Home / Ford News and Reviews
2015 Ford F-150 truck
Patrick Rall's picture
By Patrick Rall Jul 17 2015 - 5:58pm

2 Tough Tests for the 2015 F150 2.7L EcoBoost

I recently had a chance to spend a week driving the 2015 Ford F150 XLT with the 2.7L EcoBoost V6 engine and while enjoying the segment-leading fuel economy, I was also able to put this tiny economy engine through the same hard-working tests as every other new truck – and the new super-efficient EcoBoost engine never failed to impress me.
Advertisement

The front end of the 2015 Ford F150 XLT 4WD SuperCab
The 2015 Ford F150 XLT 4WD SuperCab loaded with wood
The rear end of the 2015 Ford F150 XLT 4WD SuperCab
The front 3/4 of the 2015 Ford F150 XLT 4WD SuperCab

Over the past few years, Ford has used a 3.5L EcoBoost V6 to top their F150 engine lineup and while this engine was the most fuel efficient in the lineup, it was also the most powerful and the hardest working – leading the lineup in towing capacity. With the introduction of the new 2015 Ford F150 came a new EcoBoost V6, measuring 2.7L and offering fuel economy figures that made it comfortably the most fuel efficient gasoline powered truck in the segment.

15 Great Pictures of 2015 F-150

Based on the EPA ratings, the 2015 Ford F150 XLT 4WD with the 2.7L EcoBoost V6 can expect to get 18 miles per gallon around town, 23mpg on the highway and 20mpg combined, making it a segment leader among half ton gas trucks.

That is nice, but the fuel economy leader battle among the half ton trucks is one of inches, so the lead over the closest competitors in MPGs is slim. That slim margin makes you wonder if opting for this smaller efficiency-minded package is worth the compromise in working capabilities, but in my experiences – the 2.7L EcoBoost doesn’t come with any sacrifices for the vast majority of truck owners who actually use their half ton trucks like trucks.

2015 f150 guard rear

Plenty of people will point out that a great many newer half ton truck owners in the United States don’t spend much time towing or hauling, so strong fuel economy figures can play a big role in which new pickup someone buys when that person never uses the bed or the hitch. However, there are a great many newer truck owners – and new truck shoppers – who might not tow every day or even every week, but they still want the ability to pull a decent sized trailer from time to time.

In short, the 2015 Ford F150 XLT 4WD with the 2.7L EcoBoost V6 might just be the perfect truck for the buyer who wants a truck that can pull a nice sized trailer, comfortably handle a heavy load and still get segment leading fuel economy when not all loaded down. Also, at no point in my test time did I find that the aluminum body made this truck anything but one of the best on sale today.

Hauling 1,000lbs of Grain
The first test for my 2015 Ford F150 was a trip to the grain store, where I purchased a half ton of bagged horse feed to load into my EcoBoost-powered half ton Ford truck.

Some people automatically believe that because it is a V6 that gets class leading fuel economy figures, the new 2.7L has to be a pig in terms of power, but that couldn’t be further from the case with the new EcoBoost V6. While it is the most efficient gas powered truck on sale today, this F150 still packs 325 horsepower and 375lb-ft of torque, so it is a far cry from the super-efficient engines from past years where MPGs came first and power came last. While these figures make it the second least powerful engine in the current F150 lineup, those figures comfortably trump any V8 engine from the F150 in the early 2000s.

