F-150 fuel EPA ratings

[SnakeEyeSS]

Only standout is the 2.7 RWD.

 

http://m.autoblog.com/2014/11/21/2015-ford-f-150-ecoboost-26-mpg-epa/?post=1&icid=autoblog_river_article

[GMP]

Not to impressive to me for being a aluminum body their raving about.

[j-ten-ner]

Well...I don't know what the testing methods in Canada are. But I rather stick with my V8.

 

That's what my sticker says:

 

 

I guess it is meant in Imperial Gallons. But still better than the 2.7l scooter.

 

so long

j-ten-ner

[Imcrazy]

I dunno about all that... I think the truck isn't much to look at. I do think that the increased towing capacity and payload is a nice feature but, I'll stick with GM for my pickups for now.

[Stex]

Turbos do not seem to get the MPG they state. Mainly because in heaver rides one tends to stay in the turbo to get the thing going. This was the problem way back with Acura on the first RDX. I think they keep the turbo one or two yrs. before dismal MPG reports killed the turbo.

 

The Ford 5.0 just does not get the MPG the GMs do. But no AFM in the Ford. I think an 8sp GM and tune out the AFM if it bothers you is the way to go. To much uncharted water on the Aluminum truck. Can you say dissimilar metal corrosion? Body shops in non-metro areas scratching their heads?

[foghorn23]

The F150 sans approximately 700 pounds with a mighty 2.7 twin turbo and stop and start technology and all the durability associated with the ecoboost name and it manages to hit 23 mpg in epa estimates (1 better than the 5.3 pushrod "dinosaur" I drive)..... no thanks. I'll keep my dinosaur of steel and V8 power and we'll see who is standing last. Ford at its best, overpromising and underdelivering. No wonder they dropped this news on a Friday before a short holiday week on Wall Street. They better pray the investors forget about it after they've had their fill of turkey or Ford stock may be the turkey.

[j-ten-ner]

lol...I guess it is hard to get those numbers in real life (F150 or my truck).

But I can still drive with dignity and a real V8 sound while trying to do so.

 

so long

j-ten-ner

[truckofwinandawesome]

Turbos do not seem to get the MPG they state. Mainly because in heaver rides one tends to stay in the turbo to get the thing going. This was the problem way back with Acura on the first RDX. I think they keep the turbo one or two yrs. before dismal MPG reports killed the turbo.

 

The Ford 5.0 just does not get the MPG the GMs do. But no AFM in the Ford. I think an 8sp GM and tune out the AFM if it bothers you is the way to go. To much uncharted water on the Aluminum truck. Can you say dissimilar metal corrosion? Body shops in non-metro areas scratching their heads?

 

I still say that the MSRP is going to make a ENORMOUS Jump; because they have to recoup the Development costs SOMEWHERE. and repairing aluminum Body Panels is virtually a fine art. I bet Ford's recommendation for Collision repair is to Replace Panels instead of Repair, and then they will price replacement panels as if they were stamped from Solid 24 Karat Gold, and encrusted with Swarovski Crystal and Debeers Diamonds!

[j-ten-ner]

I think it is safe to say that aluminum is way better than metal when it comes to corrosion.

And I've read somewhere that the cost to built a new aluminum F150 is not so much higher. Can't quite remember but something in the neighborhood of 400 bucks.

That said, it still remains to see how the insurance and body shops handle the new challenge of repair costs.

 

I even take it one step further and say that plastics and/or synthetic materials are the future.

 

so long

j-ten-ner

[nahulu77]

The front almost looks like a Toyota Tundra. Lol

[2017SierraSLT]

They are still having issues with the "proven" 3.5 EB. Time will tell how reliable the 2.7 EB will end up.

['01LS1]

Going to have to be careful bashing aluminum as GM will be following suit. Remember reading they were messing with it back in 08 pre bankruptcy. The idea was scrapped along with the 4.5 d/max for the same reason.

Pretty sure the hoods on the K2XX are aluminum as Ford & Ram have been since 09.

 

GM has their own twin prop 3.6 V6. So they are not totally against the idea.

http://media.cadillac.com/media/us/en/cadillac/news.detail.html/content/Pages/news/us/en/2013/Mar/nyas/0318-lf3-engine.html

 

Would not want a twin turbo truck & will stick with my 6.2L. But could see GM doing the same as Ford to match/meet fuel economy standards & media reviews.

I keep hoping they will go the diesel route, but could see the twin turbo gasser taking off in their eyes from a cost to mfg. stand point.

[Stex]

I think it is safe to say that aluminum is way better than metal when it comes to corrosion.

And I've read somewhere that the cost to built a new aluminum F150 is not so much higher. Can't quite remember but something in the neighborhood of 400 bucks.

 

That said, it still remains to see how the insurance and body shops handle the new challenge of repair costs.

 

I even take it one step further and say that plastics and/or synthetic materials are the future.

 

so long

j-ten-ner

If it is done correctly. Have you heard about galvanic corrosion or dissimilar metal corrosion? An example is iron/steel in contact with Aluminum if the protective barrier/coating breaks down. Assuming Ford has the proper barriers in place.

 

http://engineersedge.com/galvanic_capatability.htm

[j-ten-ner]

If it is done correctly. Have you heard about galvanic corrosion or dissimilar metal corrosion? An example is iron/steel in contact with Aluminum if the protective barrier/coating breaks down. Assuming Ford has the proper barriers in place.

 

http://engineersedge.com/galvanic_capatability.htm

 

Yes I'm aware of that.

Same applies to stainless steel and normal steel. As you say yourself there are ways to avoid it.

 

One would assume that Ford has the barriers in place.

But I assumed also that a cracked dash in a GM truck is history....

 

so long

j-ten-ner

[rdnkcpa]

I applaud Ford for trying to make this work. I think aluminum is the wave of the future in automotive bodies. All manufacturers will be trying to squeeze as much MPG's as they can as gov't fleet mileage rates get tougher. I have read that Ford's profit margin in a F150 is about $10,000.00. So if they can take a small hit on increased manufacturing costs, and this works, it will pay long term dividends across the entire Ford product line. If they can shave off 700 LBS off a F-150 and perfect the technology and reduce the aluminum manufacturing costs, they then can transfer that technology to lower margin vehicles, make them lighter and increase the overall fleet mileage. With a Fusion they maybe could drop 350LBS off of the weight and kick up the mileage a MPG or two.

 

Where I think Ford and their customers may run into real trouble is with insurance companies. They may jack insurance rates up on those vehicles until the repair market adjusts for aluminum body repair.

 

And all of those people worried about the durability of aluminum, just think, that 737 you get on flies at 35,000 feet, travels at about 530 miles an hour, is made out of mostly aluminum.