any e-85 users?

WIMUSKY

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 26, 2009
Messages
19,790
Seeing as how my next truck will be in 2 years and will be a 3 year old off lease f150 with most likely the 5.0l I quess it will be flex anyways.The small ecoboost cant be ruled out either.So I'm looking at 2015 trucks in 2018 I figure.Why 2018?Well I will turn 60 then and I will get Canada pension which will give me a raise of 700 before taxes a month.So in theory that pays for a used truck.And no its not free money as I worked 35 years and had Canada pension deducted off my check for the same amount of time.


A friend of mine has an ecoboost, 2.7L I believe. He likes it. Not sure what mileage he's getting. And I know he doesn't tow anything, so I don't know how they're rated.

No need to explain whether it's free money or not, and it's not, because it's nobody's business. So what if it "is" free money. That would be great for you! I know I get tired of people telling me, it must be nice, or, the economy sure must be good, whenever I buy a truck.
 

82rude

Rear Admiral
Joined
May 8, 2012
Messages
4,082
True.Thanks WIMUSKY.It would be interesting to see numbers for the 2.7 for towing .My set up cant be no more than 2500 lbs Even if we through the atv in the box were only adding 800 tops.
 

funk6294

Petty Officer 1st Class
Joined
Apr 26, 2009
Messages
294
I had an Equinox that had the flex fuel Ecotech. I tested out the E85 capability a couple of times driving between Phoenix and Las Vegas and for sure saw a drop in mileage. It's been a couple of years so I don't recall the exact numbers, but I think it lost around 100 miles of range on that tank. Based on that there was no way that it was going to be a cheaper alternative, and it might have come close to breaking even with gas when factoring the lower per gallon cost. Taking the cost savings from the equation and all that's left was mileage/range, which was less than gas so I had to stop more often to fuel up.

As for changes in power I could swear it felt a slight bit more peppy when measured with the butt dyno. It wasn't huge, it just seemed like maybe (MAYBE) it was a tad more responsive when passing. My logic was since that motor was 11:1+ that maybe with the extra octane rating of the E85 the pcm could put in more timing. But then again, it could have easily been my imagination.

As for adding the option to the vehicle, I don't know that I would go out of my way to pay for it, but if the car came equipped with it standard I wouldn't turn it down, it adds another fuel option and let's me park in the Fuel Efficient Vehicle spaces at some of my customers facilities.
 
Last edited:

WIMUSKY

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 26, 2009
Messages
19,790
As for changes in power I could swear it felt a slight bit more peppy when measured with the butt dyno. It wasn't huge, it just seemed like maybe (MAYBE) it was a tad more responsive when passing. My logic was since that motor was 11:1+ that maybe with the extra octane rating of the E85 the pcm could put in more timing. But then again, it could have easily been my imagination.

Just like when a person runs a vehicle thru a car wash. it seems to run better.... :)
 

funk6294

Petty Officer 1st Class
Joined
Apr 26, 2009
Messages
294
Just like when a person runs a vehicle thru a car wash. it seems to run better.... :)

So if you fill up with E85 and get a car wash it just might make a measurable difference! Well at least the car would be clean anyway....
 

Harritwo

Chief Petty Officer
Joined
Oct 4, 2011
Messages
586
WIMUSKY, I bought a 16 model F150 Supercrew with the 2.7L ecoboost. Out on the open highway where i can punch the cruise in at 70, she clicks off 23 mpg. Running my normal commuting route from Arlington to Seattle and back at the breakneck speed of 30-70, it averages 19.5 mpg. Towing the boat (94 Sea Ray 170) she averages 18 mpg. It gets about 2 mpg better than my dads 3.5 ecoboost and significantly better than my 04 F150 with the 5.4L. Havent had anything real heavy towing but I am happy with it. Mine is rated for 7200#, if you get the Heavy Tow option, it is rated for 11,500 i believe.,
 

82rude

Rear Admiral
Joined
May 8, 2012
Messages
4,082
What gearing did you get?Do not quote me but I believe theres 3 options,3.08 3.55 3.73
 
Last edited:

Harritwo

Chief Petty Officer
Joined
Oct 4, 2011
Messages
586
82Rude, It has the 3.55 and is the Sport 4x4. When towing i put it in towing mode, most of the time i leave it in stock mode. When you put it in Sport Mode, it is fun to drive and will set you back in the seat. When in sport mode, i cant keep my foot out of it and still turn over 18 on my commute.
 

82rude

Rear Admiral
Joined
May 8, 2012
Messages
4,082
So, it sounds like it could tow my small set up easily as I cant be more than 2000 max.Heck let toss in the atv also still wouldn't be 2600.I would guess the 3.73 are for trailer towing .
 
