of it. I know the designers have their work cut out for them trying to style a wall like that, but god their efforts have been ugly.

          • 0 avatar
            Carlson Fan

            ” also don’t bump it when going for something like the vents or infotainment/HVAC like I do in my cousin’s 2014 Silverado”

            Have about 320K miles between my Tahoe and now gone GMC Sierra and have to say have never done that once. They’re not sports cars, put the shifter on the column and give me more space between the buckets for my can of Mountain Dew!

  • avatar
    Kyree S. Williams

    To be honest, this is probably a better luxury car than the sparsely-equipped 5-Series or E-Class you’d get for the same money.

    • 0 avatar
      brawnychicken333

      Truth. Also gets no stink eye from employees.

      • 0 avatar

        Knowing what these cost I was surprised when an old coworker showed up in one of these (well platinum) he’s the manager of a body shop and I wonder if the guys under him wondered how much he was getting paid when he traded in his 99 for it.

      • 0 avatar
        Kyree S. Williams

        Right? Since I was at the Lincoln dealership (yelling at them *again*), it occurred to me that the biggest thing against the Continental is the fact that you can walk across the lot to the Ford store, where you’ll be able to buy an F-150 King Ranch, Platinum or Limited that costs quite a bit less than a Continental, dollar-for-dollar, but is about as luxurious, far more capable., and has stronger resale values. I mean, I get that the Continental is an entirely different class of vehicle, but I’ve got to admit that even I would consider an F-150 before buying one.

        • 0 avatar
          bumpy ii

          Uh oh. Did your ride turn into a MKSuck?

          • 0 avatar
            gtemnykh

            Yeah, do tell Kyree!

          • 0 avatar
            Kyree S. Williams

            When I bought the car at Joe Cooper Ford / Lincoln of Edmond, it was advertised as certified pre-owned, on the dealership’s site, on Cars.com and on AutoTrader.com.

            A couple of days after I bought the car, my best friend told me I should have gotten some CPO paperwork, so I called the dealership to ask if it really was certified. They hemmed and hawed, but said nothing, so at that point I realized it probably wasn’t actually certified…and then took a screencast on my computer for proof that they’d *said* it was certified, and put it on YouTube and Facebook.

            Well, Joe Cooper had recently bought this particular store. It had previously been Reynolds Ford / Lincoln of Edmond. So when Joe Cooper bought it, since it was their first Lincoln store (they already had a couple of other Ford-only stores), it meant that they had to go through an approval process with Lincoln to be able to certify their cars. Meaning that my car, and the other eight on their website listed as certified…weren’t. They got in trouble for that with Lincoln.

            After I showed them proof of the video, they acquiesced and agreed to certify my car as soon as they were able. That was in late-February. Over the last three months, they’ve given me the runaround whenever I asked if they could certify cars yet and if not when they’d be able to. They also don’t like answering the phone—even though the Lincoln showroom sits empty of customers most of the time—so I finally went up there and got a bit loud and demanding. They blamed it on getting a new GM for the Lincolns side, and then said they’d just go ahead and pay for it and process the CPO paperwork (wasn’t that what they were supposed to be doing the whole time?).

            As for the MKS’s reliability, it’s a great car when it works, but the electronics architecture feels like it’s from the same team as Windows Vista. The car has a lot to do every time it turns on, and occasionally it skips a step…like moving the memory-enabled steering column into position or powering up the instrument panel. Yesterday, it put the HVAC on max heat and refused to accept input until I yanked the battery. The key fob completely stopped operating under its own power earlier this month, forcing me to have to use the slot in the glove compartment to start it, and the external key pad to lock and unlock it. They replaced the key fob. Also, the remote start is finicky, and I know I’m using it properly.

          • 0 avatar
            gtemnykh

            Jeez sorry to hear about the troubles. Almost sounds European!

    • 0 avatar
      FreedMike

      Depends on how you’d define “better luxury car,” though.

      If that means “more size and more stuff,” then the F-150 definitely has the edge.

      If that means “something an enthusiast would enjoy driving,” even a base, 2.0T E Class has it all over any truck.

