• 2018 Ford F-150: Upgraded Chassis, More Capability, Wifi Hotspot, and More (Video)

    2018 ford f150 stx lineup pickup truck ecoboost v8
    2018 Ford F-150 lineup

    The 2018 Ford F-150 updates are more than just cosmetic exterior changes. The refreshed truck does come with six distinct new grilles, four new interior themes, four new exterior colors, and six new wheel designs. Ford also worked on the chassis and increased the steel thickness in the rear section of the frame and the rear axle tube in order to increase hauling and towing capabilities of the truck.

    Our 2018 F-150 coverage is brought to you by our friends at American Trucks. Check out all the latest F-150 accessories, including a variety of running boards.

    The 3.5L EcoBoost V6 (with the 10-speed automatic) is the truck with the highest towing rating of 13,200 lbs. This is the first half-ton pickup truck with a rating of over 13,000 lbs.

    The 5.0L V8 (with the 10-speed automatic) can be configured for highest payload capability of 3,270 lbs.

    The 2.7L EcoBoost V6 (with the 10-speed automatic) is the one with the best fuel efficiency in the 2WD model with a rating of 20 MPG city, 26 MPG highway, and 22 MPG combined.

    There is also an all-new 3.3L naturally aspirated V6 that is rated at 290 hp and 265 lb-ft of torque. This engine is available in the base XL and XLT trims, and it is mated to a 6-speed automatic transmission.

    The 2018 F-150 lineup also gets very useful high-tech features such as Wifi hotspot and Adaptive cruise control with full stop-n-go functionality. When following another vehicle, the truck is able to automatically come to a complete stop, wait up to three seconds, and resume motion all by itself. If the wait time is more three seconds, the driver will be prompted to resume cruise control manually.

    Driving impressions on the 2018 F-150 are embargoed until 12:01am EST on August 14th, 2017. Stay tuned for many more new F-150 videos.

    Check out this Everything You Ever Wanted to Know interview.

    Andre Smirnov
    Andre Smirnov
    Andre Smirnov is an Automotive Enthusiast, Producer, Reviewer, Videographer, Writer, Software Engineer, Husband, Father, and Friend.

    Similar Articles

    209 thoughts on “2018 Ford F-150: Upgraded Chassis, More Capability, Wifi Hotspot, and More (Video)

    1. It is nice to see they beefed up the rear of the truck for increased capability. Way better than just upping the capability with no announced upgrades to any component or saying they just needed to add 2 bolts and they were done.

      1. When the headline says, “Ford upgrades 22018 Ford F150 for better quality and longevity”, I will know they are starting to grow up.

        1. Hmmm wierd. I was kinda thinking something similar….. “When Mike quits making atupid fanboy comments and actually posts aomething worth saying I know he is starting to grow up”.

    2. 13,000# plus towing capacity on a 1/2 ton???….I think that’s a little much for such soft suspension….

      1. Who said the springs remain the same? There is a new suspension mentioned in the other article.

    3. These upgrades are getting so monotonous, I can’t cope anymore. So boring. How long can they get away with this before they go bankrupt again.

          1. Rambro – – –

            R: “I can no longer cope. Your [sic] safe for now.”

            Whew! Good. I thought I was going to have to get my heart medication to handle TFLT this morning..(^_^).


            1. I got a nice email from Bollinger. Im not as bitter. Not sure how long my optimism will last. Keep the pills handy.

            2. Rambro – – –

              R: “Not sure how long my optimism will last. Keep the pills handy.”

              You better keep YOUR pills handy!
              The only way Robert’s barn toy is going to get anywhere in the REAL world is if someone (like Elon Musk) buys him out; throws $100M at the project; and commits to production, WITH backup support and dealerships. Even then, it could only be a niche vehicle, unless it went hybrid or diesel.
              Look what happened to Fiskar, and Henrik even had an actual product. Just saying….


        1. @Rambro: I’m safe? I was going to ask you how Bollinger was going to go from concept to production. Can to share with us?

          1. Bollinger said there response to the truck is overwhelming. And I believe it. Details will come to me early 2018 they said. By early 2019 they will be producing them and in 4 door configuration to the US and Canada.

            1. No, it’s called a grant. Free money never to be paid back.

              The bailout GM got had to be paid back.

            2. The GM bailout was an illegal action by the Dear Leader to circumvent a legitimate bankruptcy reorganization that would have not been such a juicy deal for the union (I.e. Obama’s donors).

      1. I dont understand this. My 2014 F150 has wifi and can connect to my home network and make a hot spot i am pretty sure.

        1. That is different. This WIFI is like what GM started a few years ago. A dedicated wifi system via cellular or sat service so you don’t need to connect your phone or home network first. It is likely an additional charge per month for data.

            1. That is my thoughts to. But my guess is since GM has it, Ford don’t want to be left behind. I don’t like my current phone bill for my wife and I let alone having a bill for my truck too.

            2. Straight Talk. My wife had it for the last 3 years and it worked great and was only $45 a month for unlimited talk text and data.

              Now shes on the Verizon 5GB plan and its like $100 a month, but her company repays her most of that.

              I have a company phone that I dont pay for so that is why we havent done a family plan.

            3. I know a few people that do the straight talk thing. They love it. However I have heard (remember heard not verified) that the service is not as reliable as a standard carrier. So I stick with Verizon. The wife and I love to travel and I want to make sure I have a good connection wherever we go. I also need it for work. Since I am on call 24/7, I need to make sure I can be reached.

    4. The fuel mileage for Ford’s full size trucks meets or beats the fuel mileage of mid-size trucks, including the Tacoma’s 3.5 with the Atkinson cycle. Also the mileage is not that far off from comparable diesel engine vehicles.

      It’ll be interesting to see if Ford’s upcoming Ranger will make use of the same fuel saving technology. If they do, I wouldn’t rule out 30 MPG from a gasser mid-size truck.

