Chart Of The Day: Does The EcoBoost F-150 "Fail" At Fuel Economy?

Edward Niedermeyer
by Edward Niedermeyer

Bringing out a V6 version of a full-size truck like the F-150 is a good way to get truck guys suspicious, especially if you try to assuage their fears by talking about the engine’s direct-injection, turbocharging and other high-tech frippery. Ford’s solution: emphasize the “power of a V8, efficiency of a V6” simplification, and hope the market catches on as gas prices rise. But does Ford’s marketing concept actually hold true in real life? Does an Ecoboost F-150 get the mileage of a six cylinder even when doing tough truck-guy work? Thanks to some great work by Pickuptrucks.com, you can decide for yourself using the data from a fantastic infographic used to illustrate their test of a loaded and unloaded Ecoboost F-150.

As the chart portion above shows, the Ecoboost’s solid unloaded mileage (the green line) takes a serious beating when it has to haul a 9,000-lb trailer (the blue line), a fact that’s hardly surprising in itself. Because the test didn’t include non-Ecoboost trucks, Pickuptrucks.com’s results don’t tell us conclusively whether Ford’s 5.0 V8 would return comparable mileage hauling the same load, but the Ecoboost’s disappointing loaded mileage was cause for at least one major car blog to deem it a “failure.” That seems harsh, as even if the V8 does match the Ecoboost’s towing efficiency, the V6 should still offer considerably better mileage under nearly all other conditions. Besides, most people buy trucks in order to have towing capability, not because they need to tow on a daily basis… for those buyers, the Ecoboost’s improved non-towing mileage would be welcome, even if towing itself isn’t especially efficient.

Still, Ford’s made something of a gamble by bringing a turbocharged V6 into the world of full-sized trucks, and yet another by marketing it as a considerably more efficient replacement for a V8. And ultimately, whether the Ecoboost V6 makes a worthwhile truck engine is something that each truck buyer will have to decide for themselves. Luckily, even if you think the Ecoboost isn’t worth its downsides, at least Ford gives you plenty of options.


Edward Niedermeyer
Edward Niedermeyer

More by Edward Niedermeyer

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 46 comments
  • Mikemannn Mikemannn on Apr 19, 2011

    I can't wait for the followup where they test and prove the *gasp* the 30MPG Ford Mustang V6 gets much worse mileage around the Streets of Willow when driven at 10/10ths.

  • Benzaholic Benzaholic on Apr 20, 2011

    "efficiency of a V6" Hmm. You mean they're selling a V6 and claiming it has the efficiency of a V6? I just don't believe them. How can that possibly be true?

  • 1995 SC Wife has a new Ridgeline and it came with 2 years so I don't have to think about it for a while.My FIAT needed a battery (the 12V...not the drive battery), a replacement steering column cover and I had to buy a Tesla Charging adapter to use the destination charger at one of the places I frequent. Also had to replace the charge cable because I am an idiot and ran the stock one over and destroyed the connector. Around 600 bucks all in there but 250 is because of the cable.The Thunderbird has needed much the past year. ABS Pump - 300. Master Cylinder 100. Tool to bleed ABS 350 (Welcome to pre OBD2 electronics), Amp for Stereo -250, Motor mounts 150, Injectors 300, Airbag Module - 15 at the u pull it, Belts and hoses, 100 - Plugs and wires 100, Trans fluid, filter and replacement pan, 150, ignition lock cylinder and rekey - 125, Cassette Player mechanism - 15 bucks at the U Pull it, and a ton of time to do things like replace the grease in the power seat motots (it was hard and the seats wouldn't move when cold), Rear pinion seal - 15 buckjs, Fix a million broken tabs in the dash surround, recap the ride control module and all. My wife would say more, but my Math has me around 2 grand. Still needs an exhaust manifold gasket and the drivers side window acts up from time to time. I do it all but if I were paying someone that would be rough. It's 30 this year though so I roll with it. You'll have times like these running old junk.
  • 3-On-The-Tree Besides for the sake of emissions I don’t understand why the OEM’s went with small displacement twin turbo engines in heavy trucks. Like you guys stated above there really isn’t a MPG advantage. Plus that engine is under stress pulling that truck around then you hit it with turbos, more rpm’s , air, fuel, heat. My F-150 Ecoboost 3.5 went through one turbo replacement and the other was leaking. l’ll stick with my 2021 V8 Tundra.
  • Syke What I'll never understand about economics reporting: $1.1 billion net income is a mark of failure? Anyone with half a brain recognizes that Tesla is slowly settling in to becoming just another EV manufacturer, now that the legacy manufacturers have gained a sense of reality and quit tripping over their own feet in converting their product lines. Who is stupid enough to believe that Tesla is going to remain 90% of the EV market for the next ten years?Or is it just cheap headlines to highlight another Tesla "problem"?
  • Rna65689660 I had an AMG G-Wagon roar past me at night doing 90 - 100. What a glorious sound. This won’t get the same vibe.
  • Marc Muskrat only said what he needed to say to make the stock pop. These aren't the droids you're looking for. Move along.
Next