Originally Posted by gggplaya
I don't have a login for CR, and for good reason.
Ok they did test towing but it's completely idiotic because they have the lowest rear end ratio in the ecoboost. 3.31 is for the buyer who only tows a garden utility trailer or simply doesn't ever tow with their truck and wants the best possible unloaded mpg. For people that tow on occasion or moderate 3-5klbs loads, they would get the 3.55 rear end. For people that tow often or heavy loads >5klbs you would get the 3.73 rear end.
The fact that they would do comparisons in towing using the worst possible rear end to tow 7500lbs is beyond me. Shows you how flawed this test is using max tow ratings by optioning the trucks with different rear end ratios in an effort to make an apples to apples comparison is just silly. It's called "consumer" reports, and any buyer knowing they'll be towing 7500lbs more than a few miles is going to opt for the 3.73 rear end with either engine. With those rear's they chose, they should have used a more realistic weight like 3-4000lbs.
An yes, i would like to see the towing mileage and unloaded mileage in the report. Consumers can make better decisions knowing how often they use the truck for either situation. They would opt for the engine based on their lifestyle.
Wouldn't the gas mileage be even worse if the Ecoboost had the shorter gearing to make it tow better than the selected 5.0? I think it was a pretty good apples to apples comparison. They picked trucks towed about the same, performed about the same (0-60, 1/4mi, etc), and got the same mileage.