Ford F-150 Ecoboost – Click above for high-res image gallery

Ford hit a milestone with its F-150 pickup last month. According to PickupTrucks.com, the Blue Oval sold more trucks with V6 engines than V8 mills. Forty-one percent of F-150 sales left the lot with the company's 3.5-liter Ecoboost six-pot under the hood. That number is up four percentage points compared to last month.

Additionally, the base, naturally-aspirated 3.7-liter V6 engine took home a 14 percent slice of the total mix, bringing the grand V6 total to 55 percent of all F-150 sales. The news comes as little surprise to anyone who's spent time in the full-size truck.

The twin-turbocharged, direct-injected 3.5-liter EcoBoost V6 engine provides more power and better fuel economy than the 5.0-liter V8 alternative. While it carries a $750 premium over the larger displacement engine, buyers are keenly aware of just how much a few extra mpgs can save at the pump. As PickupTrucks.com points out, fuel prices are currently a dollar higher right now than they were at the same point last year.


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
  • 60 Comments
      dukeisduke
      • 3 Years Ago
      Great news. I just hope that the EcoBoost engines turn out to be durable in the long run. Also, aren't Chevy and RAM going to have to counter this somehow? GM has the hybrids, but they're expensive, and nobody is buying them, although the 5.3l V8 gets almost the same mileage as the EcoBoost (15/22 vs. 16/22). Let the light truck fuel economy wars begin!
      xmailboxcancerx
      • 3 Years Ago
      Nice. More engine options for a variation of customer preferences = more win.
      ramairjer
      • 3 Years Ago
      Would like to see the Raptor get the Ecoboost V6.
      • 3 Years Ago
      [blocked]
        LUSTSTANG S-197
        • 3 Years Ago
        Please refrain from posting. You only reinforce the stereotype of the smug, left-wing elitist that is always trying to ram his narrow minded viewpoints of things he knows nothing about down everyone else's throats.
      patrick
      • 3 Years Ago
      The v8 is the way to go for me, I drove an Ecoboost and did not like the droney sound and the lack of smoothness the v6, lost over the v8, I can live with the 1 to 2 miles less per gallon the v8 gets. I will recoup the money later on down the road on repair bills due to the simpler nature of the v8. Anyway I love the 5.0 but I opt for the Ram 4x4 5.7L Tradesman, better value for the money, not that the Ford is bad, It is a very good Truck.
        • 3 Years Ago
        @patrick
        [blocked]
      nardvark
      • 3 Years Ago
      The real headline should be "41 percent of F150's sold with Ecoboost engine." Considering all the wailing and knashing of teeth we heard from the V8 truck purists around here, you would have thought that no one would buy the turbo.
        Mike K
        • 3 Years Ago
        @nardvark
        Those are truck ENTHUSIASTS, not the every day buyer. Me personally, I'd rather have the 6.2L V8 under the hood, but that's because I love the sound of V8's, and want the most HP/TQ offered. Most average Joe's who use their pickups for work purposes want the most efficient yet capable rig they can get; and that's where the ecoboost succeeds.
          nardvark
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Mike K
          It's not obvious to me that the 6.2 is more useful than the EB for hauling. The torque peaks on on the 6.2 all the way up at 4500rpm, on the EB is hits peak torque at 2500rpm and just keeps pulling... I'd have to drive them both to know how they respond in real driving.
          A_Guy
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Mike K
          You'd rather the 6.2 just to hear the sound? I love engine roar too, but if that's the only reason to get it and to brag about specs, that's just throwing money down the toilet. ...and then again at the pump. I agree with your second point, however.
          Mike K
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Mike K
          A_Guy: I'm not concerned with Fuel Economy though. I'm concerned with HP/TQ and Displacement. The 6.2L puts down an additional 55/15 respectively.
          LUSTSTANG S-197
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Mike K
          A_Guy The man only stated his preference. Down vote me if you will but, I am not convinced that the v6s get substantially better mileage than the v8s. It still has to move all that truck in a way people have come to expect. That calls for a higher revving motor which obviously hurts mileage.
      tenspeeder
      • 3 Years Ago
      Just think how well a 'modern' smaller truck with a good 4 cyl and V6 engine could sell
      marco
      • 3 Years Ago
      Bring us the global Ranger and then see how many people would choose the diesel over the regular gas engine
        Mike K
        • 3 Years Ago
        @marco
        You cant compare a diesel ranger to a boosted f150.... That's like Comparing the Focus ST to a Mustang GT...
      Commodore
      • 3 Years Ago
      D'oh. Wasn't this an obvious one from the beginning? The V6 is less expensive, gets good mileage and has great torque. Only people that REALLY need to tow a lot of stuff would buy the V8 now.
        Mike K
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Commodore
        Umm, it's actually more expensive, and has a higher tow capacity then the 5.0L, but ok lets do it your way...
          montoym
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Mike K
          On top of that, the 3.5L EcoBoost is purchased roughly 3 to 1 compared to the 3.7L according to the figures above. So, they are buying a 6cyl which still has the power and capability of a V8, they aren't dropping down as you seem to be claiming. That said. I don't think the recent F-150's were even available with a 6cyl prior to these two engines being released. If they were, I think it was only for super base level work truck trims or fleets maybe. So, a 14% mix of the 3.7L is good as well and probably higher than Chevy/GMC and Dodge. I guess HP figures that match the last generation's V8 figures will do that for you.
