2015 Ford F-150 2nd Generation 2.7 Ecoboost

Gonna trade in my 2010 F-150 Supercrew for the Aluminum Body F-15 2015 with the 2.7 Ecoboost 1st of the year.

The 2015 Ford F-150's little 2.7 EcoBoost V6 will be able to tow 8,500 pounds with 325 horsepower and 375 lb-ft of torque. Official curb weight a 2015 F-150 SuperCrew Lariat, one of the larger models, is a slim 4,942 lbs. The current 3.7 base V6 is dropped for a 3.5, but the 3.5 EcoBoost and V8 from 2014 will remain.

It's Rumered to get 28-29 mpg in the 2WD

Anyone else waiting to get it ?

Click Here for more Info

I'm digging the looks. But will have to drive one before I commit to purchase. But I'm too close to have my 2012 paid off to think about buying a new one anyways

No way. As bad as performance as the bigger ecoboost got, no telling what the little one will get. Been very happy with my 5.0

Going to a special Ford test drive event next month. Looking forward to seeing it. Initial impressions on the F150 forums are promising. 4x4 going from city to city are getting in the upper 20's, some as high as 28, in the 2.7

I don't think I'd ever be happy with a 2.7. I have the 3.5 now and it's a beast! The only performance issue any of them had was not getting the 21-2 advertised without babying the truck. I don't buy a truck for fuel mileage anyway, if I was worried about that I'd buy a little Focus.

I had decided I was going to get a 2015 when I saw it but I'm thinking now waiting 1 more year to see if Ford will actually pull the trigger on the Bronco resurection?

I don't get these comments. Ive driven an ecoboost and a 5.0. The ecoboost will walk all over a 5.0 and do it twice as bad with a load.

The 2.7 ecoboost has more HP and torque(which is also available for a huge range from low to hi on the power curve) than the GM 5.3 up to the 2014 year model. People hear 2.7 or 3.5 liter for a truck motor and automatically think no way, but a twin turbos changes all that.

I don't believe there is a truck on the market that gets the fuel economy that is advertised on the sticker.

That said, let's just say you keep the truck 10 years and put 200k on it. If they 2.7 got 20, and the 3.5 got 16, the difference in cost of gas over 10 years at $3/gallon is $7500, or about $2 a day. If the 2.7 got 24 and the 3.5 got 18, the difference is still only ~$8400 for 10 years, or 833.33 a year.

That twin turbo gasoline 2.7 better be serously de-tuned if you plan on owning it 10 years. Gasoline motors are not designed to handle turbo chargers. The new light duty diesel would be the way to go for mileage power and longevity.

Maybe ford will change my mind this go-round but it'll take at least 10 years.

Maybe... I think its not fair to say the ecoboost motors were not designed to have turbos. I highly doubt all the internals of the ecoboost motors are the same as fords other naturally aspirated motors.

Are diesel motors stronger because they run on diesel fuel? No, they are designed stronger because they are intended to have more air/fuel crammed into the combustion chamber by a turbo. Same concept applies to a gas motor, its just that gas motors are not "typically" turbo charged here.

good point.

There are enough eco's out there if they were junk it would be all over everywhere. It isn't like these things are just in the trucks, they are putting them in everything.

I had a turbo car years ago and after a couple turbo replacements I sold it...these aren't the turbo motors of the past. These things are the real deal....yes, I'm impressed with mine. I love my past diesels but this is as close as you can get power/behavior wise without having all the maintenance costs that are associated with the new diesel trucks.

I'd REALLY question how well a 2.7L would hold up towing 8500 lbs.

All that is comparing engine displacement to max tow rating. Using the same ratio would generate...

5.9 (as in the cummins) with a tow rating of 18,500 lbs... seems reasonable.
6.0 (ford diesel) with a rating of 18,800... seems reasonable.
6.7 (ford or dodge diesel) with a rating of 21,000 lbs. which also seems reasonable.

The 2.7 lieter isn't comparable to the naturally aspirated 4 banger in my car, its a built twin turbo motor putting out more horsepower and toque than motors twice its size.

Numbers are in

Source
Ford Source

2015 Naturally Aspirated Engines
4x2 F-150 3.5-liter V-6: 18/25/20 mpg city/highway/combined
4x4 F-150 3.5-liter V-6: 17/23/19 mpg city/highway/combined
(2014 F-150 4x2 3.7-liter V-6: 17/23/19 mpg city/highway/combined)
4x2 F-150 5.0-liter V-8: 15/22/18 mpg city/highwaycombined
4x4 F-150 5.0-liter V-8: 15/21/17 mpg city/highway/combined
(2014 F-150 4x2 5.0-liter V-8: 15/21/17 mpg city/highway/combined)