      • 0 avatar
        JohnTaurus

        Actually, they’re virtually the same in 0-60, and some enthusiasts may care more about towing their boat, going to a remote location, driving in heavy snow or other conditions like muddy, rutted rual roads, or hauling people with plenty of room, in which case the F-150 wins because the 2.0T sedan can’t do any of that. Have you sat in the back seat of a crew cab F-150? It makes a Town Car feel like a Focus, its an enormous amount of leg room, and although the seats aren’t as reclined, they’re far from uncomfortable.

        If car-like agility/handling and badge snobbery is all you care about as an enthusiast, then of course a truck can’t compete. Not everyone has such a narrow definition of what they want from their high end vehicle purchase.

        All I see here is people complaining about how many of these high end trucks they see, so obviously they strike a chord with many buyers.

      • 0 avatar
        bikegoesbaa

        I know many enthusiasts who would find a 375 horsepower boosted pickup truck to be quite enjoyable to drive.

        • 0 avatar
          Mandalorian

          This is exactly it. These are not cheap, but they are a great value for money. Luxury sedans are pretty terrible in comparison.

          There seems to be some differentiation between someone who is enthusiastic about automobiles and an “Enthusiast”.

          • 0 avatar
            Kyree S. Williams

            “There seems to be some differentiation between someone who is enthusiastic about automobiles and an ‘Enthusiast’.”

            I think they’re the same thing. It’s just that enthusiasts come in other flavors than the CRX/E46/brown-manual-diesel-loving set. As we’ve seen here, some people are enthusiasts who love large floaty FWD cars like my MKS, or anything with a 3800 in it. Some enthusiasts love the newer Bimmers, even if the steering is duller than before, because they’re sharply-styled and tech-laden. And some people are enthusiasts who drop $60K on a really nice truck. It all depends.

      • 0 avatar
        Kyree S. Williams

        I don’t know about that. The 2.0T E-Class, nothing against it, is kind of dull. The E-Class has never been all that athletic outside of AMG editions, but it does feel vault-like and well-built, and never hurts for power. And unlike the E38 and even E60, where buying a 5-Series of any kind, got you a proper sports sedan, the 5-Series of today feels more like a German Buick. You kind of have to tick the right combination of options boxes (or just buy an M5) to get an “enthusiast” car in the sense of driving dynamics. Otherwise, it’s just a really comfortable, tech-laden RWD ride.

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al from Oz

      Kyree,
      WTF?

      Have you been in one, let alone driven one?

      They are cheap as inside. Don’t confuse bling and luxury.

      Better value than a BMW???? Wow!

  • avatar
    JohnTaurus

    Damn, that gas mileage is awful. 17? Unacceptable.

    Why, back before trucks got HUGE AND CRAZY BIG like today, they at least got respectable mileage.

    Aww, hell, I’m one for numbers. Lets compare, shall we?

    1992 Ford F-150 5.8L (top engine choice) 4×4: 12 mpg

    What? But, its a big V-8, with tons of power. Way more than a wimpy turbo 6. Wait. 200 hp?

    12 mpg with 200 hp, or 17 mpg with 375 hp. Which is worse? Gosh darn technology, get off my lawn.

    Or, you could get 17 in the 1992, just gotta go with a 145 hp 6 that, while reliable as the sun, returned no better than 15 mpg in my dad’s bought-new 1992 F-150 Custom (trim line, it wasn’t customized Al) 4.9L/5spd regular cab 2wd. This is the same driver who coaxed 18 mpg avg hwy (70 +/- mph road trip, and not towing) from his 1999 7.3L F-250 2wd.

    What did Jack say about context?

    • 0 avatar

      In context the 3.5 gets the same real world MPG as the 5.0 so I would save some cash and get the 5.0. Against the competition this is about right. The 5.3 Chevy is about the same the 4.3 chevy pulls about 1 MPG better. The hemi is slightly worse and the 5.7 Tundra is a lot worse. The 2.7 Eco boost does about 1 mpg better and the Ram with the penta star does about 2-3 mpg better but your going down the capability scale quite a bit for that one.