      1. The very inkling that Ford gets near the fuel mileage as a ecodiesel or baby duramax is so ignorant it makes me cry for the state of humanity. As recorded by a jillion of independent testers, including TFL, the Ford ecoboost never gets the EPA ratings, and the small diesels always exceeds their ratings.

        There are no ecoboosts that come within a ballpark of the small diesels.

        Man, the dissemination of falsities on this comment section shows the lying nature of mankind. Some lie, some are just dumb. And too many are both.

        And when Ford comes out with their little diesel, I will probably agree with its competitive mileage. Because then, it will ACTUALLY BE TRUE.

        1. I work construction in different states and with 30000 miles on the 2.7 with 6R80 3.55 rear end 4×4 I can tell you my average is 21.8. That’s city, highway, and towing combined. Not bad. I can’t speak for the other ones, though.

        2. I also see EPA average on my 2014 Ecoboost which is 6200 lbs, has 3.73 and is on 33″ Wrangler Duratracs. I dont believe the EPA ratings consider that gear ratio. I have seen 21-22 on all highway 65mph drives.

          Go look at fuelly. Duramax Colorados average ~24 while the V6 Colorado averages around 20. Its not that far off. Sorry, but diesel needs to go die a quick death in these low powered “Economy” applications like the Ram ED and Colorado Duramax. Not sure why ford feels the need.

          1. Yeah, go hook a trailer to it and pull it up the mountain. The ecodiesel and baby duramax will convert you.

            And take it out on the highwasy and empty get 32 on teh dmax and near 30 on the ecodiesel.

            1. Convert you to what? Old age by the time it gets there. Energy is equal to work divided by time. (E=Work/Time) The EB Gas gets up the gauntlet in a shorter amount of time which uses more energy=more fuel. That is the biggest reason the diesel saves fuel. No HP = slow = better fuel mileage. Do I want a slow truck that never pays me back via capital costs? No. Makes no sense to buy a diesel but humanity makes no sense anyways. Purse slapping over a few mpg’s to drive a slower truck LOL. Purse slapping? I love that, I stole that one.

            2. Have you seen the Ike tests? The small diesels suck. They can barely hold 50mph. The V6 Colorado was much quicker and even the 2.7 Ecoboost blew the Ecodiesel out of the water. I own a Jeep Liberty with an older variant of the 2.8L diesel tuned to 365 ft-lbs and 200hp and have towed 5000 lbs with it. It didnt impress me. In fact, after reading all this crap on the internet about how amazing diesels are at towing i was pretty disappointed with the fact that it could barely hold 65 mph on some fairly mild hills in New hampshire. Here in Utah where I live now, forget about it.

              I dont really care about your 30 mpg claim. Fuelly says real life people are averaging 20 with the V6 Colorado and 24 with the diesel. You know how much that works out to per month if you drive 20k miles a year. Like MAYBE $30. Thats easily absorbed by the extra $4500 on your loan for the dmax.

            3. Also, try towing with an ecoboost. I just bought a 5000 lbs travel trailer yesterday and while towing it home I pulled up an 8% grade at 55mph and it only needed to turn at 2100 rpms. The ram ED would probably have been WOT lol. This is a 2014 that is a bloated 6200 lbs whale. The 2017 with the uprated 3.5 Ecoboost, 10 speed and 700 lbs lighter would have made it look even easier.

        3. Diesel has a higher concentration of energy than gasoline. Therefore explains why diesels usually get better mpg than similar size gas engines

      2. Less than 1 mpg separates averages of Ford 5.0, 3.5 EB, GM 5.3, and Ram 5.7. GM should push more 6.2 trucks. I’m guessing 10 spd will help across all F150 by maybe 1-2 mpg. GM needs to step up V6 game and bring dsl to the table. This is 1/2 ton only, no midsized included.

        18 Ford 3.0 D = ?
        14-16 Ram 3.0 ED = 22.50 avg of 745 trucks
        18 Ford 3.3 ?
        15-17 Ford 3.5 = 18.87 avg of 45 trucks
        13-17 Ram 3.6 = 18.74 avg of 109 trucks
        15-17 Ford 2.7 EB = 18.33 avg of 388 trucks
        12-14 Ford 3.7 = 17.50 avg of 63 trucks
        12-17 Chevy 4.3 = 16.67 avg of 30 trucks
        14-17 Chevy 6.2 = 16.13 avg of 26 trucks
        12-14 Tundra 4.0 = 16.07 avg of 5 trucks
        12-17 Ford 5.0 = 15.87 avg of 582 trucks
        12-17 Chevy 5.3 = 15.83 avg of 518 trucks
        12-17 Ford 3.5 EB = 15.78 avg of 950 trucks
        12-16 Tundra 4.6 = 15.72 avg of 72 trucks
        12-17 Ram 5.7 = 15.18 avg of 880 trucks
        12-17 Tundra 5.7 = 14.27 avg of 371 trucks
        12-17 Titan 5.6 = 13.32 avg of 52 trucks
        17 Titan 5.0 CTD = ?
        12-14 Ford 6.2 = 12.97 avg of 52 trucks

        1. This really goes to show that in the end, all brands of gas trucks are pretty much equal. Sure we can brag a slight benefit for this or that for our favorite brand, but in the end, all about the same. That’s why I really don’t care about fuel economy for a truck. I want it to do truck things well.

          1. Agree 100%. They are all improving. Shop between them all and pick which one has the best options and characteristics for your individual needs.

            1. Can you break out the 11-14, 15-16, and 17 3.5 EB? Curious to see how much the 11-14’s drag that number down considering how heavy they were.

        2. Great data Rustydodge. If driving 20K miles/year, it takes an Ecodiesel owner 8 years to recoup their cost when compared to a Ford 2.7 EB owner.