On the way to the feed store, I was able to experience the acceleration capabilities of the 2015 F150 with the 2.7L EcoBoost and I was truly shocked at how hard this little engine moves the big Ford truck. I strongly believe that if you put the average truck shopper in a new F150 with the 2.7L EcoBoost – but told them that it was the more-powerful 3.5L EcoBoost V6 – they would walk away impressed by how powerful this truck is. Of course, once those same folks drove an F150 with the 3.5L EcoBoost, they would quickly feel the difference, but the 2.7L EcoBoost really is that good. The power comes on quick and hard, affording this lightweight half ton truck solid acceleration when unloaded – but could it handle an extra 1,000 pounds in the bed?

f150 hauling

Well, after loading 1,400lbs of bagged horse grain into the bed of the 2015 F150, I headed out onto the road. When I pulled out of the parking lot, I straightened the truck out on the road and climbed up to the posted 50mph speed limit without any real fuss. I don’t want to say that I couldn’t feel the extra weight, but the reduction in simple acceleration was only slightly reduced, basically requiring me to give the Ford a little more gas to get up to speed. Even then, the 2.7L EcoBoost V6 barely broke a sweat getting up to speed and during the basic acceleration of normal driving situations.

In other words, the 2.7LEcoBoost V6 very comfortably went through the paces of hauling a thousand pounds of grain on my 20 mile drive, which included highway driving at 70mph, some curvy roads that tested the handling of the F150 and some stop and go city driving. I believe that if you could strap the weight down in a way that it wouldn’t make any noise and cover the load so that someone couldn’t see it, a new driver of the 2015 F150 would still be impressed with the acceleration of this efficient pickup.

In the same way that the original 3.5L EcoBoost V6 offered awesome power, the 2.7L EcoBoost packs plenty of power to get this truck up to speed in a hurry – even when you add a thousand pounds to the curb weight.

Towing a 5,000lb Trailer
After getting the grain back to the stables and hauling some wood around the grounds, it was time to hook the 2015 Ford F150 XLT up to my 5,000lb test trailer. My 2015 F150 test truck had a towing capacity rating of 7,600lbs, which doesn’t sound all that impressive with so many trucks pulling up past the 11,000lb mark, but the truth is that the vast majority of people who do tow from time to time don’t tow 11,000lb trailers. They pull things like jet skis, utility trailers and my little horse trailer – all of which weigh way under 11,000lbs. Heck, even if you rented a 2,200lb UHaul car trailer and loaded a Hellcat Hemi Challenger (the heaviest muscle car on the market), you would still be almost a thousand pounds below the maximum towing capacity of my 2015 F150 2.7L EcoBoost test truck.

I use the exact same trailer for all of my towing tests, so long as the vehicle will tow at least 5,000lbs safely (per the manufacturer) and of the half ton trucks I have tested in the past year, this F150’s towing capacity was one of the lowest. With most trucks, my 2-horse trailer is less than half of the maximum towing capacity, but I was using up about two thirds of the capacity in this test.

2015 f150 hot front

Even with that in mind, the 2015 Ford F150 pulled my test trailer beautifully. I pulled out onto the road and accelerated up to the 50mph speed limit with the transmission set to tow/haul mode. This stretches the lower gears out more for better lower speed performance and as a result, the torquey little turbo-6 pulled my trailer around town with no problem. The 2.7L EcoBoost provides plenty of power to get up to speed from a stop at a reasonable rate and when riding in traffic around town (35-55mph), this efficient little engine has no issue getting back up to speed when I had to slow down for people turning or other interruptions in my path.

After logging about 40 miles in town/city settings with the 2015 F150 hooked to my test trailer, I hit the highway to see how the small engine handled the trailer at higher speeds. The highway speed limit around me is 70 and with the horses, I never exceed that speed limit so my highway speeds when towing anything living are restricted to 65-70mph. At those speeds, the 2.7L EcoBoost didn’t feel quite as strong as the 3.5L EcoBoost, and when I hit hills without a proper run, I had to ask for a little more from the 2.7L than I have the 3.5L F150 in past tests. The 2.7L EcoBoost still pulled my test trailer very well, but on steeper grades, it did have to work a bit harder than the bigger, less efficient engines in the half ton segment.

However, at the end of my 3 hour drive hooked to the 5,000lb horse trailer, I would give the 2015 Ford F150 with the 2.7L EcoBoost a solid A, with the likes of the 5.0L V8 and the 3.5L EcoBoost V6 being A+ towers. Also, while this serves as little more than a nice bonus, the 2015 F150 muffles more trailer noise than any truck I have tested, with almost none of the rattles from the horse trailer making it into the cabin of the new F150.