      • 0 avatar
        JohnTaurus

        So, in other words, its on par with the class.

        My cousin has a not-aluminum F-150 3.5L EcoBoost 4wd, he got around 23 on the highway (unloaded), but when needed, has the torque and lower to tow his rather large tractor just fine. Sure it drinks the gas then, but it allows him to leave the 7.3L F-350 parked since the half ton can do the job, which tends to drink fuel like that no matter if towing or not.

        The F-350 is kept around because it does tow his huge 5th wheel camper (one of the biggest I’ve seen), he’s not stupid enough to try that with the half ton.

        In context, the EcoBoost F-150 is more capable than most V-8 engines, doesn’t require premium fuel, and can get V-6 mileage when you keep your foot out of it. Its obviously a good solution for many truck buyers, given its continued popularity.

      • 0 avatar
        Carlson Fan

        “In context the 3.5 gets the same real world MPG as the 5.0 ”

        Except the 3.5 will tow circles around the 5.0 when you’ve got 3 tons or better hooked to the back. If I was getting a Ford 1/2 ton PU I wouldn’t even consider the 5.0, pointless motor IMO.

        • 0 avatar
          Kyree S. Williams

          They’re probably going to discontinue it.

        • 0 avatar
          Lou_BC

          I know a few fellows with the F150 EB 3.5 and one says mpg is great and the other says it is on par with his other trucks. The guy who loves the mpg says he is careful and tries to get good mpg. His best mpg is around 5 mpg better than the best with my 5.4 at 20.4 mpg (US gallon).

          The rental I had was on par with my 5.4 mpg wise and that was with me treating the truck like, well, a rental.

      • 0 avatar
        ponchoman49

        I was pretty impressed with the mileage of the GM 5.3 in the 2017 GMC Yukon SLT we had for a rental a few weeks back. It averaged 16.7 and actually saw 22.3 on one highway stint going 70 MPH for about 80 miles. A rental 2016 Expedition with the 3.5 EB only saw 15.2 average MPG, 18.9 on the same highway run. It was an interesting comparison between 2 competing vehicles.

    • 0 avatar
      30-mile fetch

      Indeed there has been much progress, but I’m not sure Steph is arguing that 17 is bad for the capability so much as it being far shy of what is expected given the EPA rating on the Monroney. Steph’s experience may not be representative, but if it is, achieving the city mpg rating during mostly-highway travel suggests some…creativity behind the 20mpg combined rating. It’s worth noting in a review as long as perspective isn’t lost.

      • 0 avatar
        Lou_BC

        When someone complains about mpg with a 375 hp 4,700 lb vehicle they need to post a list of other 4 door vehicles with that kind of HP and better mpg.

        My 1990 F250 4×4 with 5.0 had 195 hp and at best yielded around 14-15 mpg.

        Up until putting 10 ply all terrains on my truck, exceeding mpg ratings was rather easy.

        • 0 avatar
          30-mile fetch

          When the observed mileage falls far shy of the rated, I don’t think they do. Hyundai fell into hot water for smaller proportional discrepancies than that.

    • 0 avatar
      FreedMike

      The F-150’s mileage is probably comparable to an old-school Town Car, and if you think about it, both vehicles have the same mission…but this particular F-150 would probably run rings around any Town Car.

      In that context, 17 mpg isn’t that bad at all.

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al from Oz

      It was highway miles, driven economically.

      They are known as an EcoThirst for a reason.

      I’d say my Ram I had when I eas in Seattle was giving better FE with the Hemi.

      The interior is superior to the aluminium wunder trux. As was the ride.

  • avatar
    jh26036

    Does Ford stack on a top trim every other model year? What’s next, the F150 Ultra Diamond? Maybe they can bring back the Eddie Bauer name so it can remind me of the 90s.

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al From 'Murica

      “Maybe they can bring back the Eddie Bauer name so it can remind me of the 90s.”

      Alanis Morisette and Cranberries greatest hits CD not included.

