Road Test Review: 2011 Ford F-150 XLT 5.0-liter V-8

By Mike Levine and Mark Williams
Last year, the Ford F-150 offered most buyers a choice of legacy two-valve and three-valve 4.6-liter V-8 engines or a three-valve 5.4-liter V-8. While those engines got the job done, they weren’t known for power or performance.
This year, Ford has totally revamped the F-150’s powertrain lineup with three all-new advanced engines, plus wider availability of the 6.2-liter V-8 that was previously limited to the 2010 F-150 SVT Raptor.
We’ve extensively tested the 6.2 in the Raptor and the new entry-level 3.7-liter V-6 during our six-cylinder Work Truck Shootout. We’ve also spent several hours towing and piloting the novel twin-turbo 3.5-liter EcoBoost V-6, the F-150’s top-of-the-line towing engine. But our time with the fresh 5.0-liter V-8 was limited to a brief drive and drag race in Texas last year. That’s no longer the case.
A 2011 F-150 XLT SuperCrew 5.0 4x4 showed up in our driveway last Tuesday, and we wasted no time putting it through its paces. In less than a week, we drove it 800 miles – 622 miles of which it towed a 9,000-pound conventional tandem axle horse trailer.
Snap judgment? This could be the best all-around engine ever offered in the F-150 – at least until EcoBoost’s early adopters can confirm that mill’s reliability and efficiency in real-world use.

The four-valve per cylinder, dual overhead cam 5.0 is positioned as the midrange engine choice for the F-150 — below the EcoBoost six-cylinder and 6.2 V-8 and above the 3.7. It’s rated at 360 horsepower (at 5,500 rpm) and 380 pounds-feet of torque (at 4,250 rpm). That’s more power than the old 5.4-liter V-8, but it doesn’t carry as high a tow rating. In the regular cab, it can pull up to 10,000 pounds instead of a maximum 11,300 pounds.
Like its engine, our test SuperCrew four-door was a middle-of-the-road model with a relatively steep MSRP of $39,445, after a $1,500 discount for the optional chrome, convenience and tow packages that runs through the end of the model year.
The metallic red F-150 came equipped with cloth captain’s chairs, AM/FM/CD stereo and Ford’s Sync hands-free multimedia system and Bluetooth connectivity. It lacked navigation, a rear backup camera and reverse sensors, making tail-first maneuvers a challenge in tight spots, and we couldn’t back up to the trailer without the help of a spotter. The optional chrome package added brightwork that included side steps and wheel covers. If it were our choice, we’d skip the package and invest in a nice set of aluminum wheels.
Despite a lack of luxury items, the XLT F-150 was more than comfortable inside. We turned our phone into a substitute for satellite radio by using Sync and Pandora to stream tunes wirelessly over Bluetooth, though we had to pair the phone and truck twice after the F-150 stopped playing music this way.
Ford has updated the F-150’s instrument cluster with nice gauges and an optional 4.2-inch trip computer that Ford calls a “productivity screen” that we’ve liked since it debuted in the F-Series Super Duty. It includes apps that provide fine-grained details about towing, off-roading, fuel economy and more. Controls on the steering wheel make short work of finding the information you want quickly and with minimal distraction.

The truck’s second-row seats and flat load floor made it easy for us to stow our gear for our tow test or accommodate two kids in booster seats running errands around Los Angeles.
Our four-wheel-drive 5.0 was rated 14/19 mpg city/highway. These days, we’d expect fuel economy to be higher, especially in a small-displacement eight-cylinder. It should have at least tied the 15/21 mpg rating of the 5.3-liter V-8 in the Chevy Silverado 1500. But making up for the so-so mileage was an optional 36-gallon fuel tank that gave us peace of mind and extra range pulling the heavy trailer. For comparison, the premium EcoBoost V-6 F-150 is only available with a 26-gallon reservoir.
Unloaded, the F-150’s trip computer calculated a bladder-busting driving range of 521 miles, though we wouldn’t come close to that with the trailer behind us. In our first stretch of towing — 226 miles from Norco to Needles, Calif., which included the challenging Cajon Pass on Interstate 15 — we averaged 9.42 mpg, burning 24.03 gallons of fuel (versus an optimistic trip computer estimate of 9.8 mpg and 22.9 gallons of fuel). Those are respectable numbers for a rig that weighed 14,780 pounds on a CAT scale -- just 320 pounds less than the truck’s gross combined weight rating.
On that same stretch, we also started to realize the vast potential that’s locked inside the 5.0. As we left the L.A. basin and started climbing Cajon Pass, the truck shrugged off the weight behind it. Visibly, we could see the rear squatting lower, and we could feel the truck hunker down from inside, but power wasn’t an issue. It was available on demand.
On the steepest parts of Cajon, we had no problem keeping up with traffic at around 65 mph with the modest 3.73-to-1 rear axle. When the engine needed more power, its six-speed transmission smoothly downshifted to 3rd gear, and the mill found its sweet spot at around 4,000 rpm. The truck never lost momentum. In fact, it gained speed to the point where we had to ease back on the accelerator. After cresting the top of the grade, the truck quickly upshifted into 6th at 1,600 rpm and 65 mph.

