I sent you a PM lol! Let me know when you are passing back down my way

 

edmunds did not have a good experience with the powerboost mpg wise. Its rated 24/24, over 10k miles they only averaged 19.3. Even their previous ecoboost test vehicle underperformed mpg wise

https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/lon...10k-miles.html

correct, turbos main efficiency is volumetric efficiency (power density), not fuel efficiency or else every engine would be turbocharged for mpg long ago.

 

And what would a 5.0 F150 average?

 

22 or so based on what I know people who own them get.

 

HAHAHA, no way. Not over 10,000 miles of normal driving. My global average on my S560 is only 19.9. 22 on the highway maybe.

BTW the overall average of my partner's Silverado with the 6.2 is about 14.

 

Okay then. I'm not going to argue with you since I know who is right and I already gave you plenty of proof of many cars that average higher than their EPA highway rating.

Sorry you can't exceed average performance but it's easy to do it around where I live. I'm averaging 21 on the W12 when it's highway rating is 20 and if I try I can get it to give me 24.....the Land Rover is giving the same overperformance, the LS is at 29, the 4.0 is at 27 even with heavy power runs often etc etc.

Your driving condition is just emblematic of the typical city dweller conditions that the EPA tests are more accurate for unlike the vast majority of areas by size in the nation.

I have over a dozen customers with aluminum fords with 5.0s, 3.5s and one 2.7 and the 3.5s are the worst on fuel. Period. Just go to the F-150 forums if you don't want to listen to me lol!

Normal driving is here higher speed than were you live. Thus we pick different engines, sure if we have to go into a city it sucks but that's why it's best to avoid those places or take a cheaper car in.

 

With the 5.0, extra gears and careful electronic control of shifting and running with no payload, the engine is barely breaking a sweat.

I can see these engines hit well over 100k as long as the engineers didn't design an achilles heel into them requiring an engine pull for something stupid as a design flaw.

 

I have said repeatedly that most cars on the highway outperform their EPA rated fuel economy. But there is no way that the overall mileage for a V8 F150 over 10,000 miles is 22MPG, unless it was almost only driven on the highway. Thats just impossible.

Again, I don't live in a city and drive 25 miles every day at 80MPH on a highway.

if you want proof that I have said repeatedly that almost all cars over perform on the highway, here it is:

Quote:

Originally Posted by SW17LS

The Ecoboost would similarly over deliver its stated mileage on a highway trip. Every car I have ever had does.

Quote:

I totally believe it. My S560 gets 29 MPG on the highway and its rated for 27.

And here is where I already told you that your characterization of where I live and the type of driving I do is wrong:

Quote:

Originally Posted by SW17LS

And again you’re saying lots of things about my daily commute that are not true lol. I drive 12 miles every day each way on the highway at 80 MPH, almost everywhere I go involves a highway.

Here is a comment from someone who actually owns a 5.0 F150:

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrettJacks

Edit: I should add that I get 12-14 driving around the city. My truck is 4x4 with slightly larger 10 ply tires. Vegas streets are never level and traffic flows fast, so it's a lot of 0-60-0. On the highway I can get anywhere from 17-22 depending on speed, cargo, and elevation changes. I'll typically go 80+ so i'm usually in the lower range there.

The question was, if the EB in that edmunds test averaged 19.9 over 10k miles what would an F150 average under the same use case. Its not 22.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Striker223

Normal driving is here higher speed than were you live. Thus we pick different engines, sure if we have to go into a city it sucks but that's why it's best to avoid those places or take a cheaper car in.

I also already made this point:

Quote:

Originally Posted by SW17LS

But that’s the point, that sort of use case is what the EcoBoost is for. People bought it because it gets considerably better economy in that specific use case. That’s why comparing them makes no sense.

 

it would average its EPA sticker (17/20/24) at least, unlike eco and power boost. Its very easy to get advertised numbers in an N/A engine, not these turbo engines. I get 17-18 combined in the ram which is the EPA value.

 

You don’t know what types of driving edmunds did in the test. I’m confident you will see a 10% FE improvement from the V8, and to some people that’s worthwhile.

 

You are probably not going to believe this, but it's the honest truth. My Encore GX is EPA-rated around 30 or so on the highway...and, on I-66 and I-95, at a steady 55-60 cruise with the A/C on, in FWD mode with the AWD switch disconnected....I get 45 MPG per the trip-computer. That's better than a lot of hybrids.

In local stop/go driving, though, I get just about the EPA-rated 24/25.

 

I absolutely believe it...

 

I'll also add that the current generation of 5.0 is 2 gens newer than mine and is a good bit more efficient, having dual injection, higher compression, and cylinder deactivation where mine does not, as well as a 10 speed and often a higher gear ratio in the rear end.

 

Still not going to get 22 overall in mixed driving

 

i can get 35 mpg in the Ram.......driving 43-45 mph. But that is not a practical speed for any sustained period of time to make any difference. You can always find sweetspots in vehicles but they usually are not practical. You would not want to drive 45mph or even 55-60 on I-10 here if you value your life.