I live in the KC area so it’s pretty flat roads. You have the 4dr too right with steel bumpers? I’m surprised you’re able to get that because I’ve never seen anything higher than 17mpg on a tank.Do you live in the mountains or something? This is since my last oil change. It includes a few weekends of 10-20mph forest service road trail rides.
When my friends and I haul our RZR's anywhere the 2.7 eco always gets better fuel economy than my 3.5 does.If I want MPG I'll just get in my Ram 2500 6.7 4x4 diesel with 375HP and 800 FP torque, gets 20 mpg highway at 70 all day. Weighs 8000+ pounds. It's faster, smoother, quieter than my JKUR. The Bronco will probably get better MPG when they put the 3.5 turbo in it. I'm in for that.
I hope the 2.7l turbos are a real help at altitude in CO. My 4cylinder Outback averages 27 mpg, basically all highway and that is with mountain hwy sprinkled in.My Subaru outback range is like 600 miles. HAHA. almost double. I dont even think I've ever filled it up. I usually say "put $40 in it" since it lasts forever. Im cutting my hwy MPG in exactly half with a sas bronco....that's when you know it's gonna be badass
This is what I hated most about the last 10 speed I drove. It holds the gear way too long in sport mode.how well the 10 speed holds the gears to keep them in the proper rpms.
This. Aerodynamics are the end all be all. This is why you see better city mpg on some variants, because the drag at hwy speeds is brutal.It seems like a lot of guys arent grasping the aerodynamics. A sasquatched bronco has twice as much front tire exposed than a big ol pick up truck. You know those little rubber wind deflectors they added to the lower bumpers of suburbans, pick ups, etc over the past 5 years? Imagine removing that....AND the front bumper...and what the impact would be to the MPG.
Crunch the numbers and see if it makes sense. The extra insurance alone on a 2nd car easily covers my increased fuel bill.Looks like Im keeping my daily. Disappointed in the 2.3L hwy numbers. Was hoping for 23-24mpg. I really hope 6 gear isnt turning at 3000+ rpms at 75mph.
Yeah the 5.0 loves to rev, its a great engine in the Mustang and the A10 does a great job keeping it in the power band, just so happens the power band is a lot higher then what would be needed for the Bronco from my limited off road knowledge that I have gained hereIt is true that the 5.0 likes to rev. However, those with auto over at mustang6g rave about how well the 10 speed holds the gears to keep them in the proper rpms. Having said that, i think Ford made the right choice of engines for the Bronco.
I can hear my order moving up the build pull chart as i type this.
^ He said it better than I did lolDon't feed the troll. He's apparently never driven a Coyote, so he doesn't understand how NON-linear its powerband is. There's basically nothing from idle up to about 3000 when the cams finally kick in and there's a HUGE surge in power. It's the peakiest engine I've ever owned. The 2.7 EcoBoost in my Lincoln has a perfectly smooth powerband - the turbos spool as the torque converter flashes, so it ends up being very linear, responsive, and predictable. If I try and accelerate my Coyote through an intersection with a little gusto, I get nothing at first, then halfway through the intersection when the engine finally gets into the powerband, it just lights up the rear tires with no change in throttle position.
And let's not even mention that the 2.7 F-150 very handily out-accelerates the 5.0.
He continues to hang his hat on this theoretical concept of a linear powerband from idle to 2000 rpm, which he's never been able to quantitatively demonstrate, because it doesn't exist.
But reality has never stopped some people from believing whatever they want to believe.
Yep, aerodynamics and taller lower gears start eating away at the mileage at after a certain point.Higher speeds for vehicles like this are BRUTAL on highway mileage and the EPA test cycle no longer tests at 55-65 like it used to IIRC they test at 70ish.
Just for reference in my lifted jeep on 33’s I get 19 at 65 and 15-16ish at 80