The Final Word
At the end of the day, if you are someone who tows a ton and who really wants a truck that effortlessly pulls a fair sized trailer, you are going to want to opt for the 2015 Ford F150 with the 3.5L EcoBoost engine. However, if you are looking to occasionally pull a horse trailer, a jet ski trailer or maybe a quad on a small utility trailer on the weekend – while getting awesome fuel economy for a full sized 4WD truck under normal driving circumstances – the new 2.7L EcoBoost V6 might just be your best bet for the money.

muddy 2015 f150 badge

I can confidently say that any “Average” driver shopping for a new half ton truck right now will be impressed with the power of the 2.7L EcoBoost V6 while loving the fuel economy capabilities and when the need arises to haul a thousand pounds or two five thousand pounds, this little twin turbo V6 does not disappoint.

New Vehicle Reviews
Pickup Trucks
Ford News and Reviews
Ford F150

Subscribe to Torque News on YouTube.
Follow Torque News on YouTube, Twitter and Facebook.

Comments

Gregory Faulkner wrote on September 18, 2015 - 4:58am
I just pulled the trigger on a reg cab SB with the 2.7eb, which was very hard for the dealer to find in the southeast where super cabs and crew cabs rule. I'm a huge fan of diesel power and have been waiting on an affordable diesel for 1/2-ton or smaller for nearly a couple of decades, yet I understand the cost challenges for diesel engineers here in the States with all the crazy pollution rules put on diesel exhaust. I love the low-end, easy-going grunt and demeanor, and the fantastic mpg of smaller turbo diesels and feel that DI turbo gas engines provide some of those same performance qualities when one is soft on the pedal with all that flat torque. However, unlike DI diesel turbos, the gas DI turbos don't really excel in the mpg department as was originally promised by the OEMs. Alas, after seeing what pricing strategy GM and Chrysler is using with small diesels, and seeing the limited configuration/option package choices; e.g. Ram Ecodiesel starting at $38K+ and GMC Canyon Duramax starting at near that with only a crew cab choice, I finally decided to give up on the idea of a small, basic diesel truck for my budget and tastes. I've gone a while w/o a truck with the need for one; love the driving experience with respect to Ford's smaller Ecoboost, but will sure miss that 47 mpg of my traded VW TDI and what the 4 cylinder Duramax could have provided if GM had placed it in a more basic trim and configuration; but since I don't tow and refuse to own a crew cab and can see the diesel market evolving only for the rich and famous, I have broken down and bought a gas guzzler. Nice truck though.
charles boone wrote on October 26, 2015 - 10:53pm
I too bought same after waiting months for reg cab. I get high 20s to 30 plus with 4 star tuning 93 octane econ. tune on trips to Fla.and the damn thing is a rocket ship! I also have 87 tow performance and 93 performance but i do not use them as 93 econ is fast aplenty! I use nothing but 93 non ethanol and find the difference in mpg and performance more than make up the price difference. Glad to find another eccentric throw back that believes that 2wd reg cabs are how God intended you to get around. I had several 4wd trucks and I got stuck all the damn time! May have had something to do with alcohol and youth! Most people I know with 4wd 4 door trucks don't even know how to put them in 4wd. My little race red xl cost a lot less han 1/2 the price of the "mines bigger than yours" Monsters that you spend way too much time looking for a parking place as well as way too much time at the pump! SEMPER FI C. BOONE
Greg wrote on October 28, 2015 - 6:09am
