6 month review

2014bluesle4x4DC · April 23, 2014

I am nursing the truck. I dont feel like paying for any gas that I dont have to. Like any vehicle it is how you drive it. I could het 14 mpg in this truck if I wanted to. Just dont deel like paying for it. And I would imagin you guys in the states would get better mpg since it is warmer there. I am getting these numbers when the outside temp is around 10º C I would think I am going to get better when we get the 30ºC temps. I have not added anything to the truck.

Also that is 8.1 liters per 100km for yous that have the new truck you can switch it from mpg to liters per 100 km

Northside · April 23, 2014

Another person who has an opinion about Ford's EB and has absolutlety no clue about what he's talking about. Internet is great isn't it.

What do you disagree with specifically? Are you saying I didn't drive an eco boost? Are you saying I haven't ridden in my friend's eco boosts? Are you saying turbos ARE noted for being reliable? Do you think the Eco boost beats the 6.2? Read the F 150 forum and see what they say about reliability. I never owned an Eco boost and never will. I have owned Fords and in general they nickel and dimed me to death. My Chevys never did. In my experience General Motors makes better vehicles than Ford period. But wait, I don't know what I'm talking about per some internet clown who's name even denotes his negativity. If you can't say what you specifically disagree with you are just trying to cause trouble. The internet is a great place for guys like you who want to start **** with guys you'd never start with in real life.

2014bluesle4x4DC · April 23, 2014

Ok so I looked at the life of the vehicle the over 3789km is 12.3 liters per 100 km. My numbers I gave yesterday were for my last 650 km my bad 8.1 liter per 100 km 8.1 is my best 8.8 is my average. Try being easy on the gas guys lol. Also to add there are no hills in my area just flat road. I am doing a combo of 70% highway and 30% in town.

gmissed · April 23, 2014

What do you disagree with specifically? Are you saying I didn't drive an eco boost? Are you saying I haven't ridden in my friend's eco boosts? Are you saying turbos ARE noted for being reliable? Do you think the Eco boost beats the 6.2? Read the F 150 forum and see what they say about reliability. I never owned an Eco boost and never will. I have owned Fords and in general they nickel and dimed me to death. My Chevys never did. In my experience General Motors makes better vehicles than Ford period. But wait, I don't know what I'm talking about per some internet clown who's name even denotes his negativity. If you can't say what you specifically disagree with you are just trying to cause trouble. The internet is a great place for guys like you who want to start **** with guys you'd never start with in real life.

If you care to read the thread from the beginning you'll see my 'opinion' and all 3 engines - obviously you haven't read them or you wouldn't be asking the first question. I also have friends with EBs and they are all happy with their trucks. So does that make an EB a good engine because of my experience or a bad one because your experience/perception? Yes and I agree “The internet is a great place for guys like you who want to start **** with guys you'd never start with in real life.” - That can go both ways. Sorry to have upset you but you stated an opinion; I stated mine and I’ll stand by it.

nards444 · April 23, 2014

I don't own one but I have driven one and I have four friends with them. I did feel a lag. My point was the 5.3 has decent power for everyday use. 1/4 mile times are irrelevant to me. If I had wanted more power I'd have gotten the 6.2. which outclasses Ford's little V-6. for power any day. Just for fun I did try E-85 in my 5.3, and after a few tanks the performance has increased quite a bit, not that I needed it. The biggest reason I didn't buy a Ford was because turbos aren't noted for reliability, nor were the Fords I owned in the past. All the power in the world doesn't mean squat if the truck won't get me home.

I totally agree comparing 1/4miles times in a truck is truely irrelevent, I dont see it as important at all. Although a better 1/4 mile time is indicative of a better engine and performance. But comparing quarter mile times with a buddy vs a buddy totally irrevelent and doesnt have a play. And Im sure you felt lag its there, but not as dramatic as you were talking and I doubt as much as the 5.3l.