    • 0 avatar
      Scoutdude

      Yes what better way to shame someone who has to have the latest and greatest than by making their trim level second and introducing a new top level. It represents a return to the basics. Bel-Air was the top Chevy for a number of years, then they added the Impala above it and the Bel-Air was now the mid range. Fast forward a couple of years and the Impala was in the middle and the Caprice the top trim. Ford did the same thing with Custom once being the top trim and eventually ending up at the bottom with the LTD at the top.

      • 0 avatar
        TMA1

        Isn’t that what BMW did, renumbering all their cars? What, you won’t replace your 328 with another 328? Fine, we’ll change it to 330, and then everyone will know what a cheapskate you are if you don’t upgrade.

    • 0 avatar
      JohnTaurus

      You can get a Lariat with the tan lower exterior and tan interior, its priced below this model.

      If you could rake in profit by the truck load by creating different versions of the same popular product, wouldn’t you? Lets ask Porsche about its 911 and how that works for them.

      • 0 avatar
        Kyree S. Williams

        Indeed. And you can get the Lariat with the 2.7-liter TT. the 5.0-liter or the 3.5-liter TT. You can also get leather, a sunroof, proximity key, BLIS, and the LED headlamps on the Lariat. The 2.7 is well-suited to any F-150 that doesn’t do heavy-duty towing or payloads. I think the Lariat fits most people’s needs.

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      “Does Ford stack on a top trim every other model year?”

      Nope.

      King Ranch, Platinum, and Limited are as high as it goes.

      I like the Platinum over the King Ranch since I’m not a fan of the wannabe cowboy motif.

  • avatar
    redapple

    Cartoon size pickups that dont even fit in a parking spot. Add a V-6 turbo and you get the same mileage as a V-8.
    No way.
    Thanks EPA Jag offs.

    • 0 avatar
      JohnTaurus

      Lol, this truck is at most 7 inches bigger (not wider) than its equivalent in 2001. That’s SO HUGE! How big is a new Accord compared to one from another era? Is it cartoon sized? Hell, i bet a Fit is bigger than a early Accord in some ways. But, it goes to support your bias, so its fine, that 7 inches destroys everything in its path and turns a little truck into a military grade 6×6 duce-and-a-half monstrosity that flattens Prius C’s like a pop can.

      He didn’t compare EPA estimates to EPA estimates, he compared his OBSERVED MPG with EPA estimates for the 5.0L. But, it goes to support your bias, so its fine.

      • 0 avatar
        Scoutdude

        And though he didn’t specifically state it, it sounds like he filled it with regular rather than the premium that is recommended and required to get the advertised HP, TQ and MPG numbers.

        Also how much time was spent with the engine idling getting 0 mpg while showing off all the features to multiple groups of people?

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al From 'Murica

      Yet I park mine in several parking lots on a daily basis. Wierd

  • avatar
    RHD

    This reminds me of an old Cuban joke.
    The judge is arraigning a defendant, who is accused of overloading his car.

    “It says here you had 19 people on board! How in the world did you manage that?!”

    “Easy, Your Honor. Three in the front, four in the back, two in the trunk, and five on each side!”

  • avatar
    SD 328I

    I find the Ecoboost will get you V8 mpg when working like a V8. The difference is when you are cruising, you get far better mpg.

    When hauling, the 2.7L got us about 15 mpg, which is about 1mpg better than the 5.0L we have.

    However, when cruising on the return trip, we got almost 25 mpg, the V8 could barely do 19.

    • 0 avatar
      Carlson Fan

      You just proved my point above that the 5.0 V8 is a pointless motor next to either twin turbo V6. Your observations and exactly what I get when I talk to people that I know who actually own these trucks.

      • 0 avatar
        stingray65

        The V-8 isn’t pointless to those who are still afraid turbo-motors will blow up, or just have inaccurate perceptions that a V-6 just can’t possibly be as strong as a V-8. Just because your customer is irrational doesn’t mean you don’t want to sell him/her a truck. About the only rational reason for the V-8 is the sound – hard to beat the sound of a good V-8.