Yeah it's amazing how affordable the all-new aluminum F150 can be compared to the craziness surrounding the pickup truck market and high prices if only consumers would consider the idea that less can be more. This is also the case with respect to the other brands too, but where the F150 excels is in the fact that one can get pretty much all the important, advanced technologies (the ones that matter for driving) at a comparable, base price to the other brands. That's a truck with a lighter aluminum body and advanced engine technologies. If one opts for a Ram with the Ecodiesel, for instance, he or she is forced into an expensive truck. The other brands don't even have advanced engine technologies as of yet, except for the little Duramax for the Colorado/Canyons, but it's the same deal as the Ram; you'll have to take a crew cab and put down $35K. But even if you're a GM or Toyota fan, they have basic trucks with decent gas mileage that will provide good utility and good looks for a great value, but that value goes away when one starts looking at these featured-up monster-truck versions of the same-boned truck. For instance, the F150XL I took delivery on has the 2.7EB (Ford's most advanced engine with auto start shutoff feature); the 101A option package which gives, cruise, day-time running lights, power door locks and windows, remote keyless entry, and remote-locking tailgate, and a few other features that were meaningless to me but came with the package. The truck I chose also came with the chrome trim package, which in reality, I would have preferred just the work-truck trim, but the 2016s were being manufactured at the time, and so I needed to find a 2015 that the dealer was willing to pickup, because the 2016s did not come with rebates, so I opted for the closest thing. Even with all of these features (some I didn't need or want), I got the truck for around $27K before taxes, the trade, and all that stuff that varies from state to state. Conversely, I saw a review on an F150 with the 2.7 on a super cab (not even the bigger crew cab) that listed @ $54K; double the price I paid. Now even if someone got, say $5K in rebates, that's still $12K more for a truck with more interior storage and lots of luxuries and conveniences and connectivity that few people really need or even want if they stop and think about it. In the area of connectivity, for example, one would be much better off to go get a portable device and subscription to support it separate from the truck and have that same connectivity without paying thousands for it that works either in or out of the truck. In the area of fuel economy, where Ford has taken a beating by the reviewers, it's only because the reviewers are reviewing elaborate, large, heavy versions of these trucks and it is that fact that is driving down the mpg. A regular cab pickup, in 2wd and shortbed configuration, with high to medium rear end axle gearing can provide much more mpg than these reviews telling folks. When one looks around the web, he or she will find reviews for only the $45K pickups and up. I've seen one video by TFL that sported a $62K 1/2-ton pickup truck. That's 230% more than my truck that has the same Ford quality and performance; only that my truck has more practicality and usability unless I wanted to haul around a bunch of folks with us. The wife and I have a car and a truck just like most families, so I'm often confused as to why every family needs a crew-cab truck and a mid-size car. If you don't need a truck for family transportation, you can add a versatile, folding or rollup tonneau for about $250. You've then got the equivalent of a huge, water resistant trunk that is easily removable for the times when you need a 6.5 or 8 foot bed. You can fit in garages, maneuver around town, get better mpg, wash and spray wax it in under an hour, and get one for under $30K and get the same ride and drive as those paying tens of thousands more.
Mickey wrote on December 28, 2015 - 4:24pm
I just drove a crew cab 4x4 with the 2.7L and was completely blown away. I haven't driven the bigger V6 or the V8 so I have no basis for comparison, but I've driven plenty of older pickups with V8s. Most recently my 2002 model Toyota Tacoma V8. Lots of small block Fords, Chevys and Dodges as well. This tiny V6 really does feel like a small block V8. NO turbo lag at all. Way more grunt that it has a right to. I'm also used to 15 mpg being the norm in a V8 powered half ton 4x4. The fact that 23 mpg is even possibly (though unlikely) borders on voodoo. Another thing I noticed is that you don't have to get the fancy trim level. An XL used to be pretty spartan, but with the cruise control and power options group the XL is a very fancy truck. For the life of me I can't understand the point of spending an extra five grand or so on an XLT. I went in looking for an XLT and drove the XL just to get a feel for the engine, but in the process they talked me out of the higher trim level. By buying a 2015 instead of a new 2016, and getting the XL instead of XLT, I'm putting a cool $10,000 in my pocket. Seriously....look at the 2.7L. If you don't need to tow heavy loads on a regular basis it's PLENTY of engine.
