5.0 more efficient at 75-80 mph than the Ecoboost engines? Edit: while not towing.

[JExpedition07]

That’s great and all, but have you seen a significant difference between the 5.0 and 3.5 in mileage when cruising 75+ without a trailer? I’m not looking for a tow monster, otherwise I’d spring for a superduty, and I’m not expecting Prius mpg’s either. I’m looking for a comfortable, all-weather, long-range highway cruiser with an engine that’s the least affected by the drag of wind resistance. If it’s negligible, meaning 1 mpg difference, then I’d rather the 3.5. Otherwise if the 3.5 and especially the 2.7 takes a nosedive compared to the 5.0, than I’d rather the V8.

For your use case the 2.7 actually sounds like the winner. That gets the best unladen highway MPG. The 5.0 does the best on gas of the bunch with a trailer behind it, it gets great MPG towing my boat to the ramp…surprisingly good. But empty the 3.5 and 5.0 are close, with the 2.7 winning the efficient fight by a good bit.

Sponsored

 

[Yason84]

For your use case the 2.7 actually sounds like the winner. That gets the best unladen highway MPG. The 5.0 does the best on gas of the bunch with a trailer behind it, it gets great MPG towing my boat to the ramp…surprisingly good. But empty the 3.5 and 5.0 are close, with the 2.7 winning the efficient fight by a good bit.

Nah, I’m pretty much sold on either the 5.0 or 3.5EB (non-hybrid). Not looking for maximum mileage, just trying to decide between the two mentioned. I’m not towing anything now but may be in the future when I move out of the city. Your previous comment about the 5.0 going to LeMans has made it an even harder decision! Darn you!!!

 

[Yason84]

I think they produce similar results under those conditions even though you are describing the best possible condition for the 5.0 and the worst possible for the 3.5HEV. Roughly equal unloaded at 75mph on the Interstate, and the PB does far better once you come off the ramp.

That being said, if I had to compete in an unloaded long distance mileage competition with other F150s, I'd pick the 2.7EB.

I was talking about the 3.5EB not PB. Yeah I’m sure 75-80 are the worst conditions for the PB since at that speed, the electric motor and battery are pretty much just dead weight. My guess is the conditions are somewhat better for the 3.5EB than the PB.

 

[JExpedition07]

Nah, I’m pretty much sold on either the 5.0 or 3.5EB (non-hybrid). Not looking for maximum mileage, just trying to decide between the two mentioned. I’m not towing anything now but may be in the future when I move out of the city. Your previous comment about the 5.0 going to LeMans has made it an even harder decision! Darn you!!!

I can’t wait. The 5.0 is so overbuilt on the bottom end it’s crazy, Le-Mans is perfect for it to stretch its legs and and run out. Here is a good article, Ford is sending the 7th gen Mustang GT3. It’s been over 20 years since a Ford V8 dominated at Le-Mans, about time.

https://www.thedrive.com/accelerator/this-is-the-2024-ford-mustang-race-car-thats-going-to-le-mans

 

[Yason84]

I can’t wait. The 5.0 is so overbuilt on the bottom end it’s crazy, Le-Mans is perfect for it to stretch its legs and and run out. Here is a good article, Ford is sending the 7th gen Mustang GT3. It’s been over 20 years since a Ford V8 dominated Le-Mans, about time.

https://www.thedrive.com/accelerator/this-is-the-2024-ford-mustang-race-car-thats-going-to-le-mans

Dude, I still get goosebumps when I watch Ford vs Ferrari, especially the scene where Shelby takes Mr. Ford for a quick spin in the prototype! I’m absolutely thrilled hearing about this race!

 

[Tomatoboy]

Can anyone confirm or deny this? I’ve been hypothesizing this for a while now seeing how at 75mph or higher, the Ecoboosts are deep into the boost. I’ve also seen claims that it’s more efficient at towing than the Ecoboosts, which boosts (pun intended) my hypothesis even more. With the NA V8, you are only getting the power that those 8 cylinders are capable of providing, while the turbo engines pump air and more fuel to make more power to overcome the increased resistance.

Edit: I guess my question wasn’t too clear. Is the 5.0 more efficient at 75-80 mph than the Ecoboosts when NOT towing?

I think the issue is your central premise is flawed, the EcoBoosts aren’t well into boost just sustaining highway speeds. I keep the boost gauge open all the time because I actively try to keep my 2.7 out of boost to save fuel, and it RARELY goes into boost when just sustaining speeds. Unless there’s some sort of hellacious headwind, I can stay out of boost at highway speeds. Think about it, the 2.7 and 3.5 would still generate as more power *without* their turbos than an older engine from say the 90s/early 2000s, and we didn’t have issues sustaining highway speeds, because it doesn’t actually take that much power to sustain a speed once you are rolling, it’s getting rolling in the first place.

When we are talking about UNLADEN fuel economy, it’s unlikely you’re going to best the 2.7 simply because 2.7 vehicles, all else being equal in terms of features, are lugging around a lighter truck. Towing and carrying payload are a whole different can of worms.

