What are these trucks actually getting for mpg?

Ford and everyone else hyped these trucks up for getting substantially better mpg but yet I haven't seen anyone mention it. I have on the other hand seen members mention their 17' getting worse mpg goofing around than their gen 1's. So what's the verdict? Did the ecoboost only add more power and a ton of complexity and not deliver on mpg?

Disclaimer: I don't care about mpg as my 14' was a thirsty bitch and it was more for smiles per gallon but Ford hyped the controversial switch to the V6 largely for fuel economy.

14+mpg driving around town

First off you have to understand the MPG tests the government uses. The tests are done on a dyno in a VERY controlled environment and not by some heavy footed hooligan out on the roads. Every car manufacturer is pretty much put in a "best case scenario" setting and then they test the MPG.

Can the Gen2 get 17+ mpg on a flat highway with cruise control? Yes. Can it get 14+mpg in town if you stay out of the boost? Yes.

But if youre running around in sport mode all the time or staying in boost there is no chance in hell you will come close to Fords claimed MPGs.

Plenty of guys that have picked up their trucks so far are posting Fords claimed MPGs but they are being easy on the trucks during their break in period. Once you start getting into the boost say goodbye to any claimed MPG.

I am at 1400 miles, avg is 15.5. I have my car to burn gas and rubber around town.

For comparison:

On summer gas (winter gas has less energy) I get between 15.5 and 16.5 mpg with my 2011 6.2L SCAB in 2WD. This is absolutely unfailing. It doesn't matter whether the driving is predominantly city or highway. Surprisingly, speed doesn't matter either. What does matter is my right foot. Drive sanely and the big V8 will produce surprisingly good gas mileage.

You guys who waited for a GEN2 because you thought that a V6 with twin blowers would produce markedly better fuel economy forgot something important:
Physics. It takes a certain amount of energy to move a heavy, big body, high profile vehicle down the road. To do the same work requires the expenditure of the same amount of energy. That energy will come from the fuel consumed and from nowhere else. Miracles do not happen between fill-ups. Physics happens.

Ruger said:

You guys who waited for a GEN2 because you thought that a V6 with twin blowers would produce markedly better fuel economy forgot something important:

Click to expand...

I don't think there is many people in that group.

That V6 may burn as much or more fuel as a 6.2 under WOT conditions. BUT at idle, say letting the truck warm up before you put the wife and kids in it, should be better. Cruising down the highway should be much better.

The Ecoboost has been around for a while now, and AVG mpg has always been pretty impressive compared to the 6.2.

Jack_Toepfer said:

That V6 may burn as much or more fuel as a 6.2 under WOT conditions. BUT at idle, say letting the truck warm up before you put the wife and kids in it, should be better. Cruising down the highway should be much better.

The Ecoboost has been around for a while now, and AVG mpg has always been pretty impressive compared to the 6.2.

Click to expand...

No argument: The EcoBoost will get better "mileage" at idle in the driveway.

Cruising down the highway should be much better? It remains to be seen, of course. There is no rational comparison between an EcoBoost in a 1.5 ton street only SUV and the same power plant in a Raptor. How a twin-blower V6 performs in a nearly 3 ton off-road truck is a question that has yet to be answered.

Ruger said:

No argument: The EcoBoost will get better "mileage" at idle in the driveway.

Cruising down the highway should be much better? It remains to be seen, of course. There is no rational comparison between an EcoBoost in a 1.5 ton street only SUV and the same power plant in a Raptor. How a twin-blower V6 performs in a nearly 3 ton off-road truck is a question that has yet to be answered.

Click to expand...

So since I have owned a 6.2 in a non-Raptor for several years, I can tell you that it isn't any better, and most of you guys get better MPG than me. So, comparing the gen1 eco in a non Raptor to the 6.2 in a non Raptor should help tell the tale for gen2 vs the same. It has MPFI and DI to maximize performance AND efficiency - a first EVER, and the 10 speed, stop/start tech, and lighter weight. It's going to be a bit before there is conclusive evidence to support either side of the argument. I'm simply stating that every factor that attributes to MPG is in the gen2s favor.

Also, nobody said "mileage"... but it's winter in most of the country so most of us looking at our dummy MPG meter in the dash are seeing significantly lower readings there because the truck sits idle much more than the rest of the year.

I'm not an Ecoboost fan boy at all, driving a 6.2 and loving it, but I don't see why the gen2 wouldn't outshine the gen1 in every measurable capacity (other than exhaust note which is subjective)... unless Ford decided to go backwards for the gen2.

And sorry if my comments are coming off argumentative, not my intent, just trying to convince myself I need a $70k truck in my driveway like most of you guys. If it gets 20% better mpg, that's $100/mo in fuel savings.

winter is a tough time to check mpg. In summer my gauge says we are averaging 13.3 , in winter is says 9.9