Now the 6.2l will outclass that little v6 in everything but MPG and probably its torque curve. But at the end of the day in a well rounded scenario it would not be as outclassing as you think. There were some issues with turbo but I never had the even towing 9klbs over 30k miles. Some of the 11s had the condensation issue but from 13 on it wasnt as much as an issue and even believe they somewhat corrected it for the 12 year. But again it was an issue but nothing that every other truck or anything. I knew 4 guys with them and asked my dealer of any issues with that, and they hadnt seen one as of last year. Seeing as how EB accounts for 60% or more of their trucks on their road, if you do hear something bad about it, because of sheer numbers out there Im not so sure a few incidents speak for the whole batch.

In the end the 5.3l is a good engine heck I own one you dont have to argue with me. But with all things being equal the eco outclasses the 5.3l in totality it just does. Now we can say well if I bought a 6.2l it wouldnt , well your right if i bought a diesel it wouldnt either, we both have 5.3l trucks no sense in bringing what we could have bought into the scenario. If we go back to my comparison and opinion I never brought anything into the mix other than a eco and 5.3l.

nards444 · April 23, 2014

Ok so I looked at the life of the vehicle the over 3789km is 12.3 liters per 100 km. My numbers I gave yesterday were for my last 650 km my bad 8.1 liter per 100 km 8.1 is my best 8.8 is my average. Try being easy on the gas guys lol. Also to add there are no hills in my area just flat road. I am doing a combo of 70% highway and 30% in town.

so that works out to 12.4mpg, not so sure thats anygood. My 3.73s gearing is getting me 15.8mpg avg

2014bluesle4x4DC · April 23, 2014

You might want to read my post again. Im from canada im talking liters per 100 km

2014bluesle4x4DC · April 23, 2014

Im not sure what they are teaching you Yankees out there but your translation is way off

2014bluesle4x4DC · April 23, 2014

And that 15.8 is not terrible, but far from great!

nards444 · April 23, 2014

You might want to read my post again. Im from canada im talking liters per 100 km

I did and maybe my factoring is wrong but if you divide 100 by 12.3 you get 8.1km per liter.

100k equals 62 miles, 8.1km per liter equals 5 miles. 62 miles divided by 5 equals 12.4 miles per gallon

Help me out here maybe im doing it wrong. We dont play with metric to often down here.

Or over lifetime your sitting at 19mpg. which with is a lot less than you stated.

nards444 · April 23, 2014

And that 15.8 is not terrible, but far from great!

never said it was. But considering 3.73s in comparison to 3.08 and not babying it I would say its pretty good

gmissed · April 23, 2014

2014bluesle4x4DC...lifetime is 19 MPG US or 23 MPG imperial.

A simple formula for doing the conversion is:

US MPG = 235 ÷ E
UK MPG = 282 ÷ E

where E is the rating in liters per 100 kilometers.

nards444 · April 23, 2014

2014bluesle4x4DC...lifetime is 19 MPG US or 23 MPG imperial.

A simple formula for doing the conversion is:

US MPG = 235 ÷ E

UK MPG = 282 ÷ E

where E is the rating in liters per 100 kilometers.

Wish the US would go to metric makes a lot more sense.

gmissed · April 23, 2014

Wish the US would go to metric makes a lot more sense.

Still getting used to it and mentally do a conversion many times to degrees F, MPG, MPH, PSI, gallons etc.....I grew up with the imperial measure and understand it better.

2014bluesle4x4DC · April 23, 2014

Ok to set it staright! Im sorry for the confusion. 12..3 km per 100km is equal to 3.25 gallons burned in 62 miles. That works to 19 mpg. But on my last 650 km of being light on the truck I am avarging 8.8 liters per100 km with my best at 8.1. That works out to 2.14 gallons per 62 miles of driving. Thats were im getting 28 mpg. Like I said its all in how you drive it. Im finding the truck is getting better on gas the longer I drive ie.. more miles I put on it