Skip to main content

First Published 2015 Ford F150 MPGs Well Short of Ram EcoDiesel

Neither Ford Motor Company nor the EPA have announced the official fuel economy numbers for the 2015 F150, but the folks at Motor Trend have announced their numbers from the first round of testing with the 2.7L EcoBoost and surprisingly, this new engine falls well short of the Ram 1500 EcoDiesel.


The 2015 Ford F150 is expected to revolutionize the half ton truck segment with a new, lightweight aluminum body that should make this new F150 better than the outgoing model in every way. While things like towing, hauling and overall performance are key metrics for the segment, there is also a heated battle being waged for the title of the most fuel friendly half ton truck on the market. Right now, the Ram 1500 EcoDiesel holds that title with EPA figures of 20mpg around town, 28mpg on the highway and 23mpg combined in rear wheel drive form, while four wheel drive EcoDiesel Ram trucks drop to 19 in the city, 27 on the highway and 22 combined.

Those EcoDiesel Ram numbers are the current benchmark for the half ton truck segment and many expect that the 2015 Ford F150 will be the truck to unseat the Ram as the segment’s most efficient pickup. However, the first published fuel economy figures for the new 2015 Ford F150 with the 2.7L EcoBoost V6 fall far short of surpassing Ram’s powerful little diesel engine.

Motor Trend’s Real MPG for the 2015 F150
There are no official fuel economy numbers from Ford Motor Company or the EPA for the 2015 F150 pickup, but the folks at Motor Trend got ahold of a next gen F150 with the brand new 2.7L EcoBoost V6 and four wheel drive. MT put this truck through their 88 mile long “Real MPG” testing process and ended up with some surprising figures. The 2.7L EcoBoost engine in the 4WD 2015 F150 returned numbers of 16.6 miles per gallon around town, 21.5mpg on the highway and a combined number of 18.5mpg.

2015 Ford F150 Galleries:
A closer look at the trimlines of the 2015 Ford F150
The 2015 Ford F150 at the 2014 NAIAS

Those are well below the EPA figures for the Ram 1500 EcoDiesel, but Motor Trend has also put the diesel half ton Ram with four wheel drive through the 88 mile Real MPG test and saw figures of 18.6 miles per gallon around town, 25.8 on the highway and 21.2mpg combined. Based on the uniform testing process, Motor Trend found the Ram to beat the new EcoBoost F150 by 2 miles per gallon better around town, 4.3mpg on the highway and 2.7mpg combined.

Now, it should be noted that according to the EPA website, the most efficient 2014 Ford F150 4WD model was powered by the naturally aspirated base model 3.7L V6, which returned 16 around town, 21 on the highway and 18 combined – very similar numbers to Motor Trend’s Real MPG figures for the new 2.7L EcoBoost V6. The new base model V6 could be more fuel friendly than the 2.7L EcoBoost, but that base engine won’t offer the power or capabilities than you get with the EcoBoost or the Ram EcoDiesel and base on what we have seen in the past, I would be surprised to see the base V6 being more fuel friendly than the 2.7L EcoBoost.

How Accurate are MT’s Real MPG Figures?
Before comparing the Motor Trend numbers for the 2015 Ford F150 with the 2.7L EcoBoost V6 to the Ram EcoDiesel, I found the MT test for the Ram and I compared them to the official EPA numbers. The Real MPG numbers for the Ram EcoDiesel were 18.6 city, 25.8 highway and 21.2 combined while the official EPA numbers for an EcoDiesel 4WD Ram 1500 are 19 city, 27 highway and 22 combined. This puts the Motor Trend numbers within 1.2mpg of every figure, which would lead me to expect the official 2015 F150 2.7L 4WD numbers to be fairly close to the Motor Trend numbers.

If these Real MPG numbers do prove to be close to the official fuel economy numbers, the 2015 F150 is going to be significantly behind the Ram and if that is the case – Ford had better hurry up with that new 10-speed transmission.