        3. Good post Rustydodge, this is what I have been saying for years now. Everyone talks about fuel mileage but it really doesnt matter much unless you are a high miler or a fleet owner. The 6.2 is premium by they way and the GM 6.2 costs more per mile than the Tundra. Same for the Platinum 3.5EB with 400HP. And premium is proven to get 3-10% better fuel economy in some vehicles mainly because most premium fuels dont have ethanol.

          But I hate the mpg wars, I think there are more people that buy based on propaganda and this is what drives the manufacturers

          1. I thought it was the Expy Platinum that got 400hp? Does the F150 as well?

            Either way, the 400hp version probably rolls back to the normal 375 on regular.

          2. To be honest it really depends on the fleet. Some fleets like the one i manage is impossible to determine average fuel economy. Every hour is different for each of our vehicles. Fuel economy is not even a factor when we bid out trucks. It is the same across the board in my line of work. However I can fully see some fleet departments are looking at fuel economy due to their business.

    5. I got the opportunity to drive the 2018 with a 2.7 in Lakeland FL a month or so ago. I was thoroughly impressed at the power such a small engine could output. But I’d probably still go with a coyote for the sound.
      The Lariat that I got to drive also had the new B&O Play audio system and I can tell you that it sounds absolutely incredible. I’ve yet to hear any factory installed audio system that sounds better.

          1. Just think it will be mostly wasted on lossy MP3 and SiriusXM. But yeah, I have always been impressed with Harman. They just have so many brands, it’s hard to know hierarchy. Even the Infinity systems sound better the Sony. Though I will take Sony over Bose! But in the Harman systems, I think it’s Infinity then Harman Kardon. I would assume B&O sits above HK? Maybe there isn’t a simple hierarchy ether.

            1. I didn’t know they were using B&O in the F150. I thought it was just Lincoln. I am glad they did because the old radios were not that impressive.

          2. I have never heard a Sony vehicle sound system that impressed me. Bang and Olufsen is a different story. Now that they have branched out to nonpremium brands I hope they don’t water down the quality like Bose did.

            1. A few years ago my wife and I were looking at a vehicle with the Bose system in it. After the test drive I asked the sales guy for the same model but with the upgraded radio. Both the wife and I hated the stereo. He looked at me funny and said” that is the premium radio” I was shocked. It sounded like a glorified alarm clock radio.

            2. I have Infinity 9 speakers system with subwoofer in my 2910 RAM and I am impressed all the time I listen music.
              Sony in Ford is garbage.

            3. Yea….. I have heard that stereo……….. but as along as your happy with it, that’s all that counts.

    6. I’m not very impressed with the fuel economy of the 5.0. Considering it’s using a 10 speed auto and an aluminum body the average is 18MPG for a 4×4. Not that much better than the 15 to 16 I see out of my 17 Tundra. Also peak torque for the Tundra (401 lb/ft) arrives 900 rpm sooner than the ford 5.0. The Toyota 5.7 with 6speed combo is very impressive and still competitive 10 years after it was released. I’m very excited and hopeful of what Toyota has in store for the Tundra coming in 2019 or 2020.

      1. I am the first to criticize Ford on their scandalous so called Ecoboost, Ha!.

        But how do you know the 5.0 mileage? After they have revised it, it may be decent. We don’t know the mileage yet. NO independent testers have been able to chronicle it yet.

        1. What do you mean? All of the 2018 MPG ratings are posted at the top of this article and on the ford website now.


            Who cares about published ratings, they are always lies. Except for diesel ratings, they are always better than the ratings. Which actually means they are lies too.

            1. My 2016 GMC Sierra 1500 6.2 is rated at 15 city, 21 highway. Which my experience shows as pretty accurate.

      2. Yes, the Toyota 5.7 is a great engine- always has been and always will be!

        Fords 5.0 v8 is actually got a very low rpm torque peak this year for only being 5 liters na. Remember Toyota’s 5.7 is .7 liters larger displacement.

        Don’t hold your breath on Toyota setting the world on fire with a new engine for the Tundra! I did with the new Gen Tacoma’s and was severely let down and majorly dissapointed with that new 3.5 that they put in it.

        Not competitive at all, in fact its the only thing wrong with that truck and a major step backwards from the previous 4.0 v6 engine.

        In fact Toyota is directly responsible for putting me in a Ford F150 with the 2.7tt Ecoboost!

        1. I drove the 3.5L tacoma and that is one sad little engine. I couldn’t deal with it. I’m sure it will last a while though. Not for me however.

          1. Very sad. The Nissan Frontier i test drove a half hour earlier felt 100x better. It could actually hold top gear at highways speeds with the need to downshift.

          1. No its not. It may not shift well, but thats not an excuse for lack of low end. The Frontier and Canyon V6’s I drove literally minutes prior to the Toyota had no problem driving around at 2000 RPM while the Toyota was totally gutless below 3500.

            The icing on the cake after the disappointing test drive was how cocky the dealer was about the truck and how they dont move on the price because they are so amazing.

        2. Drifter I tend to agree with Moondog on the 3.5 in the Tacoma. I had a 16 TRD off-road for about 8 months and thought the power was fine (especially passing power) and thought it sounded nice as well. You have to get used to it’s high revving nature though, which I thought was kind of fun. Anyway, it wasn’t the trans or engine that bothered me, it was the seating and I could never get comfortable in the thing. So back to a Tundra I went! Only thing I’m trying to decide now is how soon to get the TRD cat-back exhaust! Probably going to get some use out of the stock exhaust before replacing..

    7. how much micromill aluminum is being used now in the new f150 and specifically what was beefed up in the rearend

      1. It says the rear frame thickness and axle tubes. I imagine they likely increased the maximum tongue weight on the hitch to 1320 lbs from last years 1220 and needed more RAWR to accommodate this.

