Riddle me this

[dgorsett]

Compare the Silverado 5.3 to the F-150 2.7. The F-150 averages about 2mpg better and gets to 60mph almost a full second quicker. Anyone saying that there's not really any difference isn't looking at the real world numbers.

I get what your saying but 10% better mileage for 1/2 the displacement isn't much, not when we're headed to 50 mpg CAFE standards. But yes Ecoboosts are fast.

Sponsored

 

[MacHudson]

Dayyyyuuuumm. Lots of fighting on this thread. The one thing I really took away is that a turbo at sea level will run like a champ, and it’s still better than not turbo when at high altitude.

I live at sea level. Ergo, that turbo make me go like Bo go when push to the flo.

 

[Big Boss]

I'm with you. I figured Ford's shift to ecoboost was aimed at meeting CAFE standards, but they really don't get much better than competitors NA engines. They do, however, generate a lot of horsepower..so there's that. I've had several NA V-6's that exceeded 20 mpgs (Ranger, Bronco II's Explorers, Mustang) and , at least in the later model ones, had fine power. Not to mention my old work Chevy 5.3 that also got 20 mpg and would screech the tires in the first three gears. I would have preferred a NA V-6 in my new Bronco, just like some wanted a V-8 or SFA. Not gonna happen and I'll be happy with what I get.

The thing I have noticed with the EB engines is you actively drive them to try and achieve maximum MPG, they can return fantastic mileage, while still offering the power of larger engines when needed. Problem is driving that way is a pain in the ass lol

 

[amccue90]

The thing I have noticed with the EB engines is you actively drive them to try and achieve maximum MPG, they can return fantastic mileage, while still offering the power of larger engines when needed. Problem is driving that way is a pain in the ass lol

Do you think better than EPA ratings? or if you try real hard you can achieve EPA?

Like can a normal driver beat 19/19 with a Tremor if they tried?

 

[Laminar]

I get what your saying but 10% better mileage for 1/2 the displacement isn't much, not when we're headed to 50 mpg CAFE standards.

Why do you think that mileage should scale in any way with displacement?

It's faster and it gets better mileage - you're giving up nothing. What does it matter how much displacement it has?

 

[Big Boss]

Do you think better than EPA ratings? or if you try real hard you can achieve EPA?

Like can a normal driver beat 19/19 with a Tremor if they tried?

If you drive to actively maximize MPGs from my own experience yes you can get or best EPA numbers.

Driving normal, ehhhhh that would tough lol.

 

[dgorsett]

Why do you think that mileage should scale in any way with displacement?

It's faster and it gets better mileage - you're giving up nothing. What does it matter how much displacement it has?

You are correct. My bias goes to my incorrect assumption, years ago, that Ford was putting all it's eggs in the Ecoboost basket primarily to boost MPGs. Now I see it was for power, which is a win, but may be a win in the wrong war.

 

[Fedexman1978]

Why do you think that mileage should scale in any way with displacement?

It's faster and it gets better mileage - you're giving up nothing. What does it matter how much displacement it has?

Why do you think that mileage should scale in any way with displacement?

It's faster and it gets better mileage - you're giving up nothing. What does it matter how much displacement it has?

That sweet, sweet rumble of a V-8.

Am I being greedy dreaming of a turbocharged coyote under the hood of my BL?

 

[Laminar]

You are correct. My bias goes to my incorrect assumption, years ago, that Ford was putting all it's eggs in the Ecoboost basket primarily to boost MPGs. Now I see it was for power

Why can't it be both? MPG satisfied CAFE standards, power sells trucks. Nobody thought electric cars were cool when it was all Nissan Leafs and electric Focuses, but then Tesla starts smoking Hellcats at the drag strip and everyone pays attention. Power/performance is sexy and sells cars, but manufacturers have to meet emissions and fuel economy standards somehow.

 

[Laminar]

That sweet, sweet rumble of a V-8.

The only correct answer.

Am I being greedy dreaming of a turbocharged coyote under the hood of my BL?

Probably, because I have no idea what anyone would do with an 800hp Bronco!

 

[Rick Astley]

OK, I currently drive a 2012 Sierra 1500 with a 5.3 (Old 350). I get about 17 MPG banging up and down the mountains in Appalachia. Got about the same in my 2004 F250 with the 5.4 (old 351) I am trying to wrap my head around little turbo engines that deliver about the same MPG with a shit ton of more moving parts to break down, what's the point?...

The fact that I was able to rebuild my FE 390 engine using nothing other than a vintage 1960's baby spoon as my tolerance gauge gives some input into how inefficient your old SBC and Windsor were.

Full disclosure: once it went over 7.0 liters I haven't had a single tank netting double-digit MPG. You and your fancy-ass 17 mpg. Looking down on us peasants at the gas stations.

Had either of your motors been designed today and with today's tolerances, technology and materials (and without CAFE standards) they would have been putting out about 200% more wheel hp and getting 22 mpg in real-world driving.

 

[ScrunchFace]

Still not sure if PSUTE is trolling y'all or not

 

[Fedexman1978]

The only correct answer.



Probably, because I have no idea what anyone would do with an 800hp Bronco!

Drive it like I stole it, of course!

 

[Deleted member 9490]

Anything the Bronco gets has got to be better than the 8.5 MPG Im getting now....V8TTs are thirsty in the city.

 

[PSUTE]

Still not sure if PSUTE is trolling y'all or not

Absolutely not. I don't drive hard. The nearest traffic light is 7 miles away, and to get pretty much anywhere, I have to jump on the freeway and set the cruise for 75, so I really have no city driving, which I'm sure has everything to do with the mileage I get...

Sponsored