Last edited:

WIMUSKY

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 26, 2009
Messages
19,790
A lot of the fullsize V-8 trucks have 3.73...

I thought the eco-boost would get better mileage. I'm using a loaner 2014 1500 RAM crew cab and it's getting 28mpg running at 70.... It has the 5.7 hemi w/MDS.
 

82rude

Rear Admiral
Joined
May 8, 2012
Messages
4,082
My brother has the same ram but a bit older.Front end completely replaced,motor blew,sucks horribly on gas in town.Start towing in hilly areas WIMUSKY that 28mpg becomes an illusion.That truck was the best truck in the world now its the most hated by him.Me ,I'm too old and set in my ways to ever concider any truck but ford.Not saying its the best atall I just like them and am comfortable with them.If only ford could license the ram side box locking areas.Remember back in the day uncle joe was a buick man,fred was a Pontiac lover,john was a ford guy,etc.Well phil is a ford truck guy,though one chev snuck in there in the eighties.
 
Last edited:

WIMUSKY

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 26, 2009
Messages
19,790
No doubt, start towing and the numbers go out the door. My 2500 6.4 MDS Hemi going the same route got 18.5.....

Frontends do suck. Look to start replacing parts at 50k. I've "heard" some Fords were going out at 30K. I can only vouche for RAM....
 

Harritwo

Chief Petty Officer
Joined
Oct 4, 2011
Messages
586
82Rude & Wimusky,

My Prior Ford ran 230k with the original front end. Was on a Front End Machine twice and was still in good shape. It ate front rotors though, especially when towing constantly.

I have been a Ford Man since 71, Had two Chevy trucks in there and both times the Admiral said I had a temporary Moment of Insanity. Went back to Fords both times. For me, it is the comfort, Leg room, and Towing. The Fords (All Gas) just seem to handle it better than the GM;s i have owned or driven consistently.

The Dodges, i never got over the quality control issues from the late 70's early 80's. Like anything else, there are always a good one and a bad one. It is the owners perspective which is good.

This was a good article and part of what i based my buying decision on the 2.7 Ecoboost. Look at the towing numbers as well as the standard test numbers and see if you are surprised by the results as i was.

http://www.caranddriver.com/compari...f-150-lariat-35l-ecoboost-4wd-comparison-test
 

WIMUSKY

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 26, 2009
Messages
19,790
82Rude & Wimusky,

My Prior Ford ran 230k with the original front end. Was on a Front End Machine twice and was still in good shape. It ate front rotors though, especially when towing constantly.

What year was that Ford? I also bet the frontend was greaseable......
 
Last edited:

82rude

Rear Admiral
Joined
May 8, 2012
Messages
4,082
WIMUSKY.my ford 2003,f150 4x4 4,6 .replaced shift fork at 70000km .Ford new they had issues but would not cover.158000km now and both front hubs and of course brakes.Thats it so far.Im sure the longer I have her the more parts will fail,thats life and is not specific to any vehicle.The exhaust manifolds were notorious for failure .also.I wish mine came with the 3 valve head instead of the 2.More power with the 3 v and it was able to take the eldebrock supercharger which I was going to do but apparently the 2 v wasn't on the list of motors.
 
Last edited:

WIMUSKY

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 26, 2009
Messages
19,790
Rude, I had to go to the conversion chart...Lol 98k miles, that's good. I know when RAM went to no zerks, problems started happening. Like I metioned, 50k and problems. That was with 2 2500s that plowed and a 1500 that didn't plow. I had a new '93 chev that I put 200k and never touched the frontend. But, it was full of zerks. Maybe I mentioned it already... Quality seems to be going backwards. They want people to buy new vehicles sooner.....
 

82rude

Rear Admiral
Joined
May 8, 2012
Messages
4,082
MOST LIKELY like you and others I wont accept any replacements without zerks.If I could afford to play id like to see how a built 460 would fare.
 

Harritwo

Chief Petty Officer
Joined
Oct 4, 2011
Messages
586
Rude, my Ford was an 04 with the 5.4L 3V engine. Had 230,000 on it when i sold it to my son's mother in law. Front End is still original. It loved rotors though, the front rotors had the sealed bearings and were non-turnable. I just knew to replace them about every other year. Put Shocks on it once at some point. but tie rods and all were original. Most likely will never find another one that will run that long with doing noting but routine maintenance and put gas in it and driving it. I drove it a lot. Towed over 12,500 lbs with it and never an issue.
 
Top