Gas mileage ?
- Thread starter Bronco635
- Start date
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.
jrc50
Full Access Members
Having had 4 Crown Vics in a row (2 were Crown Vic Sports (buckets, floor shift and interceptor package) with the 4.6 2cam I can say with about 600K miles experience (best was 184 before my wife totaled it; worst was 140K trans was slipping) I can say it was a very, very well built engine, not tremendous power but adequate and long long lasting. I also still own a 1998 Mustang Cobra Convertible I purchased new (wanted a break from Crown Vics for business) with a 4.6 4 cam all aluminum hand signed motor. It is just too much of a fun car to get rid of and is my "beater" around town. Will turn 7000 rpm, 4 bolt mains with provisions for 6 with a blower, Ford originally rated it for 157 mph. It has about 90 k on it but need to make a decision soon on it as I need to rebuild the front end and a variety of relatively minor items plus paint faded (Laser Red) in South Alabama sun (but not a lick of rust).
From what I have read the engine probably good for 160k if not beat.
The 3.5 Twin Turbo in the Expedition so far is quite smooth and good low end torque. I guess I would rather have the Turbos on a smaller displacement engine than GM's AFM (active fuel management) that goes to a V4 under low HP demand, the first 3 generations were reportedly rough on durability and caused oil usage.
We have a 2008 Lincoln MKZ with a 3.5 V6 (not Turbo). It has been a reliable car with good mileage and durability (130K so far). Does anyone know if this is the same engine assembly as in the Expedition minus the Turbos? Of course the MKZ is quite light so it doesn not pull much of a load, but only thing that died in the car to date was an air conditioning compressor at 75K.
From what I have read the engine probably good for 160k if not beat.
The 3.5 Twin Turbo in the Expedition so far is quite smooth and good low end torque. I guess I would rather have the Turbos on a smaller displacement engine than GM's AFM (active fuel management) that goes to a V4 under low HP demand, the first 3 generations were reportedly rough on durability and caused oil usage.
We have a 2008 Lincoln MKZ with a 3.5 V6 (not Turbo). It has been a reliable car with good mileage and durability (130K so far). Does anyone know if this is the same engine assembly as in the Expedition minus the Turbos? Of course the MKZ is quite light so it doesn not pull much of a load, but only thing that died in the car to date was an air conditioning compressor at 75K.
I think the new versions of the GM V8's get much better high way mileage.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The GM 5.3l is now direct injection and 355hp and 383 torque. It is available this year, with optional E-assist. That option gives V6 mileage(18/22mpg).
My neighbor with a 2016 Suburban gets 23-24 mpg when he commutes 100 miles (highway) each way to work.
Pretty incredible given that it's a V8.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
GMs active fuel management has proven to be very practical. Shutting off half the cylinders when it's not needed and you have all that displacement when you do. I prefer their method over Fords. It's pretty impressive 20+ mpg in a suburban. The engines are big enough as well that they don't need to struggle and require constant boost like Fords new engines which kill their longevity and Mileage. For me personally though.... it doesn't matter all that much... V8 with all cylinders rolling or V6 under boost mileage doesn't bother me.
Last edited:
I agree but have a question. Why do you say that Ford's V6 turbos kill their longevity? Are people experiencing this?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I don't have factual evidence to route you to but reading up the 3.5 doesn't seem like a motor that will go 350k plus miles like a naturally aspirated V8 will for you. Lots of Modular V8s, 6.2L and 5.0 coyotes with high mileage It seems pretty common. You don't see too many 3.5s up there on an original drivetrain. You can find guys with fords 6.2 with almost half a million miles on the original drivetrain over at the Ford Truck Enthusiest forum.
That makes total sense. Thanks for the response.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The vast majority of owners rarely keep their vehicles much over 100K miles these days. Ford knows this so there is no need on their part to over engineer an engine to go farther, but with modern materials and manufacturing methods I don't see having any problems getting 200K out of my 3.5. Maintenance is the key to any modern engine, you can't neglect them like you could have with older engines, the tolerances are too tight and internal oil pressure is important to get the oil to where it needs to be.
Similar threads
