New member from Northern Sask, F-150 the economical choice?
 

Could a F-150 really be a fuel-efficient choice?


So I am currently looking at getting a new vehicle and looking for advice from a fuel economy and eco-modding standpoint.

My current vehicle is a 2001 Ford Explorer Sport (2 door) that I bought 3 years ago with just over 100 000 km on the odometer. Now it has 300 000 km on it and for all intents and purposes is worn out and has been costing me much more money to keep running than I would care to admit, especially for a vehicle I never really liked that much in the first place.

I began researching vehicles in February and have really started to settle on either getting a 2013 Mazda CX-5 GS AWD (8.0/6.4 l/100km) or a new F-150 XLT Super Cab 4X4 Long-box with 5L engine (15/10.5 l/100km). The best I can figure my current Explorer gets about 17/13 l/100km.

The Mazda would be a compromise in a lot of ways and I would definitely loose some utility. I think I could live with that for the fuel economy but I would be concerned about its durability on rough northern roads (I live near Flin-Flon, MB and do a lot of work in Pelican Narrows, SK with occasional trips out to LaRonge, Beauval, etc. These roads kill trucks if you are not careful, let alone unibody cross-overs.)

The truck would be ideal in a lot of ways but where the CX-5 would pay for itself in fuel savings over 5 years the truck wouldn’t even come close. Here is where the forums come in. If I did end up getting the truck I would probably build an aero-cap, have a removable partial grill block and possibly build a custom bumper with a retractable air-dam. With these mods would I really see a fuel efficiency increase of ~20% like some threads would suggest?

It seems fantastical to see a full sized truck with 5L engine and 4x4 getting less than 9l/100km on the highway but if it is possible without loosing capabilities or utility it is making the truck option look mighty tempting.


You can see some of my logic behind going with an F-150 on this thread. [www(dot)unicyclist.com/forums/showthread.php?t=92050] Go ahead and try to talk me into something else. My path is not set at this point but will probably pull the trigger on a new vehicle around the start of June.

Unless a truck is working hard the vast majority of the time as opposed to being just a very large commuter vehicle, a truck simply isn't going to be one of your top choices if fuel efficiency is your main criteria.

If your roads are as bad as I envision from your description, you are not cruising along effortlessly and quickly on a nice ribbon of highway. You may not get as much benefit from aero work AND you may not achieve rated hwy mpg.

The first pro-truck argument that comes to mind could be if the roads are so bad as to inflict expensive wear and/or damage to a "regular duty" automobile and your truck choice is heavier-duty enough to not sustain such damage then in spite of the fuel consumption premium you could save money on repairs and longer vehicle life. But if trucks also get beat up and their parts are as expensive or moreso than car parts, so much for that.

P.S. Over 62,000 miles per year? What the devil?!? :eek: :confused:

Fuel efficiency is not my main criteria but as you point out, I drive a lot. (km, not miles BTW)

Here is what I posted as my criteria when looking for suggestions on a different (non-car) forum in February.

It is true I don't NEED a truck but ever since switching to an SUV from a truck I have been missing the utility of an open bed. All the modern body on frame SUVs are ridiculously expensive and get worse milage than a F-150 so if I want durability I figure why not go for a truck.

If I just stayed in Sask it would be an easy choice but then part of the reason I have so many kilometres on the Explorer is that I have a seasonal job and like to go on a road-trip before or after (or before and after) work for the summer. After work last year I went down to California and ended up going up the EAST coast on my way back home to western Canada. Combine trips like that and the occasional 1500-2500km round trips to see friends on days off and you get 60-65 000 km/year quite easily. For the long trips on good roads the more efficient CX-5 makes a lot more sense.

You might consider the Ford F150 with the Ecoboost motor. It's plenty capable of meeting your needs and gets decent mileage for a full sized truck. The CleanMPG guys did a cross country in a 2wd version @ 32mpg.

Wouldn't a trailer hooked to the Mazda satisfy you occasional cravings for an open bed?

I did convert to miles before commenting. Wow, that thing never gets a chance to cool off. You don't need a block heater. I wouldn't want to criss-cross the continent in a truck!