Mickey wrote on April 13, 2016 - 4:25am
Update: 8000 miles on the clock, and I could not love a human baby as much as I love this truck. Lifetime fuel economy is 22.4 mph in mixed suburban and high speed freeway driving. My last tank I played around with "hypermiling" in a modest way and managed over 25 mpg. Yet, when a kid in a late model VW GTI challenged me at a light, I made him look silly. This truck is a ROCKET. I kid you not, it's the quickest vehicle I've ever owned. I towed a largish flatbed trailer a couple of times. Maybe 4000 pounds loaded. The truck barely noticed it, but fuel economy predictably suffered. Fit and finish is still Toyota-like. ZERO issues. My recommendation is that, for most people, the 2.7L is the engine. It is literally the quickest pickup on the market, not counting trucks like the Raptor. Quicker than the 5.7 Hemi, quicker than the optional Corvette-engined Chevy. Drive it with fuel economy in mind and you'll be amazed. And, when called upon, it will work like a truck. The only caveat is that it becomes a gas hog under boost. Therefore, if you use your half-ton like a car most of the time, and only occasionally tow or haul 6000 pounds or less, this is the truck. Work it hard on a regular basis and you'll get better results with the 3.5L. The V8 has absolutely no place in the lineup. It's slower than either Ecoboost, won't pull like the 3.5, and drinks far more gas than either. It's only there for guys who insist on a V8 for whatever silly reasons. Get over it! It's a pointless thing.
Steve wrote on May 17, 2016 - 8:24am
I've seen practical tests were the 5.0L matches the 2.7L nearly exactly in actual mpg's, getting a consistent 19 mpg average. 22 is almost exactly what the 3.5L will return, and the 3.5 and 2.7 are so similar I don't see the purpose of the 2.7, were they priced the same everyone would get the 3.5. Currently the 5.0L still has a place, the issues of the 3.5EB were not myth, we'll see what the next generation 3.5L brings. Though for those that would rather see the dealer when they pick up their vehicle and that's it, I believe the truck to buy is the 5.0L.
gregsfc wrote on December 29, 2015 - 6:27am
After driving an F150 with the 2.7 EB for 3 mos., I've got a theory that the more one tries to get more utility, more off-road clearance and capability and more bling and more seating capacity with the 2.7 EB option, the less valuable this power train becomes as a fuel miser. Coupled with that, the more one wants to use the 325 rated horsepower for sporting around or for work, the more average, and possibly even worse than average this power train can be with respect to mpg. I believe the choices made mating this engine to a particular truck, in so far as real-world versus EPA estimate mpg, can be far more detrimental than what the EPA cycle has shown, and while I agree that this power train does not fall short of any mid-size V8 ever manufactured for a pickup truck in the performance and capability arena; I do believe that when this engine is under a load (be that weight, drag, or weather causing that load) it can be a real gas guzzler. If we look at combined EPA estimates; Ford does not distinguish between any of the configurations from the reg cab short and long, the super cab short and long or the super crew. They also do not account for the six or so different gearing ratios including slip and non-slip or do they account for wheel/tire size; or fully-featured versus bare bones, which can be quite different in weight. There are basically only four EPA estimates for the F150 with any particular engine. For the 2.7 EB, it is as follows: 2wd standard payload @ 22 mpg, combined; 2wd "payload package" @ 21 combined; 4wd standard payload @ 20; and 4wd "payload package" @ 19. So what I gather from all of this is that there is no way Ford or the EPA or anyone else can account for all the different variables that affect fuel economy, and if my theory is