Source: Motor Trend


John (not verified)    November 18, 2014 - 2:03PM

How do you compare a diesel fuel milage to that of a gas truck
You can't fairly do it.
And its stupid to try.
The U.S. is not a diesel friendly place.
And why pay 60 cents more a gallon for diesel fuel over 87 octane fuel.

Jake (not verified)    November 18, 2014 - 5:00PM

In reply to by Patrick Rall

They are in the exact same segment, BUT diesel cost 60 cents more per gallon. The fuel economy numbers can't be compared equally unless that extra gas cost is factored in. Using the Ram Ecodiesel 4x4 MPG (20/27/assuming 23.5 combined), a comparable gas truck would have to average 19 MPG to come up with the same gas cost. Why is this a constant point that is missed?

drawmer (not verified)    November 19, 2014 - 12:01AM

In reply to by John (not verified)

why don't you all stop trying to justify this epic failure. They could have made a very good diesel engine and took the market by storm. No one cares for this expensive aluminum if it only makes the dam thing more expensive. This is the company that couldn't fix the caster issue on super duties and bill hew from atlanta (powerstrokehelp) solved all by himself. All the ford idiots couldn't figure it out but a man from hick town backyard Alabama did. why are we even surprised that the truck blows. Ram offers real technology, Diesel. something trusted and proven.

J (not verified)    November 18, 2014 - 4:31PM

Uh, diesel has 15% more energy per gallon.
Multiply the F150's mpg numbers by 1.15 to adjust, that is if you care about comparing efficiency.

Rick (not verified)    November 18, 2014 - 6:15PM

Its' also not fair to compare a diesel vehicle to a gas vehicle by saying the diesel has better mpg. When Diesel has a higher energy density that gasoline. Of course all other things being equal, your going to get better mpg with diesel than gas. This isn't even mentioned in the analysis.

Joe Boo (not verified)    November 18, 2014 - 7:36PM

Well Diesel fuel costs over 30% more than gasoline right now in my area...sure lets just ignore the cost of stupid....any article that doesn't mention the fuel price differential or doesn't compare $ per mile is purely ignoring the Elephant in the room.

platinum13 (not verified)    November 21, 2014 - 10:04PM

In reply to by Joe Boo (not verified)

People also forget that the diesel over the base 3.6 costs $4000 but the Ford 2.7 over the base 3.7only costs $750. So right there the diesel is thousands in the hole. Right now gas is 2.67 a gallon and diesel is 3.67 a gallon. With the price of gas alone the diesel doesn't get good enough mileage to offset how,much it costs to fill up. If you look at towing tests the 2.7 ecoboost out performs the diesel by a significant amount.

Bill Johnston (not verified)    November 18, 2014 - 7:53PM

"Ram's powerful little diesel engine"...LOL, that truck can barely get out of it's own way.....and who ever heard of having defer the diesel option for a gas option (Hemi) if you wanted maximum towing capability. Ford's 2.7 and Chevy's 5.3 kicked the crap out of that wEaCODiesel in a towing test....wEaCODiesel = good grocery getter if you don't mind having to look for fuel stations carrying diesel fuel, paying $ .90 more per gallon, 11quart oil changes using special $10/qt oil and a $60 oil filter. If you want a real diesel wait for the 5.0 Cummins coming out in the Titan...otherwise ECOBoosts are the best gassers out there.

sam lagoy (not verified)    November 20, 2014 - 10:44PM

In reply to by Bill Johnston (not verified)

You are ignoring the mpg while towing. I have seen a test with a Ford ecoboost and v8, a Chevrolet 5.3, and the ram ecodiesel towing an 8000lb trailer. The ford's and chevys were avg 9.7 and 10.8 mpg while the diesel was still bringing in 14.8 that's near our over 50% better. Still doesn't justify the premium for the diesel engine unless youre doing a lot of towing