        I hope they increased the GVWR as well.

      2. My understanding would be that all F150s receive the beefed up rear frame which suggests 2018 for the F150 is more than just a mid-cycle refresh (probably due to upcoming new Ram and GM 1/2 tons). Other than that for the higher rated trucks you have to get a payload package and max tow package which gives you beefier axle and leaf springs. They are essentially a heavy 1/2ton truck

        1. Your probably right. GM and Ram have to release their new trucks and since Ford is first out of the gate they need to make sure it is good. However this does give GM and ram an advantage because now they know what Ford is doing.

          1. I just read an article this morning that featured some quotes from the Ram folks. The basically said that in their last iteration they purposefully ignored the towing capacity war in favor of aerodynamics and fuel economy.

            1. That very well could be true. FCA needs to improve their corporate average fuel economy. Since they are getting out of small cars, every gain in MPG will decrease their possible gas guzzler fines. I believe they buy credits now from Tesla, Honda, and Toyota. Correct me if I’m wrong on that part.

            2. That’s probably partially true. They know folks in the market for a 1/2 ton that has to tow 12-13k+ may opt for 3/4 ton anyway, so the effort/cost at the time to go above 10k towing wouldn’t have made much financial sense. Meanwhile, everyone in the market for a 1/2 ton will experience the benefit of better aero/economy. With the 6 lug prototypes rolling around I think they’ll get to 11k maybe lower 12k, but I do not think they are shooting for 1/2 ton towing crown.

        2. The F150 HD Payload package is awesome. I have seen a number of 2017 HDPP 4×4 crew cabs in the 2400-2600 lb payload range. You can legally tow a solid 5th wheel and have some room to spare.

    8. Actually ford did get a bailout they were given a $5.9 billion next to zero interest loan on the terms they would build more fuel efficient cars the government wanted. They took this loan the same month gm and dodge got there bailout.. but ford still has not paid back their loan they still owe 3.5 billion! So i guess ford is the real government motors.

      1. That is a loan that Ford is paying back. It even states it in the article. Ford is also keeping that plant that was making the Focus to build the new Ranger. So no lost jobs in the US and likely even
        More for the new Ranger.

            1. JJ and Z man get a hotel room already and get it over with..Lol,you guys fight like school girls..ha..just messing with you guys..

            2. Your right! The Ford is better empty but Ford is way better loaded and proven by several independent testers like TFL. Thanks for pointing that out.

          1. Absolutely a scam. How do they get away with it? We never get the rated mileage on our ecoboost 2.7.

            1. What do you get? My computer says 21.8 at 30000 miles. I haul a lot of stuff for construction, too.

            2. Ive actually hear very few 2.7 owners complaining they dont get the rated numbers. Older 3.5’s sure.

              I know a lot of the well educated/detail oriented folks on the Ecodiesel forum thought that the ecoboost was supposed to get like 22 MPG hwy back in 2011 because thats what the 2×4 was rated for. But when their 4×4 supercrew whatever version only for 19 they were so enraged they traded it in on an ecodiesel.

        1. Its a loan from tax payer money $$ ,very similar to Gm and Fca ..At one point all three Ceos were sitting side by side begging the federal gov..Its all right helping Usa auto ,it kept alot of salary jobs going..

          What needs to happen is buy American co. Product before foreign product, I highly doubt many Japanese people driving Duramaxs ,Cummins and powerstroke in Japan or other American vehicles,like you see Japanese autos driven by the masses here in the U.S..imo

        2. All of you and your damn bickering are ruining this site. Jimmy John, rambro, zviera.

          I hardly visit this site anymore so I don’t have e to see your 12 year old temper tantrums.

            1. Your pushing for the complete opposite which is Anarchy. Anarchy always leads to opression anyhow.
              A place of law and order is a friendly enviroment to all parties, just like a Republic.

          1. I resent that, I dont purse slap. I defend against communism and support my free speech in one post. Communists, self elected forum moderators try to challenge it and I defend my viewpoint as needed. What we dont need is communists and self proclaimed forum moderators policing this site and turning it into a mindless hapless wonder and pretend like the truck industry isnt behind the times. Many of us are frustrated with the truck industry. To see constant praise for stagnant updates are both ignorance and irreverence at work on our socialism. Will there be contempt of course there will

            Bring it on.

            1. Wow. Did you even read it ? Government sold the stake.
              Fiat saved the Chrysler and paid billions
              for them you loser.

            2. In a rather sharply worded blog post today, FCA Senior VP of Communications, Gualberto Ranieri, laid out in crisp detail the ins and outs of the acquisition of Chrysler by the then Fiat Spa.

              Contrary to what most people seem to think, Fiat actually paid over $5 billion dollars for the Chrysler group. $5.6 billion to be more exact. That is hardly the “free” which is what usually gets bandied about when people talk about Fiat getting Chrysler.

              To quote directly from the article:

              “In detail, Fiat paid: $1.268 billion for an incremental equity call option, to acquire 16% of Chrysler; $500 million for the 6% formerly owned by the U.S. Treasury; $125 million to acquire the 1.5% formerly owned by the Canadian governments; $75 million to purchase the rights under an equity recapture agreement; and $3.65 billion to purchase the final 41.5% of equity interests in Chrysler Group that had been held by the UAW Retiree Medical Benefits Trust, also known as the VEBA.”

              Hardly free. Ranieri also goes on to re-iterate that Fiat has completely and 100% paid back the money that it was required to pay back, from the loan that was granted by the US Government. He quotes Ron Bloom, who was formerly special assistant to President Obama as saying:

              “When Chrysler, the new company, says: We paid back every penny we borrowed − that is 100 percent correct.”

