PDA

View Full Version : Fuel Economy 2009 or 2010 Ford F150 with 4.6L 3 valve engine?


joed
02-01-2010, 10:02 PM
Anyone driving a 2009 or 2010 Ford F150 with the 4.6L 3 valve V8 engine? If so, what fuel mileage are you getting?

TXNSLighting
02-01-2010, 10:57 PM
Yep i have a 2009 4x4 with the 4.6l 3v. We took a trip to North carolina and averaged 21.6 MPG. In town is averaging right around 15. I Absolutely love the engine and the truck.

Lazer Cut
02-01-2010, 11:43 PM
I have a 2009 2wd 4.6 3vavle 8ft bed and man its a ballsy truck for a 1/2 ton and being the small block v8... I avg intown + highway going to school and home to my dads and back I avg roughly 80-90 miles aday @ 15.2 mpg. I set that avg mpg on the dash soon as I got the truck so I've had the truck maybe 5-6months have 14k on it bought it with I believe 52 miles and man it is great... you can search in the picture thread to see my setup and my truck... haul around 3500lbs with it during the mowing season and get about 14mpg maybe better... trailer is almost 2k by itself
Posted via Mobile Device

sea ox
02-03-2010, 11:00 PM
I am getting 15.2 mpg around town with my 2009 F-150 4x4 4.6 3v. I have only put 2,500 miles on it so far and not much highway driving. I got 15mpg on a 100 mile trip towing 2 ztr on a 6x12 trailer doing 70mph on the highway.

360ci
02-05-2010, 10:14 PM
Yep i have a 2009 4x4 with the 4.6l 3v. We took a trip to North carolina and averaged 21.6 MPG. In town is averaging right around 15. I Absolutely love the engine and the truck.

What's your rear axle ratio?

I'm interested to know the mileage as well, in crew cab 6.5' box guise (2wd) the 3.55 axle is the highest available (in Canada at least on the crew cab XLT). Does the transmission hunt for gears while towing, or is it somewhat smart and hold gears with minimal shifting?

I test drove an '08 with the 4 speed 248hp 4.6L at the dealer and I didn't like it. Perhaps if this new 6 speed doesn't perpetually want to get into 6th gear after 50 feet of taking off from a stop, it should be a worthy vehicle, even with the 3.55 axle.

unkownfl
02-05-2010, 11:32 PM
21.6 Thats what my more aerodynamic mustang with a 5 speed gets on the highway. You must be going less then 70.

360ci
02-06-2010, 09:12 AM
21.6 Thats what my more aerodynamic mustang with a 5 speed gets on the highway. You must be going less then 70.

My '91 LX 5.0 fastback got an average of 22mpg, but it rarely saw above 65mph on the highway. I had a 3.73 axle installed when I inherited it.

TXNSLighting
02-06-2010, 11:38 PM
21.6 Thats what my more aerodynamic mustang with a 5 speed gets on the highway. You must be going less then 70.

No we averaged 75 mph. some areas got to 70. New vehicles are getting much more efficient day in and day out. As well as improving their aerodynamics.

TXNSLighting
02-06-2010, 11:41 PM
What's your rear axle ratio?

I'm interested to know the mileage as well, in crew cab 6.5' box guise (2wd) the 3.55 axle is the highest available (in Canada at least on the crew cab XLT). Does the transmission hunt for gears while towing, or is it somewhat smart and hold gears with minimal shifting?

I test drove an '08 with the 4 speed 248hp 4.6L at the dealer and I didn't like it. Perhaps if this new 6 speed doesn't perpetually want to get into 6th gear after 50 feet of taking off from a stop, it should be a worthy vehicle, even with the 3.55 axle.

Its got the 3:55's. every now and then it will down shift a little more then id like...But all in all, it does a good job. The max it will ever pull is 4k, and it handles it fine. Mine also is getting about 15 in own as well. I really am loving this truck more and more. It definitely doesnt hunt at all. It knows where to be and stays there until it doesnt need to be. I can tell it is very smart. I love the tranny. It reminds me of the torqshift. In tow/haul mode, its got a great brake in it. slows the truck all the way down without you touching the pedal.