right, then everything added to this base truck will hurt the mpg more than the EPA predicts. So turning to my truck and my driving style and my commuting, everything is admittedly ideal, and I have always averaged better mpg than most in any vehicle: I've got a 29 mile, one-way trip along state highways. I drive through one small town with 5 traffic lights along my route, and I usually have to stop at about three of them, each way. On either side of the town, part of the route I'll drive 61 mph and the other leg, I'll drive 59. I'll rarely have to pass or stop. When it is particularly windy or stormy, the truck will tend towards 21.5 and when it's warm and calm, it'll tend towards 24. I'm using reg. 87 octane, E10 gas. It seems to do better than the 19 rated mpg in the city, but even on a long highway trip at 65 mph, it will not reach the 26 rating. Without hypermiling, it tops out at about 25 on a round trip excursion in the leastest of an F150. I really wanted a diesel as stated before, and so what's important to me about this engine is not the 325 ponies, and I'll rarely use them. The reason I wanted this DI, turbo-charged gas engine was for the higher torque down the RPM range for a more diesel-like performance, but with only a $795 premium, versus a $10K premium for a diesel, and my plan was and is to let the torque down low drive the truck accelerating and maintaining speeds on the highway with very light pedal pressure (sort of like one can drive a V8) to get acceptable mpg, as this keeps the power output low, and thus the corresponding fuel uptake low. It works! It's got enough torque to give that feeling of refinement and can accelerate and maintain speeds w/o a lot of downshifting, but the big, big difference between a spark-ignition and a diesel with similar components is that, with a diesel, you can get the turbo to spool and bring the performance to life w/o causing a huge drop in mpg. This is not the case with the 2.7 EB. If you want a truck to sport around and/or do a whole lot of high-utility applications; or you want lots of things with a truck that increases weight or gear ratio, then this is still a good choice in truck due to its performance. However, if you're pushing the $40K range in your wanted truck and you can live with 240 horsepower with an amazing, corresponding 420 peak lbs foot of torque starting at only 1800 RPM; and you don't mind driving a Ram and you don't mind the possibility of maintenance issues that may or may not arise with these newer exhaust-treatment systems in diesels, and you don't live in an area where diesel fuel gets a huge premium, and you prefer low RPM performance to high RPM performance, then a Ram Ecodiesel may be your preferred drive system. The huge advantage of the 2.7 EB in my mind, is in the lower priced ranges of truck configurations and features. As stated above, an XL with a 101A package has lots of goodies that used to be in only the higher end trim levels. No one but Ford will let one have their most advanced, fuel-efficient, high-performing engine in a base-level truck with some important features for under $28K. That's not to say there is anything wrong with a higher-end pickup with the 2.7. It's just that the mpg advantage is lost versus the competitors. At least that's my theory.
Mickey Bitsko wrote on April 13, 2016 - 4:35am
I agree that the 2.7L shines when you use a light foot. It's hot-rodded to a crazy extent, and if you mash the pedal it'll go like hell, but also drink an ocean of fuel. But that's just right for me. Once in a while I mash the pedal, knowing what it's costing me, but the rest of the time I have fun trying to stretch every drop of fuel. The engine is brilliant either way. It does exactly what you tell it to do, and does it well. No V8 will approach the fuel economy of this motor. I don't care how you drive it. I've owned a Tacoma 4x4 with a V6 and was lucky to get 22 mpg with a mini truck. I thought I was doing well. In fact, I WAS doing well by normal standards. The 2.7 raises the bar. Instrumented tests have shown that the 2.7 is the quickest accelerating pickup in the world, with the 3.5 just a tick behind. No standard V8 can keep up, and neither can the Hemi or the optional Chevy motor. It's partly the free-revving nature of the 2.7, which