[gregsfc]

A little off topic but in regards to direct-injection, turbo-charging in the spark-ignition arena, I've never been an all-out fan, but I ended up with one. This is how it's happened...owning a 2006 VW TDI car (last model year of the dirty diesels) for ten years, I became addicted to low-end torque, combined with exemplary fuel economy and can't stand any vehicle I drive to rev for power and torque or get poor fuel economy. Can't stand to be on the highway in cruise control and experience downshifts; especially that second downshift. Diesels don't do it, and so I must have this characteristic in anything I drive. I also like the refined driving experience of a low-revving engine for highway cruising.

But something has happened since January 2007, and that is diesels have become terribly expensive; choices are limited; the exhaust treatments systems are very complicated; they've lost a tad bit of their advantage fuel economy wise due to less compression and in some cases, rich run cycles. I needed a pickup truck. Felt like diesels would come to the half-ton and compact segments, so I held out for a few years and waited for the one I'd want in the configuration that I'd settle for (a compact extra cab or a full-size regular cab). Anything else would be too big. Also, I want only power glass and doors and cruise control and could care less about any other features.

Like I stated, I've never been a fan or a believer of the promise from the auto industry, which began in the European auto media, promoting this technology as the come back of the gas engine versus the diesel. But over there, while the technology has become somewhat more mainstream this mellenia, it has been rejected as an alternative to diesels for great fuel economy, because they just don't get great fuel economy.

But in U.S./Canada things are a little different. Diesels have huge potential for market penetration, however, we have the most stringent NOx limits, so that requires all this extra cost and complicated equipment, and so while waiting for years and years for a good choice in a diesel pickup, and watching the cheapest diesel in a Ram 1500 come in at $38,500 versus a truck line that starts at $27K; and then watching a great little four cylinder come to market that would be great in an extra cab, 2wd, base compact truck get planted only in the most elaborate crew cabs for dedicated towing, starting at or about $34k in a truck line that starts at or about $21K; I gave up. I had to choose something else.

I did a lot of thinking about Ford's new Ecoboost in the F150. Could I get acceptable mpg out of this truck? I saw the torque / horsepower numbers; felt like it's somewhat overkill on the horsepower for what I need, but the torque is flat; 350 ft-lbs from 1900-4500. The new aluminum panels make the curb weight about 350 pounds lighter at or about 4170 with the new 2.7L engine.

I read all the reviews; mostly positive regarding performance; mostly negative regarding fuel efficiency. I turned to Fuelly and saw the same thing. The "mode" is around 17...but still, I felt, if this power train is driven the right way, with a light foot, and one lets the torque drive the truck, it has to be decent doesn't it?

I pulled the trigger. Hoped for at least 20 mpg for my 58 mile, round trip commute along state highways at speeds from 45-65. I have not been disappointed! I'm averaging 24 and it drives just like I wanted and expected. Goes right up 5% grades in sixth gear and when it does downshift to 5th on stepper grades or on grades with headwinds, it still remains under 2000 RPM.

Of course I still prefer diesels, because one doesn't have to worry so much about how one drives to get great mpg and I don't have to worry so much about using too much of the available horsepower, because a right-sized diesel doesn't have too much horsepower; but the diesel concept is a non-starter for most of us; and I can say that at least the 2.7L, in the regular cab, 2wd, short bed, with 3.31 rear axle can get the estimated mpg when driven right and configured right. I'm no hypermiler and so this is real stuff.

The Stang with the 2.3L also seems like it's right-sized for that vehicle. The 2.7L would also probably work pretty well, but then it would be too close performance wise to the GT and Ford couldn't let that happen for fear of disenchanting the V8 dieharders, so I think, although I've not driven one, that if one is easy on the gas and uses the technology for that extremely refined ride that the low-end, mild-level boost provides, one could get very good mpg for a spark-ignition powered car.