360ci
02-07-2010, 07:12 AM
Its got the 3:55's. every now and then it will down shift a little more then id like...But all in all, it does a good job. The max it will ever pull is 4k, and it handles it fine. Mine also is getting about 15 in own as well. I really am loving this truck more and more. It definitely doesnt hunt at all. It knows where to be and stays there until it doesnt need to be. I can tell it is very smart. I love the tranny. It reminds me of the torqshift. In tow/haul mode, its got a great brake in it. slows the truck all the way down without you touching the pedal.

Good to know, thanks. I built one online with the LSD 3.55. limited slip can't be had on the 3.31 gears, which seems VERY LOW, especially with the 6 speed. I'm glad that Ford programmed the tranny right!

grassman177
02-07-2010, 10:56 PM
just to chime in, as long as you are pulling a small trailer it would be fine, anything else and it has no balls. that is directly from a good friend that works for ford.

Lazer Cut
02-08-2010, 07:43 AM
I beg to differ grassman... my uncle is head of Fords service department in Misouri before transfering to a different job. The 5.4 is a great engine but the 4.6 3 valve is a ballsy engine. I pull 3500-4000 all summer. I have a compact skid steer and tilt trailer 5500lbshooked up to it right now with 400 lbs of salt in the bed. It is little lower than level but tows and STOPS the load just fine. Sure its not going to tow this everyday but I tow a 2k # trailer, 800# grandstand, 400# gravely, misc tools and not to mention seed when necessary and few other things and gas... so usually its 3500# and tows it just fine.
Posted via Mobile Device

TXNSLighting
02-08-2010, 01:21 PM
just to chime in, as long as you are pulling a small trailer it would be fine, anything else and it has no balls. that is directly from a good friend that works for ford.

you got to be thinking of the 2v..Because coming from a guy who OWNS one, it has plenty of balls. Thats for dam sure. Heresay is worth nothing to me, nor should it to anyone else.

360ci
02-08-2010, 04:13 PM
If towing weight is under 6K, the 3V 4.6 would be the one I'd go for, as it would make a better daily driver when not towing and get respectable mileage. The 2V is a good engine as well, be it 50hp light on the 3V but it has better torque characteristics, whereas the multi valve engines thrive in higher rpms.

you got to be thinking of the 2v..Because coming from a guy who OWNS one, it has plenty of balls. Thats for dam sure. Heresay is worth nothing to me, nor should it to anyone else.

Common now, heresay 'evidence' is how I was kept outta jail!
...kidding!

TXNSLighting
02-08-2010, 05:16 PM
Common now, heresay 'evidence' is how I was kept outta jail!
...kidding!

hahahahaha!!!

O and i drove a 2v, and boy would i never buy one of those for any kind of towing. That was one gutless truck..

360ci
02-08-2010, 08:34 PM
hahahahaha!!!

O and i drove a 2v, and boy would i never buy one of those for any kind of towing. That was one gutless truck..

I don't know why Ford just won't either drop it and make the 3V the base engine, or allow the 6 speed to be optional on the 2V. The 2V would probably be adequate if it had the 6 speed behind it. Besides, the 6 speed gets better mileage anyway (according to the EPA). I'd like to see the 3V 4.6L & 6sp in the Econoline. GM has 6 speeds in their 2500 and 3500 vans. Common Ford!

unkownfl
02-08-2010, 11:05 PM
I'm talking about my 09 mustang GT with the 3v and 3.55 rear axle. My LX only got about 8mpg and it damn sure wasn't going down the highway with 4.30's. I find it hard to believe the mileage you are getting in your f-150 to be as good as the mileage I get in my mustang. The EPA and Ford says the truck doesn't get over 20mpg. Who's leg are you trying to pull Texas.

TXNSLighting
02-09-2010, 10:31 AM
I'm talking about my 09 mustang GT with the 3v and 3.55 rear axle. My LX only got about 8mpg and it damn sure wasn't going down the highway with 4.30's. I find it hard to believe the mileage you are getting in your f-150 to be as good as the mileage I get in my mustang. The EPA and Ford says the truck doesn't get over 20mpg. Who's leg are you trying to pull Texas.