winds up like a race car, and partly having access to a whole bunch of gears. But I still don't understand it. I'm convinced someone made a deal with the devil. Mine's an XL Super Crew 4x4 with the usual option package and tow package. It's the fanciest truck I've ever owned. I don't see the point of an XLT or above, frankly. I looked seriously at the new Nissan Titan with the Cummins V8, but no way could I justify parting with the extra $10K, and the fuel economy difference would have taken me at least 300,000 miles to pay for that option, given the price of diesel fuel. The final deciding factor was that I simply have no need for the diesel. I love them, but I"m not willing to pay for one just because it's "cool." The 2.7 has all the cool diesel features anyway. Just happens to burn gasoline instead. Turbocharged, direct injection, CGI block, etc. It's a tank.
UproarinSonoran wrote on May 10, 2016 - 7:10pm
I have 8k mi on my 2015 2.7EB SuperCrew 4wd SB. What can I expect for mpg while towing--5k trailer weight seems to be std so use that figure. I am taking a cross country trip with the fam from NC to WY to AZ and back for a month and we are looking at a trailer to save on hotel and use as a future camper. Wondering if we should buy a big trailer (6500 GVWR) for comfort and suffer the lower mpg or scrimp on the trailer (3k GVWR) to conserve some mpg up and down the Rockies... Any info would be helpful.
Lee wrote on August 20, 2016 - 9:45am
Not sure if you already made your choice, but I have a 2015 super cab 4x4 with the 2.7. I moved from Idaho to Washington and towed my car on a car trailer. The weight was approximately 5500lbs and I was towing through the Cascades at one point. I averaged about 13.8-14.5mpg on the trip checking between each fill up. Had plenty of power running up 6% grades at 65mph, easily able to pass truckers etc...
Tim A wrote on May 10, 2016 - 7:20pm
Perhaps the wrong forum, but a different application for the 2.7 Ecoboost. Wife has this power plant in a 2015 Ford Edge Sport AWD. She averages 26.3 mpg on mid grade fuel w/ it in mostly highway driving that's a mix of 2 lane 65mph, freeway at 70 mph (or better) with maybe 5% of city driving. And did I mention it's a rocket to boot? Had a '70 Charger w/ a 383 ci HP engine and a 4 speed stick. This little Ecoboost would be gone before the Charger stopped spinning it's wheels. 5.6 seconds to 60 and approx. 13.7 sec. quarter miles at nearly 100 mph in a car that's pretty substantial (weighs nearly 4700 lbs w/ me in it) all from an engine that boasts only 164 cubic inches! I realize the Edge is much smaller than a full-size p/u and certainly has less wind resistance and also probably has a higher overall gear ratio, but it weighs nearly as much as a regular cab, aluminum bodied, 2 wheel drive F-150. I don't see how you beat the combination of performance and fuel economy the 2.7 Ecoboost offers. Yes, it burns fuel when you make power (so does everything else) but it also satisfies every time you drop the hammer in it, sounding (on the inside at least) like a late 60's muscle car under power and nearly silent while it sips fuel in cruise. What's not to like?
Tim A wrote on August 18, 2017 - 3:40am
This is an update to my original post. 2015 Edge Sport w/ 2.7 Ecoboost now has 71,000 miles on it. Still gets 26.3 mpg, uses no oil between changes of Pennzoil Ultra-Platinum 5w-30, still runs like a top with nothing more than routine service.
UproarinSonoran wrote on May 10, 2016 - 8:29pm
I have 8k mi on my 2015 2.7EB SuperCrew 4wd SB. What can I expect for mpg while towing--5k trailer weight seems to be std so use that figure. I am taking a cross country trip with the fam from NC to WY to AZ and back for a month and we are looking at a trailer to save on hotel and use as a future camper. Wondering if we should buy a big trailer (6500 GVWR) for comfort and suffer the lower mpg or scrimp on the trailer (3k GVWR) to conserve some mpg up and down the Rockies... Any info would be helpful.
Hank wrote on July 24, 2017 - 12:47pm
2015 super cab xlt 4X4. 33,000 miles. When I tow my 5000 #camper I get 10 mpg. Empty I manage 23.5-24.8 mpg. 3.55 gears in the rear
Joe Drake wrote on February 19, 2018 - 2:10pm