            3. What Zviera didn’t mention was that when daimler offed chrysler,they had run it into the ground.Then it was picked up by Cerberus,(sp) and whatever was left by daimler,cerberus sold off what it could.There wasn’t much left when Fiat came in and started to rebuild Chrysler virtually from scratch.

              Everyone can,(and does in fact) make fun of ‘Fiat Ram’ etc.Fact is,I’m thankful for what is now FCA,was able to do in rebuilding a bigassed car company.No easy feat.

            4. We should be all thankful for saving Chrysler by Fiat. Chrysler has a great history and I like their engineering and new ideas and products.
              Fiat was the best what could happen to them and FIAT really cares about Chrysler.

    9. For the most part, small and incremental improvements. Everybody likes more power, and that helps them stay competitive. The 5.0L is just about to where RAM is with the significantly larger Hemi V8. The 2.7L and 3.5L engines are just incredibly quick and powerful. Even the 3.3L will help out against RAM sales with the 3.6L. But hey, RAM and GM are about to launch all new trucks. They could be great.

      1. I agree I wonder if the frame upgrades are for all F150 trucks? That to me is more than a mid-cycle refresh. I don’t see Ram touching these numbers unless they do similar upgradeable options to the suspension and axles to create a heavy 1/2.

        1. Unless Ram decides to go all aluminum or build trucks with the same sheet metal as GM, I think it will be hard for them to get these numbers and still maintain a class 1 truck. Honestly at this point I dont see the reason behind keeping the class ratings anymore. The towing numbers are getting ridiculously high. If manufactures want to have these best this best that war, let them build a solid truck that can handle it. Why should they skimp on something to save weight just to be class leading.

      2. The 5.0 with the 10 speed a d 3.55 gears looks like a nice setup. I genuinely hope Ford has increased the quality of their aluminum stampings on the 2018s, so I can consider the truck.

    10. Like the new front bumpers, no longer just s flat bar.
      I am liking the new look of some of the grill designs too.

      Hate the start stop. Glad it can be turned off, wish it could left in off mode, without having to turn off everytime you start it.

      Very interested in the new diesel.

      Like the numbers they are getting out of the 5.0L

      Never been a fan of any of the little EB v6s. I just hate a v6 gas in a truck. Diesel is a different story.

      All in all I am sort of liking this 18 F150.

      1. You can use a free piece of software combined with a $15 OBDII bluetooth adapter to permanently turn the auto stop/start off, as well as make many other programming changes.

    11. The front end does look better,but it needs an upgrade to the interior…Also we will see how much the rear sags when they take it up the Ike..This truck will be alot better if they offered 6.2 v8..imo

      1. Love the 6.2 in my 2013 lariat! Hopefully the motor last me a long time, I’m seeing guys getting 400-500k miles out of these motors. Just can’t understand why ford wouldn’t atleast offer it in these newer trucks….

        1. I don’t know either. Give it DI and PI and tweak it a little, I bet it would do great in the MPG battle. It is heavy so maybe an aluminum block for the 150 like the GM 6.2L.

        2. It was most likely due to CAFE averages. This engine option was reducing Ford Co. average fuel economy numbers. Going turbo has helped them on paper increase EPA numbers.

          1. Im sure that is 100% accurate. That current 6.2L was rated pretty low in MPG. It would sure bring their corporate average down. I still think they could do it and make it better but really the current EPA testing has their current engines making the best numbers. Maybe if the EPA changes to more realistic driving (in my opinion) it could change things up in the direction Ford is going with small turbo engines. Dont get me wrong, I really love turbo charged engines. But turbo charged V8 engines are even sweeter.

    12. Oh hey, remember that article you posted like 2 weeks ago about how the 5.0 had better MPG’s than the 3.5?

        1. Yeah, I guess I was to busy doing other things and missed that. Still, how many people saw that first article and now think the 5.0 is still rated higher and will base their buying decision on that.

          5 minutes of them investigating like several of us had done(you know, people whose jobs are not reporting on the truck market) would have realized that not all the numbers were accurate.

          1. So TFL is to blame for re-publishing inaccurate numbers originally put out by the manufacturer of the vehicle in question? It’s ultimately up to Ford and their dealer network to help buyers make the right buying decision for their products.

            1. Plus they pulled it from the Build and price, not the actual spec sheets which were still blank at the time. If it wasnt obvious, I dont know what to say.

              It’s kinda like when you go to a youtube video and theres a bunch of GM fanboys posting about how crappy the ecoboost trucks are and how they blow up left and right. Its hard to ignore that if you are in the market for a truck and dont spend your whole life on TFL or forums getting better informed.

            2. Jay S, I had to go back to the original TFL article, they quoted 18/23 for the 3.5 and 18/24 for the 5.0. Close enough to not be obvious to some in my opinion, but I’m not well-versed on previous F150’s to know how that stacks up in comparison to last year’s model. TFL covered themselves by stating they’d have to verify the numbers with their own testing on the 100-mile loop. I just can’t find fault in what they did. I now see they also updated that article to give updated numbers. Bottom line, by the time these trucks reach dealerships, there will be many more thorough articles and youtube videos for potential buyers to review before signing their life away for one of these things. If they choose to ignore all those and simply purchase based on a single TFL article that will be months old by that time, then that’s on them.

            3. I’d also recommend staying far away from forums if the goal is to become better informed. Too many biases from all directions, opinions not supported by experience, etc. Take everything with a huge grain of salt at least.

      1. It was premature information that wasn’t certified yet.

        Info posted above is now the accurate numbers and certified!

      1. Go for it. Ill enjoy towing a 5000 lb trailer up an 8% grade at 2000 rpm like i did yesterday with my Ecoboost.

        1. Why are you afraid of rpm pulling a trailer up a steep grade?

          I don’t understand the logic of bragging about how low of an rpm you’re at, it’s meaningless. Besides, 2000rpm? It stayed in OD The whole time? That doesn’t sound good at all.

