[Envoy4Life]

Ford's 2015 F-150 Tows 12,200 lbs; MPG Jumps By Up to 20 Percent
Left Lane News
September 29, 2014
By: Justin King

Ford has confirmed preliminary tow ratings for its forthcoming 2015 F-150 pickup lineup.

The all-new model can tow up to 1,110 more pounds and haul up to 530 more pounds than its predecessor, thanks in part to an aluminum body and other weight-saving measures that shave up to 700 pounds from the truck's heft.

Of the four available engines, the 3.5-liter EcoBoost V6 provides the highest tow rating of 12,200 lbs and the second-best payload rating of 3,180 lbs. The smaller 2.7-liter EcoBoost V6 steps down to 8,500 lbs behind the truck and 2,250 lbs stacked on the bed.

Full article at link.

 

[Envoy4Life]

Uh oh...

 

[NoStopN]

Ford's press release can be found here.

 

[GHull3]

Yawn. Wake me when they announce a bike rack and graphics as a new concept vehicle. Maybe I missed it but they said all 2015 Chrysler, GM and Ford trucks were adopting the SAE J2807 standard. Does this apply here?

 

[mchicha]

I cannot wait for the pickuptruck.com comprehensive comparison of all the 2015's

 

[bballr4567]

"by up to"

I'd venture to say that the 5.0 gets the 5% bump while the rest get better.

Payload numbers are pretty impressive.

 

[Envoy4Life]

Using 2WD numbers, and assuming a 10% increase across the board:

3.5L V6: 19 city / 25 highway
5.0L V8: 16 city / 23 highway
3.5L Ecoboost: 18 city / 24 highway

Scary stuff indeed...

 

[GHull3]

Using 2WD numbers, and assuming a 10% increase across the board:

3.5L V6: 19 city / 25 highway
5.0L V8: 16 city / 23 highway
3.5L Ecoboost: 18 city / 24 highway

Scary stuff indeed...

It'll be interesting to see the 2.7EB fuel economy numbers.

 

[Envoy4Life]

It'll be interesting to see the 2.7EB fuel economy numbers.

I'd guess 20 city / 26 highway in 2WD form. I think Ford wants to hit 20 MPG in the city just for bragging rights...

 

[richmond2000]

my thought is FORD is almost "priming the pump" for a NEW RANGER and if it was built "like" the F150 but made lighter in the frame so to be lighter VS high payload/tow capacity
and say "TOPS out" with the EB 2.7L I could see some "awesome" EPA Fuel economy numbers

 

[GHull3]

I'd guess 20 city / 26 highway in 2WD form. I think Ford wants to hit 20 MPG in the city just for bragging rights...

If you're right GM better hope that there's a very large price discrepancy or your garage barely fits a F-150 because those numbers would make a Canyon/Colly a pretty tough sell.

 

[bballr4567]

Meh, I'm still not on the whole Ecoboost bandwagon yet. Friends Ecoboost Flex is sitting at the dealer waiting on a new engine at 48 miles. Sad part? There are zero available for warranty proceedings.

I doubt that the 5.0 will match the 5.3.

 

[GHull3]

my thought is FORD is almost "priming the pump" for a NEW RANGER and if it was built "like" the F150 but made lighter in the frame so to be lighter VS high payload/tow capacity
and say "TOPS out" with the EB 2.7L I could see some "awesome" EPA Fuel economy numbers

You mean like an "F-100?"

 

[KingElvis]

This headline implies the EPA numbers were in, which they are not.

Looks like they really want to sell you that 165cube V6. I wonder if that's where they are getting the "20% better" quote. 20% better than the last ecoboost? I get the feeling the turbo treatment is kind of optimized on that one.

Even with the 165 you surely have to get the "HFE" option to get to the 20%

 

[richmond2000]

You mean like an "F-100?"

I am thinking "global" and IMPORTED from Thailand POST "chicken tax" VS a MADE-FOR-America F-100 but "BOTH" options would be interesting/exciting
I could see the Global ranger "adopting" the F150 design elements EX if "ONE Ford" globalizes the F150

 

[mchicha]

If you're right GM better hope that there's a very large price discrepancy or your garage barely fits a F-150 because those numbers would make a Canyon/Colly a pretty tough sell.

Canyon cannot really be configured as a work truck. So they will not really be going after the same type of buyer. Tacoma buyers would never consider a full size

 

[1958carnut]

my thought is FORD is almost "priming the pump" for a NEW RANGER and if it was built "like" the F150 but made lighter in the frame so to be lighter VS high payload/tow capacity
and say "TOPS out" with the EB 2.7L I could see some "awesome" EPA Fuel economy numbers

I keep hoping that they get back into that game as well, if only to keep GM on their toes. Another thought after seeing the title of this thread is: First, Dodge and their diesel and now this from Ford. GM better be on the ball and keep on improving their entries as they seem to be losing the battle right now even though they probably aren't. GM's entries are plenty good but the cat and mouse game goes on.

 

[samesun]

Meh, I'm still not on the whole Ecoboost bandwagon yet. Friends Ecoboost Flex is sitting at the dealer waiting on a new engine at 48 miles. Sad part? There are zero available for warranty proceedings.

I doubt that the 5.0 will match the 5.3.

I agree about eb. Not sold on it. Ill believe the fuel economy gains when the real-world reviews come out. Same thing for weight...wasn't mustang supposed to be lighter? And I've never been an F-150 fan but I respect the truck. This new one however is butt ugly.

 

[optiongm]

Meh, I'm still not on the whole Ecoboost bandwagon yet. Friends Ecoboost Flex is sitting at the dealer waiting on a new engine at 48 miles. Sad part? There are zero available for warranty proceedings.

I doubt that the 5.0 will match the 5.3.

They raised the HP and TQ of the 5.0V8 to 385HP and 387lb TQ that is without DI, Chevy 5.3 V8 is 355HP and 383Lb TQ with DI. That is impressive....

 

[Al465]

I'd guess 20 city / 26 highway in 2WD form. I think Ford wants to hit 20 MPG in the city just for bragging rights...

Ford will brag no matter what.