We noticed some interesting transmission behavior as the terrain flattened out. We kept the truck in tow/haul mode the entire time it was hooked up to the trailer. Tow/haul mode does two things: The transmission holds gears longer when the truck is working hard to keep power up, and it downshifts automatically to slow the truck with a tap of the brake pedal on descents. Every cog swap was carlike, but several times after upshifting into 6th, we felt the torque converter lock up about 20 seconds after the gear change. We’re sure that helped with shift feel, but we wonder if we weren’t sacrificing a bit of fuel economy with the torque converter seeming to stay loose for such a long period. If we could squeeze out extra mileage with a faster-locking torque converter, we’d take that option over smoother shifts.
Another trait we noticed as we requested more power from the engine on climbs and to pass traffic was its split personality – similar to that of the 3.7-liter V-6. Loping along, the V-8 was subdued and quiet. But when we needed more power, the exhaust note snarled like a sports car – not surprising, since the engine is also shared with the Ford Mustang. We loved the deep notes it made. They were perfectly tuned to match the engine’s effort and sounded much better than the flat exhaust note of the EcoBoost V-6 when that engine is under load. There’s nothing like the tenor of a hard-working V-8 in a half-ton pickup.
The 2011 F-150 also features standard 12-volt electric power-assisted steering for every engine except the 6.2 V-8 – the first half-ton pickup to do so. (The limited-volume Chevy Silverado Hybrid uses a 42-volt system.) The steering feels light when the truck is stopped and during low-speed maneuvers. It dynamically adjusts steering effort to match the speed and loads the truck is under. On the highway, the steering was precise and provided excellent driver feedback. There was none of the numbness generally associated with electric steering’s early days in small cars. It seemed to vary boost levels as we entered turns, smoothly assisting the trailer around bends in contrast to the on/off boost that can occur with conventional hydraulic steering pumps.
As we drove across the desert, we encountered strong winds that had knocked several semis off the highway the day before. While we could feel the gusts buffeting the truck and trailer, we never felt control was an issue. At least once, immediately passing an 18-wheeler, we were hit by a strong gale that seemed to trigger the F-150’s trailer-sway control system.

Trailer-sway control senses difference in yaw between truck and trailer and uses the wheel brakes in both vehicles to counteract any sway before it becomes dangerous enough to throw the rig off the road.
If you order a 2011 F-150, we highly recommend you option it with the integrated trailer brake controller, which extends sway control to the trailer (in addition to controlling the trailer’s brakes via ABS). Even though our truck was optioned with the F-150’s trailer towing package, it didn’t include the brake controller, which costs an extra $230 from the factory. A local dealer had to add the controller after it arrived for our test.
Our turnaround point for our road test was near Laughlin, Nev. Cajon Pass was a warm-up for testing the 5.0 F-150 on the 12-mile, 5 percent grade Davis Dam hill climb on Arizona Highway 68, just east of Laughlin. Davis Dam has become the default location for measuring performance against the industry’s new trailer towing standards set by the Society of Automotive Engineers. It’s also where Ford recently tested the EcoBoost six-cylinder against competitors’ eight-cylinder engines. On Highway 68, the 5.0 was incredibly strong — so strong that we could accelerate at any point along the route and still gain speed to where we had to slow down to safely control the truck and trailer around turns.
We also staked out a 7,500-foot stretch of the grade where we could safely climb the hill from a full stop and measure its performance using our VBOX kit. Zero to 60 mph up the steady 5 percent grade took 30.29 seconds, and the truck finished the quarter-mile in a respectable 25.06 seconds at 55.5 mph.
Those numbers, plus seat-of-the-pants feel, make us wonder how much Ford might be sandbagging the 5.0-liter V-8’s power figures, something we suspected during our first drive in Texas.