      • 0 avatar
        supadoopa2

        Every time I get on the gas, I’m glad I got the Coyote. It’s music to my ears.

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al From 'Murica

      People act like the ecoboost motors are something out of an 80’s exotic while the Coyote is a 302 with a Holley double pumper on it. I mean the only real difference tech wise is the 2 turbos.

      • 0 avatar
        DenverMike

        Ford will have to try harder to talk me out of the V8. Hey maybe I’m not looking for the tow king or mpg queen of 1/2 ton pickups. The Fast Lane Truck (youtube) requested the Coyote F-150 several times to test and had to practically beg Ford to provide it. Ford gave in and guess which F-150 they preferred over all??

        Yep the Coyote! I mean replacing cylinders with turbos is just a means of chasing one’s own tail. The Coyote is being kept simplistic and that’s just they way I want it anyway. No “cylinder deactivation”, direct injection, start/stop foolery, etc. And no premium unleaded ever.

        I’m by no means afraid of turbos, ask my Power Stroke and SVO. But in a 1/2 ton I just want a normal V8 even if “handicapped” to sell more V6TTs to the unsuspecting.

        When there’s something better than V8s, all things considered, it’ll be all over it.

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      The 5.0 V8 exists for the “loud pipes annoy lives” crowd.

  • avatar
    Carlson Fan

    Double post.

    • 0 avatar

      For towing the 3,5 is great. But I prefer the 5.0 for every day driving. Friends of my inlaws tow a 5th wheel with a 3.5 F 150 and say it does well. My inlaws use a Tundra 5.7 for the same size 5th and it also does really well.

  • avatar
    whitworth

    “That said, the start/stop system, given the size of engine being jolted to life, made itself more conspicuous than desired.”

    I absolutely hate this feature, to the point where I could even say its a possible deal breaker. I hope it’s not something that has to be be reset every time the car is started like it is on Mercedes.

    I’ll pay the 50 cents extra on my monthly gas bill not to feel like the car is stalling out at every stoplight.

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      I was next to a new F150 the other day and that stop/start feature startled me when the light turned green. I wasn’t expecting to hear an engine start.

    • 0 avatar
      N8iveVA

      I have a 2017 Escape Titanium and i have to hit the off button EVERY time after i start it. I hate it. If Ford doesn’t put a software fix in to make it so i can go into the menu and “permanently” turn it off, this will likely be my last Ford.

    • 0 avatar
      Dan

      Stop start is idiotic. The only time you idle long enough to waste a meaningful amount of gas is parked, and in park it doesn’t work. Killing the air conditioning 30 seconds at a time at red lights and the power steering in drive through lines is just obnoxious for the sake of being obnoxious. I have read that the cost to add stop start is in the order of a few hundred dollars per vehicle. Three bucks of gas will idle a little V6 like these for four hours. Do the math.

      That said, it can be fixed fairly easily, either with Forscan or by taking the top of the dash apart and jumping two wires behind the disable button.

  • avatar
    EBFlex

    Egoboost garbage. Anyone that buys a high strung V6 truck that drinks fuel like a V8 needs to have their head examined.

    The only engine worth buying is the 5.0L…..if you insist on having a POS Ford “truck”. The other entries in the segment offer you much better value for dollar. Ford’s are overpriced and underdeliver. Unless you like your truck made out of beer cans….

    • 0 avatar
      Frylock350

      Its hardly high strung, the 3.5TT actually has a lower redline than the 5.0 :)

      • 0 avatar
        N8iveVA

        Don’t feed the troll.

      • 0 avatar

        It’s not high strung if anything it’s the opposite. It behaves more like a diesel with low end torque. The torque on the 5,0 rises steadily thru the RPM range the eco boost hits early at 2,500 then tapers off. This make the eco boost the better truck engine but from a driver feel, especially when driving hard in a light truck like a reg cab the 5.0 feels better and more like a muscle car.