John Goreham    November 19, 2014 - 8:48AM

I love these types of analysis. Well done. That said, I am not a fan of the MotorTrend Real MPG system. I respect MT and I quote the magazine in my own work often. However, the EPA test is an average of many scenarios and is adjusted for fuel changes, environmental conditions, and driver style differently than the MT system. Here the analysis might be valid and match the EPA tests. However MT adds an apparatus onto the back of the vehicles it tests. MT discounts the added weight and the disruption to aerodynamics, which is really not cool. I also agree with what the folks above say. Compare the cost per mile, C02 per mile, and the petroleum used (not gas or diesel) and the Ford's gasoline engine beat the RAM diesel in every category is my prediction. All that stuff will be included in the summary for each when the Ford info is published.

truickguy1000 (not verified)    November 19, 2014 - 10:44AM

NOT counting the cost difference in fuel; at 15,000 miles per year, $3.50 cost of gas average, add the oil change costs (5000 Ford/10,000 Ram), it would be over 13 years to offset the $4500 upcharge for the EcoDiesel. Higher diesel costs skew it even further. Realistic?

neil blake (not verified)    November 19, 2014 - 12:05PM

As has pretty well been stated, you have to look at cost per mile, not MPG. Around the midwest, diesel costs about an extra dollar per gallon. At today's prices, that is a 30% penalty right off the bat. Then look at the cost of the diesel engine option in the Ram. If the cost per mile is higher, you will NEVER be able to cover the extra cost of the engine option. For some advocates, diesel power is like a religion. They will never concede there is anything better regardless of how well you formulate your argument. Oh and don't forget the cost of the DEF fluid. I've owned both and I can do without the need to wear a glove when handling a diesel fuel nozzle and having to avoid stepping in the spilled fuel around the pump.

Rick (not verified)    November 19, 2014 - 10:36PM

I agree with a few of the comments about the extra diesel cost issue, is it worth it? Maybe in towing, yeah. The eco-diesel torque is at a usable 2000 rpm, not very high, great for towing. That's common sense. Then you have the die-hard Fecal-boost lovers who are too dedicated to their Fords, and turn a blind eye to the truth. Out here, the dealerships are actually talking people out of buying the Fecal-boost (That's even what the Ford mechanics here are calling it!!! Heard it there first, funny!!) Between all the problems of fuel in the engine oil, which they say is common, the fuel millage is horrible in them. They have changed a few engines already. I would like to say that all manufacturers build vehicles as good as the other, but, nobody builds scrap like Ford. And I would tend to believe Motor Trends real world testing, only a complete idiot would believe the manufacturers or the EPA testing. I have never seen the "official" ratings being close. The eco-boost here in Canada was saying 31 MPG on the tv commercials, like that would happen. My nephew bought one, getting 18 mpg highway-a bit off!! Seems that's what Ford lovers believe, whatever Ford tells them .In the end, just buy what you want, don't let these blogs sway your own choices. I've had all brands, so no "favorite" here, but yeah, I'll never own a Ford again, personal choice. But, the eco-diesel? Doubt it. not sure of which one yet, need more info yet. Fuel millage definately the clincher, but, I know it won't be a Ford. As for towing or payload, that's another joke. I haul a 600 lb bike, or 450 lb sled, so who cares about biggest payload. If I need bigger, get a 2500 series.Iknow guys who NEVER haul anything in their truck, yet bought them because the salesman told them of the great payload rating!! I expect some negative response to this, should be interesting. Sure some Ford lovers will say something. But, if that's what you like, so be it, its their money.

Notblindedbybrand (not verified)    November 20, 2014 - 1:15PM

Just picked up the ecodiesel in 4wd crew cab. I'm averaging 26-27 combined. I do about 75/25 highway over city miles. I'm able to get diesel at about $3.20/gallon. Towing a 5,000 trailer Ive gotten 20-21 with the same type of driving. I was considering all manufacturers when I was looking to buy and it pretty much came down to basic math for me. The diesel cost per mile was just over .12 and the avg gas motor was .155. Figure in the additional maintenance cost for both - dealer quoted $90 oil changes on the diesel not including DEF. Gas oil changes were wuoted at $60. DEF sells at my Walmart for $11 for 2.5 gallons. Sorry but on a $45k+ truck, 11 bucks is chump change and if you add it once a month to spread the cost out it is really nothing. Most of you spend more on coffee every month. Regardless, I like the truck. I hope it last a long time. Never been a brand loyal guy so I don't understand that mindset. I just try and buy the best product available for the best price. If ford is the best when I go to replace the Ram then I'll buy a ford. Last time I checked the manufacturers weren't paying me, why would I stay loyal. Make a better product and I'll buy it. Basic tenets of competition and capitalism.