          1. If you do a lot of towing,and climbing 7% grades on a regular basis,spinning high r’s will wear out any engine.Do the same thing with an engine that makes substantial torque at lower rpm’s,it won’t wear out as fast.That’s why diesels are popular,as well as the EB’s.

            1. Actually there is more load on an engine pulling at low RPM vs high RPM. Thus is mainly why diesel engines needs to have such large rods and pistons. The piston receives so much downward pressure from the expanding mixture it wants to cock the piston in the bore. So a longer piston is needed to keep it square in the bore. You also need the larger rod for the bigger bearing. That much downward force exerts a ton of pressure on the oil film. Spreading that out is a must. Thus is mainly why diesel engines weigh so much. The ecoboost 3.5L to. High RPM engines you can build it lighter because the higher piston speeds (not piston travel distance) enables the same work to be balanced out through high crank rotation speeds. There really is no free lunch with engines. People also use the argument that diesels last longer. And they can. But most diesels are over the road with high mileage and low engine hrs. Gas engines, low miles, high engine hrs. Look at vehicles like public transportation and school buses. Those diesel engines do not last nearly as long as the over the road diesels. But they also have high engine hrs. Hrs is what really counts for engine wear. Airplane engines are the same. Based purely on hrs.

            2. JJ:
              Hors aren’t just for the aircraft engine.There are inspections that have to be done based on hours.Also many parts on the aircraft I crewed were ‘time change’ items,like rotor blades etc.

              BUT,I agree,hrs is where it’s at.A city vehicle will have a ton more operating hours than a hwy vehicle.

    13. Kyle nice to see you don’t speak from experience. I owned a 3.5L eco for a while no issues for me. Engine will pull the shit out of majority of half ton v8s on the road too.

    14. When your ecoboost is 10 years old with carbon clogged cylinder heads and worn out turbos my 6.2 will blow your doors off if your truck will start!

      1. Thats a fine argument, but I’ve yet to see that actually be an issue on anyones ecoboost. More speculation that anything.

        Plus, now they are dual injection and its no longer a problem.

        Oh, and dont buy a diesel that was manufactured in the last 10 years either is your worried about that either.

      2. In ten years our quantum particles will be diseminated and travel at light speed through air waves and resembled via beam me up Scotty. There will be no more ICE engines. 10 years? WTF

        1. In the movie back to the future they had us in flying cars by this date. Plus Biff controlled his town.

          1. And ten years ago the oceans are going to rise and drown all them cities on the cost, but that didn’t happen either.

            1. Oh the oceans did rise. Heard about it last week or 2 weeks ago. According to satellite data, the oceans raised the thickness of a dime. Whoa, get out your life boats everyone.

      3. Your 6.2 is going to have the same issues with carbon build up. It’s a problem for engines with DI only.

    15. To all you guys criticizing the EPA numbers saying there not achievable- your wrong!

      This testing and certification is the most scientific and consistent set of variables that will ever be put to rating mileage of any vehicles!

      Does it suck – yes, especially what they are doing to Diesels! They could be so much better!!!

      These are closed course or special route tests with same driver, same rules, same speeds, same EXACT VEHICLE MODELS, same weight, same fuel and about anything else you can do to eliminate all of the constant variables that real world testing gives!

      Its also 100% legal with emissions levels monitoring continuously!

      Without out it you have Billy Bob resetting his trip meter going downhill, with a tailwind, going 55mph, claiming he gets 25mpg average out of his 6.2v8 crewcab 4×4!

      Or you have the Mario Brothers driving foot to the foor, pulling high profile trailers, with 35″ tires – lifted, carrying extra tools, trying to go 85mph everywhere in a headwind, claiming their 2.7 Ecoboost only gets 12mpg!

      You never know what modifications real world feedback has? They could be cheating on the Diesels tunned with no emissions? They could and most likely are running larger tires or a lift kit? You never know the maintenance of these unreliable sources either?

      All of the known info on the Ecodiesel needs to be thrown out the window now and be restarted because the previous calibration was NOT legal! Thats why it’s been on a stop sale for almost 1yr and new production and old needs to be modified!

      EPA certification is very, very hard for the manufacturers to achieve and its always the last step before production and the most sought after and hardest to get!

      Now before 2008 the EPA testing was a joke and several companies got caught fudging their numbers. The testing speeds, averages, everything was revised.

      Go back and look at all of the diesel owners claiming better than EPA – most if not all will be engines caught up in EPA violations because it has been found that their real world programming is different than there EPA testing programming.

      Interesting coincidence you think?

    16. I think the EB tech is getting far better each year. Europeans have been using boosted cars for longer than I have been alive and I have never had an issue with my boosted cars. Maybe we will get to that point. For now, the non boosted engines seem to be selling like crazy. If I was buying for long term I would look hard at the 5.0 but might give over to the lust of all that EB torque.

      1. Europeans have been using turbocharged motors for a long time, but oh yes, they have had plenty of problems. Older turbos really weren’t that good. They were not well lubricated nor were they well cooled. They were very laggy. Many engines were ruined when a turbo seal blew and pumped all the engine oil down the exhaust or back into the air intake. Hot shutdowns resulting in the bearings getting coked up. Plenty of failed turbos in Saabs and Volvos from the 80’s and 90’s; heck even Audi 2.7L twin turbos from the early 2000’s were failing pretty frequently.

        1. I understand that they have had some issues but none of mine have and I’ve had my share. Europeans are far ahead because they had to be. They were forced to try to find a way to get power from smaller engines.

          1. Edit, turbo lag is very common on the European turbos and I’ve had my share of that but you get used to it.

            1. I think they mostly eliminated this with DI though. The Germans have had DI for a while now, I mean i think the BMW 335 was using it back in 08. My subaru Legacy GT was very laggy too. Under 3000 rpms and it just chugged along but as soon as you hit 3k it would take off in this explosive manner. Luckily it was AWD. I used to have trouble getting it to launch at the drag strip because it was AWD and it would either bog and drop below 3k or you would have to slip the clutch so much that it would overheat and wouldnt grab well.