    • 0 avatar
      ponchoman49

      We just finished with two rental vehicles the past two weeks. The first was a 2017 GMC Yukon with the 5.3 V8 tied to a 6 speed automatic and 3.08 rear gears. The second was a 2017 Ford Expedition with the 3.5 EB V6 and 6 speed auto tied to 3.55 rear gears. I was expecting to be blown away by the Ford’s highly touted 3.5 mill but the GMC’s 5.3 actually outperformed it and returned superior mileage to boot!

      The Yukon did 0-60 in 6.8 seconds and sounded great. It also easily got 22.3 highway MPG and averaged 16.7 in everyday driving.

      The Expedition did 0-60 in 7.6 seconds, was smooth and quiet enough in driving but only managed 15.2 MPG and 19 on the open road. A bit disappointing. Both had over 8K miles on the clock!

  • avatar
    cdrmike

    Sorry, I don’t yet trust a Ford to start/stop when it feels like it. I got the V8 and am satisfied with the choice. But, I admit that the V-6 seemed much quicker with the turbos, and I have a really hard time getting mine to 16mpg under any conditions. Other comments spot on about comfort.

  • avatar
    Big Al from Oz

    Here is one of America’s top selling vehicles.

    Look at the price, quality, FE and size.

    Add Donnie’s whining about why there is a deficit in vehicle trade with the German’s. The protected F150 is a classic example of an out of balance US auto industry.

    It not hard to realise the US produces uncompetitive vehicles for export overall.

    These vehicles are only very competive in the US due to the protection offered to them. They will sell in large numbers without protection and be cheaper.

    Outside of NA they are niche, global competitive vehicles abound. Why?

    Luxury? Don’t confuse luxury and bling. If this King Ranch is luxury then most Chinese and many Korean vehicles are luxury products.

    • 0 avatar
      DenverMike

      @BAFO – What “protects” F-150 sales, other than buyers love them, they start reasonably priced, huge rebates, great “resale” and over all value??

      And are the Tundra and Titan offered any less “protection”???

      Is there something “protecting” Coca Cola?

      Having to deal with converting to RHD, crazy high “import tariffs”, ridiculously expensive fuel, having to offer tiny diesels, conforming protectionist regulations, are just some of the reasons American (bigger, gasoline power) autos/trucks aren’t big sellers around the world.

      Automakers have adapted to the US market, including Toyota, Nissan, etc, as they should, but don’t expect US specific autos/trucks/SUVs to sell big, around the world… Unless you’re stupid..

  • avatar
    Frylock350

    Dear Ford, Column shifter please? This is a proper truck, not a Camry.

  • avatar
    dukeisduke

    I live less than ten minutes from the real Southfork Ranch, and lately I’m seeing way more Platinum F-150s than King Ranch models. What is the sales by trim level, or does Ford break this out?

    On another note, my kids’ high school has been been for several years holding their senior prom at Southfork, in the conference/event center, but they’ve now outgrown the place, so prom will be somewhere else next year.

  • avatar
    Brett Woods

    Seeking Scalable, Cost-effective Reductions in Gasoline Demand and Tailpipe Emissions: Focus on Pickup Trucks, Not Priuses:

    (https://www.bakerinstitute.org/research/how-improved-pickups-can-save-more-fuel-priuses)

    Author Gabriel Collins states, “For every 100 miles driven, improving the fuel economy of a single Ford F-150 by five miles per gallon can theoretically achieve the same volumetric gasoline savings that would be accomplished by making a six-miles-per-gallon improvement to six Priuses”

    Just throwing this out there because I think the re-sale value of these will tank 15 years from now. Do your own DD.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • Ermel: Why you aren’t getting the Amarok? Four reasons: too small (it’s just a midsize), and too...
  • Stanley Steamer: A tire patch kit and a cheap compressor is all I ever needed. I have had to use them 20-plus times...
  • raph: The 5.4 DOHC V8 fits in the S550 car so the 6.2 probably would as well but I suspect its not doable down a...
  • JohnTaurus: They tend to have timing chain issues. I see a lot of Explorers so equipped with “needs...
  • Ermel: On its home turf, Volkswagen has been notorious for being late to the game, then winning it anyway. The Golf...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff