[GapRunr]

Overall mpg is pretty comparable when driven like a Grandma. Get aggressive with the throttle and the 3.7 will drive less like a Grandma and maybe a little more like your youngest Uncle and get slightly worse mpg. Get the EcoBoost and it drives like a teenager who just got his license and is alone for the first time in the car and you'll lose another couple of mpg.

 

[919amelia]

Haha - thank you @Timetogo and @GapRunr. That makes me feel better if I decide to pull the trigger on the 3.7! I currently have a Prius and a '64 VW Beetle, so I'm not sure I'd even know what to do with all that power.

 

[mcp]

I have a RWB, MR , 3.7 It is still an empty cargo and were getting over 20 in mixed driving. I did drive a LWB 3.5 I'm glad I went with the RWB I understand it weights 500lbs. less? I would not mind a 3.5 but the 3.7 works find in WNC hills and is probably easier on the drivetrain.

 

[njbill]

Before I purchased mine, I had the opportunity to chat with a fleet manager who had both 3.7 and 3.5 Transits. He said many of his 3.7s approach 300k miles with only wear items. He also said he saw some turbo issues at 160k miles on the EcoBoost Transits. After this discussion, I drove both and decided on the 3.7. After all, it is a van, not a sports car.

 

[Mobileempire]

I would vote for the 3.7L for the rwb and long wheelbase but I would vote for the 3.5L for the extended and especially the extended with dually wheels.
I have a High roof long wheel base with a 3.7L and it has plenty of power.
In my mind a camper conversion is feather light , no need for a bunch of cabinets , beds , chairs sinks etc. Van life ussually equals cramped life.

 

[Whitewhale]

Ditto - mines a T350 EL HR 3.7 w/ 4.10 rear. I get average 16. Cargo van for service work, hwy miles. Just depends on your foot if you want plus or minus 2 more miles a gallon.

 

[mikeehlert]

These are some speed and mileage from a trip. 2017 T350HD. 3.5L EcoBoost, HR, Extended, Winnebago Paseo so about 9,700 pounds wet and traveling.
Lancaster, Barstow, Lancaster, Baker, China Ranch Date Farm, Lancaster, Barstow, Las Vegas, Salt Lake City, Prometory Point, Ely, ..... Lancaster. I took a few photos of the trip meter.
Highlights. 15 mpg at 70 mph into a big headwind. 18+ coming down Donner on I80. 12 mpg runners around suburbia.

20190511/55b573b23497b4d24a2bba3d66776e13.jpg[/IMG]


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[cav]

You need to go with the 3.5L EcoBoost engine and the 3.31 rear axle ratio. With your small weight factor and mostly highway miles, that would give you the best drivetrain for your use. Would be good to get one with the Trailer Towing package or at least the Tow Mode option. Trying to find a cargo van with the 'All Around Windows' option may be hard to find in a used Transit.

What price range are you looking at for this Transit van? Right now the best bet would be to find a off-lease Transit that someone ordered and is turning in. Not sure where you are located but if you get down to exactly what your requirements are, I may be able to locate one that a Ford dealer would get from the Ford dealer closed auction. That is where the lease units end up once they are released.

 

[OldMadBrit]

You really only have 2 choices:
1) get the Ecoboost now
2) really wish that you got the Ecoboost later when you are loaded up and wheezing over a 7000ft pass in 2nd at 30MPH with a big rig looming large in your mirrors, your wife is giving you stink eye and your dog has abandoned you..

 

[IanCH]

It's so very nice to drive the Ecoboost van and know that you have the power to make the moves necessary to be safe while driving.

I don't know if it's just these vans or what but people LOVE to sit in your blind spot and/or creep up on the right side of you, even though you are not going slow, just before an exit you need to take....

The van built out is heavy, and it's not great to slam on the brakes if you don't have to. It's great to have both the option to quickly accelerate or brake in any situation.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

 

[dustboy]

We have a 148 regular and 3.7 has plenty enough giddyups mostly anywhere we want to go. Fully loaded, I bet we’re rolling well over 8,000 lbs. The only time I felt like we couldn’t keep up has been high mountain passes like Monarch Pass, CO which is a steep grade and peaks at 11,312. But how often do you cross the Continental Divide?

Out of the 3 options, the 3.7 has the fewest known issues. Not gonna lie, there have been times when I’ve thought the ecoboost would have been nice to have, but not enough to pay extra for it.

All that said, if I was going for the extended body, that would tip the scales to 3.5.

 

[1x1_Speed_Craig]

We're happy with our 3.7L in a lightly loaded Transit, but I also am easy on the accelerator. We're averaging over 18mph. We're in a relatively flat area, though (Michigan), but did drive it through some mountainous areas during our visit to East Tennessee a couple months ago.

Craig

 

[koggedb]

The 3.7 is a fine motor and I honestly don't think you'll be missing out on much but get the EcoBoost if you can. It's a superior technology. On perfectly level ground, I average around 18-20mpg in a lightly loaded transit. If you add hills to the equation, that number is closer to 12-15 and I usually struggle going up the grades unless I pin it in third gear or something and use manual mode. The default transmission tune is just garbage for ascending/descending. Thing is always shifting around either bogging or redlining and you can actually hear the slamming of the driveshaft engaging (I don't trust that thing to begin with given all the recall stuff)

 

[redhongkong]

engine are designed to run hot. cold turbo engine are wearing out faster and creating more problem in a long run

if u could keep engine warm or hot most of the time. ecoboost / diesel are best option.

if u regularly doing short trip cold engine, just use NA. (not powerful but enough to get things moving)