I bet that's an atypical result. Don't count on getting that.

Yah I am pretty leery about the ecoboost numbers. From what I have read on F-150 forums etc it is a real mixed bag on whether you will get good results or not. I have not heard any negative reports on the 5L and know two people who have one. They are both very happy.


Just had a look at that 32 mpg claim. While I don't doubt their numbers I would call it impracticable for me. I am not going to give up safe driving habits (staying with the flow of traffic) for better fuel economy.


Yes I can haul stuff in a trailer, it's just nicer to be able to load stuff on a truck. I have lived with an SUV instead of a truck for over 4 years so I know I can make that work. What I want to figure out is if I can get the vehicle I want instead *AND* end up with decent efficiency without resorting to hobbling said vehicle.



EDIT: I don't quite have these forums figured out yet but where would the best place be to ask about doing these modifications (aero cap, air dam, partial grill block, etc) and what I should reasonably expect after doing them?

There's a search function at the top of the page and practically everything you might want to try has been discussed, done, and analyzed.

My father has a 08 5.4l F150 2wd and gets 19-20 mpg on the highway consistently. 0 mods just conservitave driving@ the speedlimit.

Here are the results from the EPA's web site for 2011 to 2013 models of 4 wheel drive trucks.
Fuel Economy


Personally I like using a trailer more then a truck bed, when I borrow my parents truck I always take the trailer because it's a foot and a half lower the truck bed, it's wider, longer and dead flat, the one they have tips too, so loading anything with wheels on to it becomes really easy, at work we have a larger trailer and we never put anything in the truck bed because our work truck is a 4 wheel drive dodge and the tailgate height is just to high to lift much of anything up to without hurting your self, light stuff is nice to protect so it tends to go inside the cab.
If the little Mercedes vans were 4 wheel drive then we would have one of those as a work vehicle, but we end up in weird places at work and use the 4 wheel drive enough to make it worth while, but the smaller ones are 1 ton, get 28mpg and are pretty nice inside, they also do have rust issues, but with how many miles you put on a vehicle the rest of it's going to wear out before it rusts to bad.

Unreal, on that list even the 4 cylinder's got 17-18 mpg city and 21 -23 mpg hwy. What a advancement in burning gas quickly with modern technology.

I think the engineers studied at the center for wasting fuel.

I am going to go test drive some F150s this weekend and a CX-5 (and probably a few other vehicles) when I go south before the long weekend.

The last Ranger sold a couple days ago so I won't get to drive it at the same time as the 1/2 tons.

I am going to give the 3.7L engine a shot and see how it feels empty and with a quad in the back. Probably do the same with the 5.0 and ecoboost.

The big problem with the 3.7 (if it doesn't feel underpowered) is the lack of a LS/locking differential option. Other than the dismal fuel economy of my current ride open differentials are one of its major pitfalls.


I have always owned body on frame vehicles (other than briefly owning a lifted Jeep Grand Cherokees) so am really not sure what I will think of the CX-5 when I get to test it. Who knows, maybe I will love it and thoughts of trucks will disappear. I am also concerned I will break stuff and it will be more expensive to fix.

If I got the Mazda I don't think I would change anything on it for fuel efficiency, but if I got the truck there are so many things to try.


EDIT:
[RANT]I wish everyone would agree on one efficiency measurement. MPGs are stupidly confusing here in Canada since the older people and manufacturers tend to use imperial gallons, but not always, while the younger crowd tends to use US gallons, unless they grew up on a farm...

I like my L/100km nice and unambiguous.[/RANT]

Just a note, your 4x4 is more fuel efficient than the awd, as awd is not contollable. It just goes. I would suggest 4x2, to save weight of a transfer case and other gear, but if you need or feel more secure, get 4x4 way before you get awd. The ecoboost seems like a great suggestion, even before modifying. I want an eco boost in the Mustang, personally. But twin turbos on a truck sounds good, too.

I second ECOBOOST! (or third ecoboost?)