I have a 2015 F150 2.7 4x4 3.55 gears with 26k. Towing is no issue. I have a 24 ft Wilderness (7000 loaded) and have taken over many mountain passes (We live in Colorado) with no issues PERIOD! Love the truck. I average 12 - 13 when towing and 22 when empty. Just an fyi...
nam wrote on May 11, 2016 - 1:06pm
I bought a used 2015 F150 XLT Supercrew with 2.7L EB . Like everyone else I LOVE THIS ENGINE . It is so fast , so responsive and so easy on gas when driving sensibly. I no longer tow so wanted a truck with good fuel economy. Never thought I would ever own a Ford but I must say this is my most favorite vehicle ever ! I love this truck !! Used to drive a Ram 1500 with 4 corner air suspension and the drive in this F150 is at least as smooth if not smoother than the Ram. There are just so many great things about this truck I can't even list them all. I have no negatives to report. I really like the Auto Stop/Start feature. Most of my driving is city so anything to help save fuel is a bonus.And I still have enough grunt for the occasional time I need to tow something. Have I mentioned I love this truck ?
gregsfc wrote on May 12, 2016 - 7:13am
2015 F150; Almost 11K miles, 8 mos., mostly highway commuting but use occasionally to carry materials for projects and recreation, under 65 mph, 85% state highways, 15% city; reg cab, 2WD, short bed, 3.31 rear axle ratio, 4168 curb weight, averaging 24.0 mpg, cost only $27.3K versus cheapest diesel truck @ or about $34K and that's a compact truck; cheapest full-size diesel at or about $37K. What I like Power train: Super quiet, smooth, refined, shifts up down low on the tachometer while accelerating modestly (just like a diesel does), transmission shifts smoothly and quickly. Absolutely love speed control..will downshift down grades to control speed and then up shift as road flattens with a mild lurch forward. Truck handles well, steering great Looks okay. Mine has chrome bumper package and I'm over chrome; will plasticoat some day. Don't like the black grill with chrome bumper, but only truck close to what I wanted. Hoping for at least 21 mpg commuting; ecstatic with 24 in warm weather and how strong an engine it is with that kind of mpg. What I don't like Coming from a straight shift, I miss the engine and gearing braking to help slow the vehicle. The 2.7L has very weak braking. I use the gear lock out function, but awkward, because one has to keep hitting - and then + several times to reset. Wish it had some kind of one-touch button "on" " off" for braking and/or coasting, but was not something I was expecting in an automatic; just wishing. Wish that the "gallons used" data was accurate or had a more consistent error so one could estimate mpg w/o having to hand calculate each tank. Wish My Ford Basic would display all my phone data, i.e. my contacts on the screen. I wish my truck didn't have spark plugs, but it cost too much to buy one w/o them; plus if it didn't, it would have DPF and SCR, and I don't want those headaches. I just realized that my don't like list, except for spark ignition and " gallons used" data being inconsistant, is really more of a wish list and not a don't like list, so I must love just about everything about it.
John Neechiona wrote on July 12, 2018 - 1:41pm
A year ago I bought a Race Red Crew Cab, 4wd, STX with the 2.7 Ecoboost engine. In a year not 1 trip back to the dealer for anything, 18,000 Miles and nothing has broke. This is my first full size pickup and I see now why so many people buy these trucks, from hauling grandkids, to runnining to Lowes, to pulling a load of alpaca’s, this truck can do it all! It’s fast, quiet and comfortable. I regularly see 20.4 mpg and 23 out on the highway in the mountains of West Virginia. Messed up the tailgate when backing a trailer and that cost $1400.00 due to the Aluminum construction, but at least it won’t ever rust. Not saying this is the best truck on the road, but I truly love this truck. The 2.7 is a work horse never feels underpowered and will whip any other stock pickup away from the red light. Go drive one, as they say the Proffitt is in the pudding!
Tynccymnten wrote on October 11, 2019 - 6:26am
I know been disappear for a while, but now I recall why I victimized to couple this blog. Impart you, I give try and hitch bet statesman often. How oftentimes you update your website?