Director of Adventure Management Operations
Instantaneous mpg readout's DO NOT equal average mpg's....but you can enjoy that fantasy if you so choose.
As for the 2.7l ecoboost getting better mpg's than the 5.7l iForce...that shouldn't be a surprise to anyone. Vehicle weight difference, engine displacement difference, aero & gearing difference. A lot of factors at play. Never said that the 5.7l iForce Tundra was just as efficient as the 2.7l ecoboost F-150; nor would I expect it to be.
What I am saying is that all things being equal, or as much as is realistically possible, between a NA v8 and turbo gasoline of similar output in a similar platform, the turbo gasoline engine does not have much, if any, mpg advantage for working (key word there) applications.
So maybe instead of comparing a brand new 2.7l ecoboost F-150 to an older 5.7l Tundra, compare something that is more apples-to-apples. Go tow 6k lbs with the 3.5l ecoboost and 5.0l coyote...tell me how much more "efficient" that ecoboost is. Because plenty of people, besides TFL, have done those tests...the mpg difference is negligible.
Dude....the pic I posted shows the AVERAGE fuel economy over a given distance...hence the three letters "avg." Had you actually driven an F150 you would have been familiar with the display and know that the average and instantaneous displays are two completely difference screens. Now, before you start to cry that its not accurate, I took the 5 min to enter the correction factor when the truck was brand new so it reads with in a tenth of being hand calculated. I underlined it for you:
Also, I'm comparing a 2017 F150 to a 2014 Tundra. Both 2wd, both crew cabs, both 6 speeds, both on OEM street tires, both carrying the same loads, both driven the same speeds, both driven by the same person, both pulling the same boat, both pulling the same travel trailer, both taking the same family vacations. Sorry that my years (and tens of thousands of miles) of personal experience doesn't support what you read on the internet somewhere.
Lastly, I've had the 3.5 and the 5.0 in work trucks, both 2wd Super Crews with 3.55 gears, 6 speeds, OEM tires, same tools, same emergency lights, and the 6.5 bed. The only differences between the trucks was the paint color and the motor. With all other things being equal, the 3.5 got the same if not better fuel economy than the 5.0 under all conditions. Where the 3.5 got worse was when it was towing at 80mph (because it easily could) and the 5.0 was stuck at 70mph (because anything more and it was struggling). If the speed was kept the same, the trucks got with in 1mpg of each other while towing.
Drivers get worse mpg out of the 3.5 because they can easily cruise at a higher speed and accelerate much faster while towing a heavy load. While the 5.0 is huffing and puffing and stuck in the right hand lane, the 3.5 is in the left lane passing traffic.... You'd know that had you actually driven one.
Here is a video showing how big of dog the 5.0 is when compared to the 3.5:
Now, I'm putting you back on ignore. Have a wonderful time "bench racing" vehicles that you have never owned...and have flat out lied about driving.