I have no reason to lie about this, why would i?? Thats stupid and pointless to lie about crap. If it got 18 i would say it got 18. And actually the sticker says my truck is rated for 21 mpg. Im giving a HONEST opinion about MY truck and what it is doing. I expected about 18-19 highway on that trip and was quite shocked when my figures came to 21.6. I checked it twice.

360ci
02-09-2010, 04:46 PM
Mileage depends on the driver anyway. If I drive my Durango (EPA rated 11/15 city/hwy) at 55mph, I can break 18mpg with it, which is what the EPA tested vehicles at. Some rolling hills help of course, and unless the engine has some sort of cylinder deactivation, you'll get better mileage NOT using cruise control if you're careful.

joed
02-09-2010, 08:35 PM
Thanks for all the feedback fellows. I appreciate it. I'm trying to decided between the f150 with the 3 valve 4.6 or a gmc 1/2 ton with the 4.8 or 5.3 engines. According to Transport Canada's data here in Canada, gm's 4.8 L gets 15.9 litres/100 km in the city, the 5.3 gets 14.4 litres/100 km and the ford 4.6 l gets 14.9 litres/100km in the city. I don't know how to change those numbers to mpg. The 4.8 gm engine only has a 4 speed auto. If it had a 6 speed, the figure would be better. I've always been a GM truck guy so I'm little hesitant to go over to ford. Tough choice but fuel economy is #1 for me. I'm not sure about the 5.3 l engine numbers because I've read a few comments where people with the 5.3 L engine are not getting any where near close to the estimated fuel economy.

360ci
02-09-2010, 09:22 PM
Thanks for all the feedback fellows. I appreciate it. I'm trying to decided between the f150 with the 3 valve 4.6 or a gmc 1/2 ton with the 4.8 or 5.3 engines. According to Transport Canada's data here in Canada, gm's 4.8 L gets 15.9 litres/100 km in the city, the 5.3 gets 14.4 litres/100 km and the ford 4.6 l gets 14.9 litres/100km in the city. I don't know how to change those numbers to mpg. The 4.8 gm engine only has a 4 speed auto. If it had a 6 speed, the figure would be better. I've always been a GM truck guy so I'm little hesitant to go over to ford. Tough choice but fuel economy is #1 for me. I'm not sure about the 5.3 l engine numbers because I've read a few comments where people with the 5.3 L engine are not getting any where near close to the estimated fuel economy.

The 5.3L only operates in V4 mode when you're NOT touching the go pedal, or cruise control is on, which optimizes fuel economy with that combo. If you went GM and you don't plan to tow over 6K, the 4.8L 4 speed will work fine. Parts are a plenty, and you WILL get similar, if not better real world fuel economy over the 5.3L and 6 speed if you don't tow often. Lower displacement = better mileage, irregardless of gears. Besides, I'm on a GM forum for my Astro cargo van (other work service vehicle) and the 5.3 6 speed guys are happy with their purchase, but with the absence of the 6.0L now, it's a tough sell. The 4.8L without cylinder deactivation should also be less costly down the road for repairs.

It ultimately comes down to personal preference, and by the sounds of it, you already know what you're going to buy. As much as fuel economy is important, it's capability that matters. If you want to tow 9K, the 3V 4.6l can do that with the lowest gears you can option. If you want a better ride, GM is the only one to go with, as its suspension is more compliant on nearly any surface. I'm not really biased as far as band name goes. However, the ultimate factor would be price. For instance, if I can get a GM for $35K, a similar Ford for $34K and a Dodge for $33K, I'd more than likely get the Dodge with the 310hp 4.7L V8 and 5 speed auto. Rebates are a plenty, so shop around. Price, followed by excellent service and support would be the ultimate buying factor for me.

grassman177
02-11-2010, 01:10 AM
yes, i was refering the the 2v. and yes, it is weak for my standards too.