 

[dmac]

All the f150 engines are great. I'm partial to my 5.0 because of x reasons... I think the overall consensus is the 2.7 gets best unladen mileage, and the 5.0 and 3.5 are pretty neck and neck otherwise on the freeway.

My data point - I can pull 23-25 mpg around 70 mph all day in my xlt 4x4 SC with 18" factory tires and 3.31 gears. Goes down to 20-22 at speeds of 75-80.

Since I go up and down mountains and have wind in my area, I get much better freeway mileage than an almost identically equipped powerboost I had before on the same routes.

 

[Samson16]

I was talking about the 3.5EB not PB. Yeah I’m sure 75-80 are the worst conditions for the PB since at that speed, the electric motor and battery are pretty much just dead weight. My guess is the conditions are somewhat better for the 3.5EB than the PB.

See but that’s part of my point. The worst case scenario for my PB is still equal to or better than the 5.0’s best case.

 

[JJSnell]

I found my sweet spot on my '22 PB is 64mph flat highway.
I was getting almost 27.4mpg on a recent trip.
My '15 EB is a piece of crap and I am lucky if I get 17mpg.
Both have tonneau covers which I've found to help MPG tremendously.

 

[GregBC]

Haven’t seen anyone mention cylinder deactivation as a possible reason. I can never hear/feel when it happens but maybe it still does at 75-80 (assuming benign terrain/conditions). It’s a fuel savings technology, so all the discussion on parasitic drag and optimum cylinder design etc etc is all well and good, but 4 cylinders generating more power/cylinder is generally going to be more efficient than 8 cylinders generating less power/cylinder.
(If anyone’s interested, take a look at any generator efficiency vs HP/%max pwr curve; it wil peak at 95-100% rated power;ICE’s are most efficient at their design power). Of course with vehicles, max power efficiency as measured by “mpg” isn’t so great because drag (as mentioned often), but the ENGINE is still most efficientat max power (again, as measured by power generated per gallon).

So: cyl deactivation might help explain slightly better mileage in the 5.0L since the engine is now more efficient in 4-cyl mode than the EB which is always 6-cyl, for a given power output.

(anyways, they’re ALL good engines, lol)

 

[GregBC]

(and if you want to geek out more, ships have the same “mpg “ challenges as cars, usually measured in total range vs speed. So a ship designer graphs it for the captains to understand their most economical cruising speed, or the costs for going faster; warship captains obviously want to go Flank all the time, haha, but then they’re refueling twice as often. Commercial owners will evaluate cost of fuel burned vs income of more containers delivered per month, for instance). Anyway, off-topic I know!

 

[HammaMan]

I'm guessing we'll see ford roll out variable compression ratio for the EBs. There's 2 different technologies that allow the possibility. Keeping the motor out of boost as long as possible would do the platform good. However such a tech begins the decade long reliability challenge. Any word if they're working on them? Granted I'd prefer them to focus on intelligent PHEV designs with a move to long-life chassis and forward thinking modularity. Move into selling solutions instead of whole vehicles.

 

[Cheez_Greater]

In my 3.5, when I am driving 75mph near sea level, cruise control on, I only see boost when going up an incline or maybe in a stiff headwind. But I'm not sure a little boost in 10th is bad vs shifting to 9th and not having boost. It should reduce pumping losses by getting the manifold pressure closer to atmosphere instead of pulling a vacuum. If the engine load needs to produce more power, like climbing a small hill, I think the turbo slightly pushing the air into a cylinder instead of the cylinder having to work to pull the air in would be more efficient.

 

[Yason84]

I think the issue is your central premise is flawed, the EcoBoosts aren’t well into boost just sustaining highway speeds. I keep the boost gauge open all the time because I actively try to keep my 2.7 out of boost to save fuel, and it RARELY goes into boost when just sustaining speeds. Unless there’s some sort of hellacious headwind, I can stay out of boost at highway speeds. Think about it, the 2.7 and 3.5 would still generate as more power *without* their turbos than an older engine from say the 90s/early 2000s, and we didn’t have issues sustaining highway speeds, because it doesn’t actually take that much power to sustain a speed once you are rolling, it’s getting rolling in the first place.

When we are talking about UNLADEN fuel economy, it’s unlikely you’re going to best the 2.7 simply because 2.7 vehicles, all else being equal in terms of features, are lugging around a lighter truck. Towing and carrying payload are a whole different can of worms.

Well, I’ve read otherwise on many counts, i don’t know by experience because my 3-ton steel body truck is 11 years old and doesn’t have a boost gauge. I hope what you’re saying is true. All I know is once I hit 68-70, my mileage drops down to about 18.5 mpg and 17 mpg at 75. I’d be happy with 20 mpg at 75… thats over 100 miles of extra driving range. If all the engines can achieve that, especially with the weight savings, then it’s just a matter of preference between the 5.0 vs 3.5EB.

 

[Samson16]

I’d be cautious of anecdotal mpg claims as well. The published numbers typically hold true if not rosy in their predictions of actual mileage results. 2.7EB leads the impressive group of engine choices in this category

Sponsored