              My Ecoboost will put out like 15 psi at 1500 RPM’s with a tune. I dont think my Liberty diesel will even do that.

            2. Turbo lag has pretty much gone away these days with modern electronics controlling everything.

              Now you can have smaller twin turbo setups pretty much making boost at idle for instant response, then the ecu controls the throttle plate and a waste gate making sure the boost stay within the design parameters to reach the desired power levels!

              It used to be that to reach the desired power levels you would need a certain size turbo, then if it was too big it had all this lag so drivability suffered.

              Now days all of the turbo systems are both oil cooled and water cooled.

              In some of the most advanced engines like Ford 2.7tt and Porsche, Audi, Volkswagen, the exhaust manifold is cast into the cylinder head for even quicker response, efficiency, and cooling!

              The turbo just bolts right to the cylinder head! Very reliable and pretty simple considering the trucking industry and many other heavy haul industry’s have used turbo technology for over 35yrs.

          2. I think it is far less of an issue now with modern turbos. I’ve heard of very few Ecoboost turbos failing. Certainly diesels have used turbos for a long time and push them very hard.

            1. I do t think Ford would put almost all their eggs in a basket that is going to fail. I trust that they will work the tech issues out if they haven’t already.

            2. In the case of Ford, I suspect they are using a very high quality turbo charger. Just about every one of their engines have turbos on them and if they are failure prone, not only would it cost them money in warranty repairs but also in reputation. Someone may know for sure because I dont remember who supplies their turbos but there are only a few companies that makes them.

    17. TFLT – – –

      “The 3.5L EcoBoost V6 (with the 10-speed automatic) is the truck with the highest towing rating of 13,200 lbs. This is the first half-ton pickup truck with a rating of over 13,000 lbs.
      The 5.0L V8 (with the 10-speed automatic) can be configured for highest payload capability of 3,270 lbs.
      The 2.7L EcoBoost V6 (with the 10-speed automatic) is the one with the best fuel efficiency in the 2WD model with a rating of 20 MPG city, 26 MPG highway, and 22 MPG combined.”

      Great. Now where is my beloved 6-speed manual transmission? Being a shifty character, I’ve absolutely got the shift gears, or I’ll go nuts..(if I haven’t already — ask my shrink)….(^_^)..


      1. Bernie, it is still there. They moved the shifter on both sides of the steering wheel though. (°_°)

      1. It doesnt look like it to me. Towing looks about the same and so does payload. The specs are posted on Fords site.

    18. Here’s a random statement/question: I was told that the MPG, Towing, HP, Torque numbers are all derived by filling tanks with pure petroleum gasoline, i.e. NO ETHANOL. The EPA allows for that.
      Unfortunately we mortals can only buy watered-down ethanol-laced go-go-juice, therefore we can NEVER match the advertised numbers!! Diesel used during testing is the same as the diesel we buy, so diesel owners can achieve the advertised performance numbers. How can you really tell who is winning the power war, especially when comparing diesels to gas? Maybe that’s why we love the TFL tests, because they cut through all the shell games being played by the manufacturers!

      1. That would be rather odd but in my experience in testing MPG’s with my work truck, I had no gains using E0 fuel. Remember that E10 is only 10% ethanol. Ethanol has a high BTU rating. Just under gasoline.

      2. There is biodiesel now. It has 103 to 109% the energy of gas. Pure diesel has 113% the energy of gas so it too depends on what type of diesel goes in your tank. TFL really has to get on board with this. I wish they would test premium vs regular in a lot of these trucks so I can crunch numbers. Been getting withdrawls lately.

        1. But the diesel loses that 13% with a heavier motor and power robbing filters to keep it from giving people cancer. How much it loses from that? Well thats why we got TFL but I would like to know what type of diesel they use and how much ethanol is in the gas. Mpg should be based on dollar per mile from now on. Makes 100% sense to do that. Mpg by itself means nothing without the dollar value with all the various fuels now.

          1. Rambro – – –

            Ultimately, there is only one measure of fuel mileage that REALLY counts for everyone (IMO):
            Dollars-Per-Month. … AND how that number fits into your lifestyle, your income, and your budget.

            My neighbor has a Prius whose total fuel expenditure (driving about 90 miles to work and back) is greater than that of the guy across the street, with a weekend-only, vintage Oldsmobile “442” (1964?), which gets about 12 MPG. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oldsmobile_442)
            (What a beauty, whereas the Prius looks like….)

            So, any EPA numbers have to be balanced with a “so-what” point-of-view. And that “so what” is how much you are actually going to drive your vehicle and for what purposes*.

            * When racing at “Road America”, getting 0.5 gallons-per-mile is totally acceptable!


          2. Problem with that is the price of gas or diesel varies WIDELY throughout the country.How could that help? Here at home,diesel,as of last evening,was 20 cents cheaper than 87 oct reg gas.

            1. Bernie/Lohchief I agree drive what you want and its also based on your income. Dollars per mpg is another variable but so is mpg on its own. An mpg with the 6.2L GM is better than the Tundra but the Tundra is cheaper to drive per mpg. With regards to gas at least premium is always more than regular. Regular vs diesel vs biodiesel will var considerably. But I digress, these TFL mpg tests are a lot more complicated now. And there are journalists that have proven some cars get 3-10% worse fuel economy with Ethanol based gasolines. Its all getting very confusing unless your in the game and understand it you are left with propaganda from the manufacturer and even with these TFL tests if people dont know any better they believe buying a vehicle with good mpg is going to save them money which is not always the case.