We also ran the same performance tests on level ground. The zero-to-60 mph time with the trailer was cut almost in half, to just 16.85 seconds. Unloaded, the 5.0 yielded a zero-to-60 time of just 7.18 seconds – almost as quick as the large displacement 6.2-liter V-8 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 crew cab 4x4 that was the fastest truck in our 2008 Light-Duty Shootout.
Our final confirmation of the tremendous towing performance and potential of the 5.0 came on the Dynojet Research chassis dyno at our friends at K&N Engineering in Riverside. At the rear wheels, we measured a very healthy 311 hp and 325 pounds-feet of torque. While the torque curve isn’t as flat as the EcoBoost V-6’s curve, it is broad, and power steadily climbs over most of the rev range instead of being peaky near 4,000 rpm.
Overall, we’re very impressed with how comfortable the F-150 5.0 was during our long-haul towing legs. We towed just under the truck’s max GCWR and towing capacity, yet the truck felt like other half-tons towing much less. A truck that drives this smoothly and comfortably, with very little driver fatigue, at max capacities is something quite special — even unusual in any truck segment.
The truck was also comfortable and relatively easy to manage in unloaded driving around Los Angeles. It was also fun to show off some of the 5.0’s power at one or two green lights. We averaged between 13 mpg and 17 mpg depending on traffic conditions, surface streets and highway driving. Nothing to brag about for fuel economy, but superior to what we’ve observed driving a 6.2-liter V-8 in LA.
Which engine should F-150 buyers choose? If you’re going to tow and haul more than 10,000 pounds frequently but want something smaller than a heavy-duty pickup, opt for the 6.2. If you’re going to tow more than 10,000 pounds occasionally and need a truck for light-duty hauling activities the rest of the time, a 3.5-liter EcoBoost V-6 would probably be a good fit. But if you’re going to tow 5,000 to 10,000 pounds regularly and aren’t quite ready to trust a twin-turbo six-cylinder to move your rig, the 5.0 is for you. If we were going to buy an F-150 today, the 5.0 is the box we’d likely check on the order form.

Special

2006 Honda Civic Coupe First Drive

Coupes are more expressive and aspirational than conventional sedans, but modern automotive marketing wisdom says that unless it’s a luxury or sports car like a BMW 3 Series or Nissan 350Z, a two-door won’t sell. Buyers of small cars choose them because they must for reasons of practicality, the theory goes, and a coupe is clearly impractical. Yet Honda, never afraid to buck a trend in the process of setting a new one, has continuously offered a Civic Coupe since 1992.

That tradition continues with the introduction of the redesigned 2006 Honda Civic. The new Civic Coupe is still less practical than the Civic Sedan, but moves solidly into expressive and aspirational territory with a big dose of style and refinement.

Radically cab-forward in terms of design, the 2006 Honda Civic Coupe possesses a strong European flavor, a spirited driving character, and an upscale ambience that belies its fully-loaded price of around $20,000. Coupled with Honda’s technologically-advanced four-cylinder engines – among the most fuel efficient and least polluting available today – and a nearly complete roster of safety equipment, the all-new 2006 Honda Civic looks to be a smash hit. If you don’t mind the lack of rear doors, that is.

Review: 2012 Honda Civic EX

Honda has never paid too much attention to how other car makers do things. In the past this led to many highly successful innovations. Today…well today we have the ninth-generation Civic, recently launched as an early 2012 model.

The eight-generation Civic was the most stylish to date. While not everyone was a fan, I personally liked the car’s tight proportions and smooth flowing curves. Still do. At the time I thought the 2006 Civic signaled a new emphasis on innovative yet tasteful design by Honda. The years since have proved me wrong. For the 2012 Civic, Honda has retained similar dimensions (though, reversing a decades-long trend, its wheelbase is 1.2 inches shorter). Some creases and angles have been added to the sedan to make it, in the words of the press release, “the most aerodynamically and aggressively styled models in the model’s history.” The side windows have been scrunched vertically and lengthened horizontally to outwardly express the increased roominess of the interior. The windowlette ahead of the door has shifted to the door itself, leaving a black plastic triangle where it used to be. At the rear edge of the side windows a crudely executed Hofmeister kink has been added. Overall, the new design is busier, less graceful, and simply much less attractive.

Honda claims that the revised interior “delivers more style and convenience than any other vehicle in [the] segment.” Yes, style is highly subjective. The instrument panel remains a bi-level affair, with the tach visible within the small steering wheel rim and the other instruments, including a new five-inch information display (you can upload your own background!), visible above it. This layout was my least favorite aspect of the 2006, and I have yet to warm to it (though some owners have told me they like it). Other car manufacturers used to copy Honda’s innovations. None of them have copied this layout. This might serve as a clue.

One thing I do like: the center stack is now aggressively canted towards the driver, classic BMW style, so you can easily see and reach the audio and HVAC controls. With the odd exception of the audio power switch, the buttons are fairly large. So while I can’t see the touted style, I can see the claimed convenience. But this does not justify the interior’s clunky styling, poor panel fits, and materials that vie with those in the 2011 VW Jetta for worst-in-class honors. The door panels include four different hard plastics. I couldn’t decide which of them is the worst. Probably the pebbly stuff above the armrest. Said armrest is pleasantly cushy, but it elicited a “crunch” when pressed. Even in the uplevel Civic EX the fabric appears chintzy. Honda needs to pay much closer attention to what GM, Ford, and Hyundai have been doing—the interiors of the Cruze, Focus, and (to a lesser but still large extent) Elantra are all far ahead. They might also consider following Chrysler’s lead and banishing light gray from the interior color palette.