Naw, seriously, I started off yearning for a ford fiesta but my wife said no way you're getting an F-150. I thought I could break her over time....like water on stone. 15 months later I had to raise the white flag (she's obviously tougher than me)....and bought an F-150. Got the 3.7l super cab 2WD and with only 700 miles on the odometer I can get a solid 23mpg on the highway, 18-19 to work and back (5 miles, 7 stoplights, 45mph max speed, cold engine both ways). I think I'll be able to do better as she breaks in. Over 300HP, it'll wind out to 7000RPM and let out a beautiful sound, pull 6000#'s, haul stuff, and it really drives nicely. It's not gonna get you 40mpg...but I think it's the best option in trucks. The 3.7L engine isn't available in 4WD Supercrew...you've gotta go super cab or 2wd (sorry) but if you really need 4WD and Supercrew then the ecoboost got me the same mileage during test drives in town....as long as you don't spin up the turbos.

I guess I never updated this after my test drive.

I took three 4x4 XLT supercabs for a spin last week. One with each engine.

I started out with the 3.7 and was unimpressed. I could probably get used to it but it had sort of a cheep feel. Couldn't hold its gear on some hills I had never had to shift on before (despite the less powerful engine in my current Explorer)

I coulden't help but feel like I was driving a big stiff frame with small engine and they should have softened the suspension to reflect the low payload and tow rating. The thing bounced all over the place on washboard gravel and was way too stiff for the brief stint on a rolling quad trail.


I took the 5.0 on the same circuit. I smiled the whole time.

Felt great, sounded great, seemed more planted with a bit more weight in the front. I know it has the worst fuel economy rating but it just felt like a truck should (in my opinion)


Last I took the ecoboost for a spin. and spin it did. The ecoboost can have a "holly poop" feel to it. The thing just felt like it wanted to go fast. 160km/h / 100mph felt like it was just starting to wind up.

But it just didn't really feel right. It felt oddly overgeared/geared too tall. A glaring omission on the instrument cluster was the lack of a boost gage. I was really interested in where and when the turbos would kick in but never got to.

My guess is it is either "eco" or "boost" with these things. I don't think Ford wants us to know how much time it is really in "boost"


I went through the process of getting approved for financing for the 5L but need to try out the CX-5 before I make a decision.

I am going to test a CX-5 in 1 week and before I even start the engine I am going to see how a 36" unicycle and a thermarest fit in the back...

I have high hopes for the CX-5. If it looks like a good fit after the test drive I am definitely going that direction.

It would be nice to have a proper truck so I wouldn't have to always borrow my dads when I am hauling/towing but if I keep my current driving habits (over 60,000km/year) then the CX-5 could save me over $20,000 in 5 years over the F-150 and pay for itself in fuel savings in less than 7 years compared to using my current bomber.

I think those 6 speed transmissions just feel that way when you get on them or going up hills. You literally have to downshift from 6th to 2nd or 3rd if you punch it at 40mph so it takes a second to make the jump. I think they're doing it because you can roll along at 40mph in 6th at about 1000rpm getting dang near 30mpg on a flat road. But it definitely feels different than a regular 4 speed and it's going to shift more. With the GM truck you have to engage all 8 cylinders (because you've been cruising along with 4 deactivated, right?) and then downshift 3-4 gears so it feels even more sluggish...despite > 300hp. At least that's my take on them.

But I don't know, saving $4K per year in gas......that's a pretty good reason to avoid the truck if you can.

Can you wait a year or so?

Cummins and Nissan are teaming up to make a super fuel efficient Titan.

Check it out

I'm also from Sask, southeast (Yorkton)

google

news.pickuptrucks.com/2011/05/cummins-feds-developing-four-cylinder-diesel-for-nissan-titan.html]Update 2: Cummins, Feds Developing Four-Cylinder Diesel for Nissan Titan - PickupTrucks.com News[/url]

I can't post ink cause I'm still new here.

Thanks PR03

My sister lived in Yorkton for a while, nice place, an upgrade from living in Regina anyway. ;)

I had seen the article about the Cummins Nissan. It looks promising but I am not holding my breath.

I wish I could wait but it's to the point where my current vehicle isn't worth keeping any more.

Tailpipe is gone, transmission has issues, engine is not running properly, needs new brakes, shocks are blown (again), it won't hold an alignment, burns more gas than a 1/2 ton and is about 2 inches too short to sleep in anyway.