          onewayroll
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Mike K
          The 3.7L is cheaper than the 5.0L which I believe he was talking about.
      Silly Pickle
      • 3 Years Ago
      Oh Z71...you're such a di@k. Ok...I own an Ecoboost...had it all of 2 weeks now, going on 3. And so far...it doesn't appear to be any better on gas than the '08 5.4 it's replaced. Gobs and gobs and gobs more power though. Where the 5.4 would probably smoke the EB6 off the line (it did have good torque down low) it's when the EB hits...and keeps on hitting that it just screams past the old 5.4 like nothing you'd think should. The '08...dead after 30-35 mph...then it's all noise and you might as well stop before it hits 4000 rpm because it's not doing anything. The EB6...shoot that thing hits 6000 rpm so damn fast it'll make your head spin and there's NO loss of power from the point it starts getting (around 1750rpm or so) to the time you hit 6000. 100 mph happens awful damn quick. I bet you could run that old Cobra race and the '11 would do 0-100-0 before the '08 even hit 100. I love the juice this thing has and even the way it applies it. (sure would kick any Z71 to the curb...like candy from a baby) I never did drive a 5.0 though, kinda wish I had... That being said, all the love and all...mileage so far hasn't been great. Only gone through 2 tanks so not fair to judge yet I guess. If it beats the '08's avg of 15 Imperial mpg, well, then I guess I'm ahead aren't I? Time will tell. One item of note - driving behind it as it's accelerating away (wife was in it I was in the car) - holy crow that thing must run rich. Smelled worse than a 30 yr old pickup truck. Kids in the car thought I laid one out my backside. Wasn't me...it's the truck. Hoping that's just a run rich programming trick for the first few thousand k's. I think my car picked up 20 hp just from the gas filled air - or maybe I picked up 10 mpg because I didn't need to burn what was in my tank. Either way...that was weird. As for the V-8 sound, I thought I'd hate it too, not having it, but it's ok. It's a damn quiet truck, little bit o' turbo whistle...and goes like a raped ape when asked to. Can't wait to pull the camper with it.
        SheldonRoss
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Silly Pickle
        Turbo engines run rich to cut back on NOX emissions I believe. My Mazdaspeed3's tailpipes were coated with soot before I hit 500 miles. On a side note, seeing as how most turbo engines can be tweaked quite a bit - easily, I'd like to see what a good tuning shop could do with EB3.5. I'm thinking large FMIC, SRI, DP and CBE would push this well in to the 400hp range. For those who don't speak turbo :) *FMIC - Front mount intercooler *SRI - Short ram intake *DP - DownPipe *CBE - catback exhaust
          Silly Pickle
          • 3 Years Ago
          @SheldonRoss
          Word on the Ecoboost forums is that any tampering with the setting will null and void the warranty. So until Ford actually comes out with something that is warranty approved, I aint touchin' it. Then again...it's not like it's got a shortage of power to begin with. I'll be keeping an eye open anyway. More is always better, even if it's already got enough. Right? Re break in period...I've heard varying stories there. Some guy says 10,000 km, someone says 6000...someone knows a guy who's brother builds the trucks in Kansas and says they're broken in when they leave the factory...I don't know what the truth is. I do know my dealer used this very truck to run an 11,000lb Bobcat/trailer combo to 60 mph as fast as they could (customer before me I guess wanted to know how fast it was) so it's not like I've done anything to it that hasn't already been done. (BTW - customer X went to the local GM dealer and test drove a new '11 Duramax with the same load, and though he said it felt better with the load, being a heavier truck in general...he said the F150 was a full 2-3 seconds faster to 60 mph with that load...not bad.) 6000 rpm comes up with half throttle quicker than you'd think to step out of it. It's got warranty. Hope I never need it.
          SheldonRoss
          • 3 Years Ago
          @SheldonRoss
          ..cont The Magnuson Moss act specifically prohibits spurious warranty denials. Some absurd examples to illustrate what it protects against. If you put aftermarket wipers on your car and the transmission blows up. They cannot deny the warranty. If you put aftermarket rims on and the stereo quits working they cannot deny the claim. What they can do is deny a warranty claim if the aftermarket part or modification can be linked to the failure. Examples If you put in an aftermarket amp and your stereo head unit fails, they could deny the claim. If you do put Front mount intercooler in and the motor blows up, they could deny the motor replacement. So yes there is reason to be concerned with modification, but manufacturers cannot just "null and void" a warranty for any old reason.
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Silly Pickle
        [blocked]
        A_Guy
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Silly Pickle
        2 weeks and 2 tanks is still well in the break-in period. I'm sure your mileage will improve. Maybe this isn't needed anymore, but aren't you not supposed to be hammering the thing during break-in period? :\
      sysadm1n
      • 3 Years Ago
      More automakers need to do what Ford's doing.
      longhornjon
      • 3 Years Ago
      This V6 is actually more expensive, but makes up the bulk of dealer orders, currently. There's no surprise it's outselling the V8 when it's the only option sitting on dealer lots. Look at customer orders to see the real demand...
        Synthono
        • 3 Years Ago
        @longhornjon
        Dealers order what they think their customers want, it does them no good to bring in trucks they can't sell. While they have been told to push Ecoboost, they wouldn't keep ordering them if they weren't selling.
    • Load More Comments