Bombsquad68
Full Access Member
Sure they could have but cylinder deactivation on a overhead cam twin turbo V8 would have added significant cost and complexity. Then you need the rest of the truck to handle the extra power and cooling requirements. Check out the 2017 Porsche Panamera Turbo at $150k base for that powertrain, because this isn't a OHV engine like the GM and Rams with cylinder shutdown.Based on displacement, I think the power numbers are extremely impressive when compared to other FI performance sedans and SUVs that are either V6 or V8. MPG gains, to me, are a bit disappointing. Not sure 18 highway is enough to make it worthwhile to abandon the 8. Could Ford have gotten 500+ power numbers and 20 highway with better gearing and cylinder deactivation with a 5.0 TTV8? If they could have, and even if I had to cut a flinstones trap door in it just to get 10 city, I would have taken that in a second and paid more.
What may make the the new MPG numbers even worse is that I assume city, which had the significant gains, was with engine start-stop active. I could easily see driving with this off.
To qualify and not to start a Gen 1 war, I would chose the TTV6 over the Gen 1 8. The numbers are better and I like FI. I do think though that Ford could have built an 8 with power numbers that exceeded the TTV6 and MPG very near the TTV6's rating.
At the end of the day, highway mileage is suffering because of poor aero and high rolling resistance, not because they shit the bed on designing the engine. All you have to do is look at the 22 MPG or whatever it was highway number for the standard F 150 with the new EB. That's what small tires, 6" narrower, lower to the ground with an big ass air dam will get you.
People in here complaining about the mileage need to look at a diesel if they want 22 MPG in a 35“ tired, widebody/wide track, lifted truck. I'll take 18 highway and get the lightweight, snappy powertrain that works in an offroad truck with 510 tq. This thing is going to be a beast without the extra cylinders.