I like going on long trips. it is looking like New Mexico is a possibility this fall but I don't trust my vehicle to get there or back anymore.

Right now I am really hopping that a CX-5 will work for me. I need to know the internal dimensions to know if it is a good fit but that kind of fuel economy with AWD and a *suposedly* fun drive is pretty alluring. If I could get the european diesel model I would be all smiles but don't think I can wait another year or two.

Ecoboost best mileage?
 

Hi
I bought my F150 just a year ago and now have 26,000 km on it. I did a lot of shopping before buying, and had a similar wish list to yours. I settled on a super cab 4x4 3.7l v6. The ecoboost did not have the highest rated economy, in spite of Ford's advertising. The ecoboost was amazing to drive, but you cant make horsepower without burning fuel. I wonder if the real world reveals any interesting facts. Did you know that the gas powered TURBO beetle gets MUCH better economy than it's normally aspirated sister.

I am very pleased with my truck, and the comments about the 6 speed transmission are right on the mark, it is different and takes some getting used to, but is very likely a key factor in good economy.

My lifetime average is 12.1 l/100km (19.7 Mpg-us)
I just did a 1900 km trip and got 9.86 l/100 (24.2 mpg-us) on the last fill-up (1020km) this was mostly highway driving with 200 km of gravel roads. Almost all on cruise, highway speeds 115km/hr

I consistently get in the mid 11's l/100km driving IN TOWN

The truck is very sensitive to hills, and the cruise is too aggressive for optimal fuel economy. I can pick up 10% by driving carefully without the cruise.

It tows a trailer well and my last trailering trip was a couple of hundred km to deliver an antique car to a new home. 12.5 l/100 km pulling the trailer (5000 lbs)

So did I buy the right combination?
I am not sure and I have to admit the ecoboost is very appealing. I love turbo cars (I have had a number of turbo Audi's).

Is there any one out there with a year of mixed driving in an ecoboost 150 that can share detailed results? The information I can find is spotty.

PS
I bought a 2000 Honda Insight in need of some TLC a month after the F150. WOW I love that little car, I do a 20 km drive each way every day, and if the traffic is light, and I work at it I can get my mileage as good as 2.5 l/100km (95.3 MPG-us)

Do you have a topper on that thing or anything or are you just running with the open bed? I have a cab-height topper and think it cut my mileage a bit. I have 4000 miles on mine and the 2wd with supercab, 3.7L engine, and about the same lifetime mileage (a hair under 20). I'd love to have a 40mpg vehicle but an honest 20 in a full sized giant truck is pretty dang good.

No topper, I do have a rigid tonneau cover. Which interestingly didn't seem to make a darn bit of difference, and I do keep good records.

I sure am glad to hear that....I've been thinking I should have gotten a tonneau cover to boost my mileage. I think the topper dropped it a bit....maybe 1-2mpg? But I didn't have more than a few hundred miles on the truck before getting it so not enough data to know for sure. I'm just super happy it can get over 20mpg on the road.

I decided to go to Australia for the winter and buy something when I get back so not really in the market anymore but I did just get some real good real world experience with a 2012 F150 ecoBoost.

I was sent to Idaho for 3 weeks to help fight the fires there as part of a 20-pack and we were given new rental trucks for the tour. We went to 4 different fires so did a real mix of highway, gravel roads and forest service trails.

5 different drivers, 1300-1800 lbs of people and gear, widely varying road types and gear and no consideration for fuel economy. We were getting between 17 and 18 US-mpg on each fill.

Not phenomenal but pretty respectable in my opinion for the loads and mixed terrain.

We had 3 Fords, one Chevy and one Dodge, all 2012 crew cabs. All did fine except the cab of the dodge was too small for 5 full sized guys on long trips and we cracked the airdam on the Chevy getting over a drainage berm at one of the fires. I did not get any milage info from the other trucks.

Ford's new eco boost motor is almost making their v8 irrelevant, almost lol. But yeah, my dad has a tacoma king cab, and with the rear cover he gets close to 30mpg on long hwy trips (v6)