• Oct 14, 2010
2011 Ford F-150 – Click above for high-res image gallery

As we said shortly after driving Ford's latest F-150 pickup trucks, we think the Dearborn automaker has the very best range of powertrain options in the segment for 2011. One of the engines we are most impressed with is the 3.7-liter V6 that now serves as the base powerplant in the F-150, but until now, we didn't have final EPA fuel economy figures.

Well, that's been rectified, as Ford has announced that the 302-horsepower 3.7 will serve up 16 miles per gallon in the city and 23 on the highway in rear-wheel drive models, the latter figure making it the most fuel-efficient full-size pickup on the market. Stepping up the next rung to the 5.0-liter V8 will get you 360 horses and a fine 15 city, 21 highway EPA fuel economy rating, another best-in-class figure.

There are two more optional engines in the 2011 F-150. The top rung, 411-horsepower 6.2-liter V8 will deliver 12 mpg in the city and 17 on the highway. That's not exactly stellar mileage, and it's actually one mpg lower in both categories compared to General Motors' 6.2-liter V8, but we're expecting much better figures from the 3.5-liter EcoBoost, which matches the 6.2's 11,300-pound tow rating and 3,060-pound payload.

Sadly, we still have to wait for final EPA mileage certification on the twin-turbo V6 mill. In the meantime, feel free to hit the break to read Ford's latest press release touting its F-150 fuel economy figures.

Live photos copyright ©2010 Jeremy Korzeniewski / AOL and Ford Motor Company

[Source: Ford]

I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.

    • 1 Second Ago
      • 4 Years Ago
      I have an Escalade ESV with the L92 V8 and AWD.

      It returns 23mpg regularly on the open road cruise set at 70mph. Per tank overall in the city it's 14-16mpg, which I consider damn good for something this big, versatile and with 400hp. Oh and whatever I want to use it for is nobody else's business.

      My folks had a 96 Chevrolet K1500 4x4 with the Vortec for a long time, it returned about the same on the highway. Over 20mpg in fullsize trucks on the highway isn't anything really new or earth shattering.
      • 4 Years Ago
      IMHO. By small cars I mean anything smaller than a Focus or Corolla... My next vehicle will be the EB 4x4, if it really gets at least 23mpg! Thats great!
        • 4 Years Ago
        @ MikeW Clearly tires are part of the equation, but all i'm saying is, when a accident does happen i'd rather be in my body on frame truck then a Econo box car... I will pay for the extra gas no problem... If they can make them return better mileage and retain capability, then all the better!
      • 4 Years Ago
      I just got back from the Texas State Fair. I really like what Ford is doing with the F-Series. Too bad they can't pull their heads out of their collective ass and do something spectacular with the Ranger.

      Oh wait, they did. They're just to friggin stupid to sell it in the US.
      • 4 Years Ago
      How bout a Raptor with more Boost, less Eco?
      • 4 Years Ago
      The EcoBoost only turns 25 in the Taurus.

      I wouldn't be surprised to see it turn the same mpg as the base V6 in this car, same as in the Taurus.
        • 4 Years Ago
        Spin - this is not your father's ECO Boost, it's been extensively re-engineered for this application with VVT on both intake and exhaust cams. This and all the other refinements and upgrades should make this a much more efficient mill, rumour has it will even outdo the 3.7 in MPG. If this is true Ford truly will have a game changer on its hands.
        • 4 Years Ago
        Probably not a bad assumption. In every application where the NA 3.7L and 3.5L EB are offered side by side, the 3.5L EB gets at least the same mileage.
      • 4 Years Ago
      Quite impressive for a full size.
      • 4 Years Ago
      It's big, ugly, planet destroying polluting and uselessly powerful for most people. Why would people buy this car over a small diesel pickup?? (I'm looking at you new Ranger)

      If you REALLY need a truck for work, that's fine, but this car shouldn't be the best selling vehicle in America...

      And don't tell me people need a 8000 pound pulling capacity. When i (rarely) see a truck hauling something heavy it's a boat and the average small boat weighs under 3000 pounds.

      This car is only a status symbol and a penis size compensator for most people. Now feed me to the fanboys.
        • 4 Years Ago
        Am I the only one that sees the irony in somebody with a Veyron avatar talking about people buying gas guzzlers?
        • 4 Years Ago
        Go back to Autoblog Green.
        • 4 Years Ago
        If I see a troll do I get to bop him on the head?
        • 4 Years Ago
        • 4 Years Ago
        I agree.
        90% of the people I know that have these vehicles have no use for them.
        I will use some of the people in my neighborhood for example.

        Dentist and his housewife: Escalade ESV and Range Rover
        Dentist and housewife #2: Escalade ESV and Escalade
        Physician and housewife: X5 and MDX
        The list goes on and on like this.
        I have a friend who is a hairdresser, no kids, no pets, not married with a massive Tahoe.
        For what I don't know.
        None of these people have any boats, jet skis, quads anything either.

        What is funny is that the one neighbor with a boat actually has a little Nissan truck and a Saturn sedan. They keep the boat at the marina.
        • 4 Years Ago
        I agree. The answer is to keep saying that - when it's no longer "cool" to have a big truck or SUV, people who don't need them will stop buying them.

        The trend's already started.

      • 4 Years Ago
      It's funny to me that after all these years of manufacturers saying it was impossible to give us anything but lousy gas mileage, suddenly we get much better. Why? I used to think CAFE was a bad idea, and now I'm not so sure.
      • 4 Years Ago
      Amazing that the new Ranger has a greater payload capacity than the larger F150. I wouldn't be surprised if it gets notably better fuel economy as well. Maybe it's just me, but I kind of feel like we're getting screwed here, at least a little bit.
      • 4 Years Ago
      Not bad Ford, not bad, but I wanna see the ecoboost's mpg
        • 4 Years Ago
        This is good MPG for a full size truck... but if you want even better mileage... put either an "air gate" in place of the tail gate or a cover over the bed... both will greatly improve aerodynamics and MPG!
        • 4 Years Ago
        Air Gate doesn't improve MPG at all, it could actually make it worse by making the vortex much larger behind the cab. A tonneau cover is a good idea though, and gets you 1-2mph at high speeds.
        • 4 Years Ago
        I want to see that too. I am waiting for the day that my tiny Ranger is outclassed in MPG by a fullsize truck. Right now I still AVERAGE higher than the hwy estimate on the V6.
      • 4 Years Ago
      Impressive number on a sticker - but I want the numbers from an official real world drive done by Auto Blog's writers.

      Next, hook it up to a hard walled 5500# loaded race trailer and compare the fuel numbers to the F250 PSD to tell me which truck I need next.

      • 4 Years Ago
      GM has been getting better fuel economy, not to mention extremely more power, with it's trucks for the past 3-5 years. When I say more power, it's ridiculous what the 5.3 Chevy will do to the 5.4 3v ford besides make an a-- out of it in a power comparison. The 5.3 will set you back while the 5.4 3v can barely get out of it's own way. Chevy will increase their mpg's, while increasing power, and be ahead of the bluish oval.
    • Load More Comments