South'ner (not verified)    November 20, 2014 - 3:43PM

The cost of Diesel by my house is $3.09/gal. Regular unleaded is $2.55/gal. With the EcoBoost getting 18.5 MPG average, and the EcoDiesel getting 22 MPG, the gasoline powered ecoboost is slightly (5%) better in terms of cost of fuel per mile: 13.8 cents per mile for gas, vs. 14.6 cents per mile for diesel.

So if the Ecoboost is cheaper to buy and maintain then it wins hands down.

NoBrandLoyalty (not verified)    December 7, 2014 - 9:42PM

We always always drove GMC/Chev on our farm growing up and the 1986 6.2L I drove for a number of years consistently got 28 mpg. (Imperial) By the time I got around to buying my own truck, nobody made a diesel for a half ton and since I wasn't really pulling anything of substance, the 2000 Toyata Tundra suited me just fine. I needed more room and upgraded to a 2006 Titan; the mileage was barely 17mpg. My son totalled that (he faired better than the deer) so I had to buy a truck in a hurry. By this point, I'm pulling a 6,500lb trailer throughout the summer so mileage and pulling power were both important. I thought my 2011 F-150 with the ecoboost would solve my problems. Now with just over 80K, I've had 3 significant warranty repairs and the mileage at just over 20mpg is better than the Titan, but not what I expected. (BTW, other than the mileage and repairs, I love the truck)

Back in the summer when it was in the shop again, I started thinking I didn't want to have it after the factory warranty expired. Not going back to Titan or Nissan, and the Chev's my friends have owned haven't exactly impressed me so I decided it was time to look at Ram. Frankly, never really liked the look of them but I know people who are getting 28mpg (Imp) in real world driving. At the time, diesel was still cheaper than gas. The local Chrysler dealer ordered my exact spec's in August with no commitment and the truck is scheduled to finally come in this week. Since then, the price of gas has dropped significantly. So what to do?

Fuel prices are fickle and a diesel truck is a longer-term commitment than a one or two year difference in price between diesel and gas. Even at current prices, the improved real world mileage is way better than than what I actually get on my Ford. The Ford feels like a ticking time bomb and the diesel isn't as much of an experiment as the ecoboost was. The issues I've had won't be solved by an aluminum body and they would have cost more than the diesel premium so I guess we need to figure that into all of the calculations when trying to determine the "true cost" of ownership.

To each his own...

Patrick T (not verified)    April 6, 2015 - 3:17PM

In the real world guys....
Fuel efficient and durable diesel engines are the way to go for heavy use. They are not offered in the American market because of all the attitudes from the manufacturers to prejudiced consumers nevertheless, they are in demand. If you put an Ecoboost engine through farm or commercial service you have a throw away truck at 15,0000 miles even though Ford is to be commended for a very fine product for most users. A diesel application will serve 450,000 miles and just start over. For all you guys who obviously have no concept of a true durable good product please understand that there are those of us who put 50,000 to 80,000 miles a year on our vehicles. The economics of a good diesel product are FAR superior to a gas one. Tens of thousands of dollars to some of us. Now I am going to get on my soap box: Enough of this corrupt competitive vain human nature guys:) Let's humbly stand up and applaud Dodge for doing a good thing and ask Ford and Chevy to to make an even better diesel product. We need small diesels for Transit Connects and Promaster City models as well as the mid to small size pickup classes. For awhile there Policy pushed diesel engines off the map because of particulate emissions. Thankfully that is resolved. Let's demonstrate a better attitude about good products and encourage each application to further reach it's potential by how we discuss these things.