Skip to main content

Add new comment

RKS (not verified)    November 25, 2014 - 12:10PM

Sounds good, although the mpg numbers dip significantly when you make them work a touch harder. I have noticed a much larger dip in economy on the ecoBoost when labored compared to it's naturally aspirated rivals and or counterparts. I have a friend who had a 3.5l ecoBoost which (after it was loaded with tools, aftermarket tires, etc..) would pull 21mpg (17.5 for the states), he drove it till 260,000km(160,000mi) with no engine issues (2 rear ends though). He traded it in on a new Dodge ecoDiesel he is getting decent fuel economy, expects it to improve when fully broke in, but the 30% higher diesel fuel costs completely offset any gains in the mpg department. Also of course he says the power difference is massive, but I am sure that would be because his Ford was tuned, and was pushing well over 400hp, and 500lb/ft. So 240 hp diesel would seem rather tame.
When Ford/GM get the 9-10 speed transmissions I am sure the mpg gap will close for all the big three,

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote cite> <ul> <ol'> <code> <li> <i>
  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.