    19. For me, the peak HP numbers for the 5.0l and the 3.5tt are not at a usable RPM. 5000 and 5750 RPM just seem unreasonable for a truck or commuter vehicle.

      1. Peak hp on nearly every gas engine in production today by any automaker is over 5000 rpm. What is your point?

    20. I wonder how flat their dyno charts are, peak torque at 3000 RPM is awfully high also

      But that does seem to be the trend.

    21. Like some others, I have a 2014 F150 Supercab 3.5 ecoboost with 3.55. It has everything on it.
      Rated 15/21 and averaging 17 overall.
      Best tank, just over 400 miles, 20.8.
      It has a 36 gallon tank, so it’s tough to do a full to empty run.

    22. @TFLTruck: What are the chances of pitting the 2018 F150 2.7 ecoboost against a similarly priced 2.8 diesel Canyon or Colorado diesel?
      Same weighted trailer up and down the Ike, 100 mile Trailer Tow loop and 100 mile no trailer loop?

      1. It would be an interesting test if you slow the 2.7 down going up the Ike to about 45mph like the Duramax will be going!

      2. Oh hell yeah. I would love to see that. I know it’s a few years ahead,but I’m dyin’ to see the midsize gas AND diesel shootout.Ike and the 98 mile mpg loop,heavy and empty.Is it 2020 yet? Will I live that long? LOL

    23. @Sean: since you say I’m full of s**t, lets see if @TFLTruck will pit the 2018 F150 2.7 against GM’s 2.8 diesel using identical tests.

      I beat the results of this comparison will generate quite a bit of dialog.

    24. One thing I don’t need in a truck, is wifi hotspot video. It’s a truck after all. It’s a utility vehicle. One thing I would want for the Ford F-150 would be a turbo diesel engine.

    25. I watched that video and that Ford guy was just too much. Reminds me of that guy trying to sell clap chop at 2am on the shopping channel. “We listen to our customers” but yet I gaurantee their off road packages still require you to roll on your back to remove air dams and brackets before doing work in off road conditions. And there are a lot of frustrated people who want a lightning and a small truck, smaller than the Ranger but he apreciates that but I dont see it. How about an XLT with off road body clearance like what the Raptor has minus the other fluff so I dont have to spend 70 grand for a truck that can do more than park at a mall??? At least Ram has a Rebel with adjustable suspension. All I see here is stagnant updates as expected. Nothing that stands out. I think the biggest news for this guy was the 25Ftlbs of torque in the 2.7. I cant wait to tell everyone.

      1. Yea I couldn’t stand it either. Just say the truth man, we want to be best in class. So what. That is your job. Just like the Chevy rep that said we didn’t look at Fords power numbers when they redesigned the Duramx. Bull crap. You had a full spec list in your office. The powerstroke aan Cummins was in your crosshairs. Just say the truth. We all know it.

    26. Well the ford salesman was making his case how great the truck is. For me I can see that reading all the info. Anyway Ford is keeping foot to the metal. Did gain a whole lot from this video.

    27. Diesel fuel is closer to oil. It will protect engine bores.

      Gasoline is closer to a solvent so there is less engine bore protection. I am not sure that gas additives could help with engine bore protection. But a higher bottom number in oil ratings will help.
      For fuel mileage, Manufacturers are recommending 0w20 and lower. I don’t feel 0w 20 is good for me. 7% grades in 115 tempetures need at least 20w40. I use 20w50. But it’s rare for temps below 32 here.

      I just don’t see thin oil helping mileage much in a warmed up engine.

      Maybe they are also trying to improve cold engine smog numbers.

      I’m still running 80lbs oil pressure at start up and 35lb idle oil pressure on a 100 degree day on an 168 thousand mile, 25 year old engine that has spent most of its life towing.

      1. The thinner oil is definitely for fuel economy. It takes less power to pump thinner oil than the thicker stuff. It still seems weird to me using a thin oil but I know it does work. I still prefer full syn oil. Not much to back it up but it makes me feel better. In my fleet of diesels I run full syn 5-40. Based on oil sample reports and engines over 9000 engine hrs with less than 250k miles it is working pretty good.

    28. If you are or not ford fan, it has generated almost 200 comments so far. That is something Ford has done good at keeping everyone interested in there product.
      Just my opinion the 2019 gm and ram half tons will catch ford in the advancement of what ford has done but will not surpass ford.

      1. Not if GM and Ram are working on an electric motors to power the wheels. GM might be working with VTrux to produce a superior powertrain capable of 100mpg with gauranteed class leading instant torque. It will be balanced better, with better traction and real ground clearance. It will make Ford look stupid by comparison. Even the EB motors wont stand a chance against electric drive.

      2. Here is an article for you Marc to show how dated Ford really is along with the other big three

        They are holding on to a subsidized monopoly with the fuel industry. Electric drive is superior to anything Ford is offering so if this is the best were getting from the big four then Houston we have a problem? The Worhorse W15 blows the 1500 series out of the water with its powertrain while getting 75mpg. These updates from Ford are barbaric in comparison and then they decide to make a diesel that will lag behind their own EB motors as a new truck motor. These companies are ridiculous, I hope they go bankrupt when electric hits mainstream.


    29. We have spent over 200 years trying to perfect the battery.
      Hydrogen is in fact the best battery. Let’s put our money into the hydrogen infrastructure.

      Electric motors are the future. But we must use fuel cells to provide the electrcity

    30. Electric can work.. my dad has a house with 30 kW of solar and no utility bill for two years now.. Electricity is not cheap.. it is a tax collector, wires, right of way, plants and control systems that are high $$$. Monopolies are the dominant suppliers. I think you will need the fossil fueled autos and some electric competitors..otherwise we will end up riding electric bikes as the costs spiral upward. I work for a utility – mark my words.. its a monopoly..

    Comments are closed.