2015 EcoBoost Twin Turbos
4x2 F-150 2.7-liter EcoBoost V-6: 19/26/22 mpg city/highway/combined
4x4 F-150 2.7-liter EcoBoost V-6: 18/23/20 mpg city/highway/combined
(2014 F-150: no equivalent)
4x2 F-150 3.5-liter EcoBoost V-6: 17/24/20 mpg city/highway/combined
4x4 F-150 3.5-liter EcoBoost V-6: 17/23/19 mpg city/highway/combined
(2014 F-150 4x2 3.5-liter V-6: 16/22/18 mpg city/highway/combined)
(2014 F-150 4x2 6.2-liter V-8: 13/18/15 mpg city/highway/combined)

I have had my eye on the 15's for some time. I was told that it might be a good idea to wait a little while after they are introduced to purchase one in the event that there some minor problems that might have to be addressed once they get a few on the road.
It is a good looking pickup and I have heard really good things about the aluminum body.
Adios,
Gary

Comparing a turbo diesel to a turbo gas isn't even close to apples to apples.

Same reason the 6.2 doesn't have a turbo in it in the SD 's, is the same reason the Eco boost isn't in the SD's.

No doubht the 2.7 will pull 8000 plus but don't think it will hold up like a non turbo or diesel will doing it, but then again it's not ment too.

No dought turbo gas technology has come a very long ways but if it had come that far you would see it in the SD's

X2..... Love my 5.0

I bought a new 5.0 last year over Eco boost because I try to keep a truck longer, my thought is more moving parts = more wear = more chance of failure. Now the real issue is the Ford dealers will not be seeing very many of these trucks until March or April so the ones that do come in will be sold at a premium. Just my .02.

Just make sure you get the heated tailgate option so your hands don't get cold pushing it!!!! LOL

I rather push my Ford than drive an Obongo Motors or a Dodge.

I am a ford man myself and what is funny is I have only heard this from 1 person when I was in scottland co Missouri right on the Iowa border. As soon as I read this it made me think about up there and then I see you are in se Iowa. Lol

I myelf drive an ecoboost. Absolutely love it. Most of what I have found it you can buy the 5.0 for cheaper and when you hear that the salesman will put 2 and 2 together and start dogging the Ecoboost. You didn't want to pay extra $ for it so you have now formed an assumption that the engine just sux bc that's not the one you bought. Does it get the claimed mileage "no." But it will flat as spank the [censored] out of the 5.0 and tow a hell of alot better.

It don't matter what brand it is, they are ALL overpriced for no longer than they last anymore!!!

I think your comparison is what is not "apples to apples" The 6.2 wasn't designed to have a turbo on it so it likely wouldn't hold up too well to forced induction and heavy towing. Build the 6.2 to handle the stresses of forced induction like the ecoboosts are and the powerstrokes are and then cram as much boost down the intake as the 3.5 eco gets and im sure it will hang quite nicely with the 6.7 powerstroke...

I think they haven't put an ecoboost model in the superduty yet because it will slaughter the sales of the powerstroke. An adequate amount of low end power without the hassle of emmisions carp and higher priced fuel and people will jump all over it.

I would put most new vehicles up against the vehicles of yesteryear in a longevity challenge any day!

Lol. That's funny stuff Eco boost killing the 6.7. I know a lot of guys barely get 17mpg on the hwy with the Eco, what do you think will happen with a heavier truck, larger profile and lower gears?
I just talked to a guy last week that has a turbo 6.2 with 152k on it. But he averages 9mpg in a half ton.
Again gas turbo has come along ways but not ready for 3/4 ton up market.

Is it a direct injection 6.2? Was it a 6.2 when he bought it and now it has an aftermarket turbo?

Sure the gas will always get worse MPG's than the diesel, diesel by nature has more energy per unit of volume than gasoline does. On the other hand gas motors don't seem to have near the fuel system related issues and gas is cheaper than diesel. Anyone who has a aftermarket turbo on their 6.2 1/2 ton gets 9mpg because their foot is so far up that motors arse it doesn't know what to do.

Mine would be..

I get 15 mpg in my 6.2 Raptor. And I drive it like I stole it.

you certainly know vehicles, i agree with you


i own a 3.5 Ecoboost and a 2015 F250 with 6.7 L twin turbo diesel
(bought both for towing capacity )

boosted 3.5 will out tow & out run a naturally aspirated V8 trucks on the road;
it does have twin turbo so it's an unfair advantage

Commanche Co had a tractor pull in August where the big 3 truck companies
bring out their trucks for test tow
The 3.5 twin turbo out tow a Dodge and almost as good as Duramax Diesel
Changed a lot of people's opinions about the small V6 (boosted )

I tow a 10,000 lb Boston Whaler boat with my 3.5 or 6.7L
i don't care for speed, torque is what it's all about in my book

if you want better gas mileage in a boosted 3.5 turn Traction Control Off,
keep tire pressure near MAX, not what's recommended on the door label

Henessy and I know another guy with Shelby raptor but no idea about mileage