2017-2018 Owners-Improved mileage after flash?

Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.

zemuron99

Full Access Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2018
Posts
384
Reaction score
382
Location
Seattle
Playing around on the Fuelly website today after logging my most recent two fillups, and I noticed this (Raptor-specific):
2017 average mileage 13.9 (40 vehicles)
2018 average mileage 14.2 (62 vehicles)
2019 average mileage 14.6 (30 vehicles).

These may not be statistically significant, I haven't run them thru a stats program to see.

Now, I get we don't buy these for their mileage, and the smiles/mile >>> miles/gallon. BUT...have any of you with a 17 or 18 had it reflashed to an unpdated file from FoMoCo and noted an increase in mileage? I'm still on the original factory load as I've never taken it back to the dealer (for recalls or service) since I drove it off the lot. I am curious though if Ford is leaning out the tune a bit to squeeze out a bit more mileage.
 

Attachments

  • FUelly1.pdf
    71.2 KB · Views: 0

jamanrr

FRF Addict
Joined
Jul 10, 2015
Posts
1,098
Reaction score
476
I have a late 18 production and average 17ish to 18 sometimes
 

smurfslayer

Be vewwy, vewwy quiet. We’re hunting sasquatch77
Joined
Dec 16, 2016
Posts
17,605
Reaction score
27,139
It’s hard to say, what’s the use case for each truck?
I think the biggest contributor is probably the shift strategy. My early ’17 wouldn’t downshift in eco mode once moving without full throttle in most applications. Reading comments here I got my stealership to do a reflash and the difference was instant and dramatic. Instead of 10th gear and 18 pounds of boost to get up a long hill, I’d get 9th or 8th with moderate boost levels and I noticed fuel consumption was better after the flash.

My stealership wouldn’t do the reflash without me reporting some kind of problem, they would simply connect the truck and report back the truck was within spec. I think that may be a contributor to what you see there with the year over year discrepancies. As the programming improves, the old trucks are damned to the old programming unless you report a problem or issue. That seems a little odd but whatever.
 

Jtnuge

Full Access Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2017
Posts
487
Reaction score
133
Eco mode in a 17? I seem to be missing that mode.. Those mpg's must be for crew cabs also. My supercab does 14.9 during winter. Different gas during winter here. Summer time it does improve though. Never taking a long road trip yet. Would like to see how it does. Not holding my breath though, at 75 it turns 2,000 rpm's. I think the lie o-meter was saying 15.6 mpg's.
 
Last edited:

smurfslayer

Be vewwy, vewwy quiet. We’re hunting sasquatch77
Joined
Dec 16, 2016
Posts
17,605
Reaction score
27,139
Eco mode in a 17? I seem to be missing that mode.. Those mpg's must be for crew cabs also. My supercab does 14.9 during winter.

it’s listed as ’Normal’. It drives like Miss Daisy. MPG’s are a Jennifer / Gen1 obsession. One and ONLY gas mileage thread please


Not holding my breath though, at 75 it turns 2,000 rpm's. I think the lie o-meter was saying 15.6 mpg's.

Yeah, the truck is kind of an aesthetic brick with wheels. Up to about 60-65, you’re able to get high teens/low 20’s. Think “Island Time”, family hauling, with some occasional full throttle romps, time in the sand, etc.

Jump up to the 70-75 range and you start drastically increasing fuel consumption.
Lucille’s lie-o-meter is within about .2 in the few times I’ve checked.

I can live with increased fuel consumption.

I did manage to trip over a station in NC that had fuel with zero ethanol. Expensive, and didn’t seem to make a diff.
 
Top