Once upon a time the instrument panels in Hondas were compact and shockingly low. The rest of the industry studied its cars to figure out how they’d done it. Well, the bi-level monstrosity in the 2012 Civic is so tall that I had to crank the seat up a few clicks to comfortably see over it. The front seats are better than those in smaller Hondas because the headrests don’t jut quite as far forward. They also provide more lateral support than you’ll ever need given the nature of the car. In back, the cushion is comfortably high off the floor, but (in the sunroof-equipped EX) there’s only enough headroom for those up to 5-10. Both the cushion and floorboard are both nearly flat, to enhance comfort for a center passenger. There’s a little more rear legroom than before, but the seat’s width remains that of a compact sedan.

Even in EX trim the Civic tips the scales at 2,765 pounds, light for a compact sedan these days. The powertrain remains a 1.8-liter four good for 140 horsepower hitched to five-speed automatic (a manual is no longer offered in the EX, a six-speed automatic has yet to arrive). Even if you don’t engage “Eco” mode the powertrain’s responds in a leisurely fashion and performs adequately at best. The transmission upshifts quickly and sometimes seems indecisive. Like that in the Elantra and some other competitors, a “smart” alternator tries to do most of its charging during braking, and de-clutches much of the rest of the time. Partly because of this attempt to boost fuel economy, the brakes feel more than a little like those in a hybrid.

In fact, the entire driving experience is oddly similar to that in a Prius. In another fuel economy-oriented tweak, the steering is now electric assist on all Civics rather than just the Si and Hybrid. The new system feels artificial to the extent it feels like anything at all. Stability control, previously reserved for the EX-L and Si, is now standard across the line. But it should rarely come into play. The new Civic’s handling is predictable, stable, and safe. What it isn’t: fun. There’s quite a bit of lean when the wheel is turned. Even a Prius has a more direct, connected feel. Perhaps this shouldn’t come as a surprise, but even the weakest, most spartan Civics used to be fun cars.

The new Civic usually rides smoothly, but feels a little unsettled over some surfaces and never feels precisely damped the way a Ford Focus or Mazda3 does. At times the rear suspension sounds and feels like it’s bottoming out under minimal duress—even with no one in the back seat. Noise levels are lower than in the past. But even with its enhanced smoothness and quietness, the Civic lacks the premium sound and feel of the Cruze and Focus.

The major payoff of all the thrill-killing tweaks: the EPA ratings are up from 25/36 to 28/39—edging out the Ford Focus’s 28/38 and nearly matching the Hyundai Elantra’s 29/40. (To out-eco the Elantra, a Civic HF with 29/41 ratings is also offered.) To help you achieve these numbers, a pair of thick bars flanking the digital speedometer change color from blue to green when you’re behaving. There’s also a prominently placed instantaneous mpg display. The average fuel economy readout within the new information display is a bit of a bother, though. You must reset the trip odometer to reset it, and to do this you must dig through three menu levels using buttons on the steering wheel, and then dig your way back out. “Keep it simple” this isn’t.

The 2012 Honda Civic EX lists for $21,255, up $100 from the 2011 despite the addition of a few features, including stability control. But even though the 2012 is a better value than the 2011, you can get a superior, better-equipped car for the same or less from a number of other manufacturers. The most aggressively priced: a Hyundai Elantra Limited, with heated leather seats (in both rows!), lists for $20,700. A 2012 Ford Focus SE lists for about the same as the Honda when equipped with sunroof and alloy wheels, but is more fun to drive and feels like a much more expensive car.
Back in the 1970s and 1980s, the Honda Civic was so far ahead of its key competitors in responsiveness, handling, fuel economy, features, and reliability that owners became evangelists for the brand. The 1984 car was a design landmark whose influence continues 28 years later. Through the 1990s and into the 2000s the Civic was so fun to drive that an entire tuning industry sprung up around it.

It’s hard to see how the 2012 car could have inspired any of this passion. It’s a little roomier, and its fuel economy is the best yet for a run-of-the-mill Civic (if not quite best-in-class). But the design is clunky, the materials are cut-rate, and the driving experience is so dreadfully dull that even a Toyota Prius is a blast in comparison. Over the past few years Honda has repeatedly claimed to have remembered what made it great, and to be returning to those roots. While they’re at it, they might want to pay closer attention to what GM, Ford, and Hyundai have been up to. Perhaps this has happened, just not quite soon enough to help the new Civic. If so, we’ll be able to look back on the 2012 model year as a low point, after which the cars got better.

Gresini Honda team-mate Marco Simoncelli

Hiroshi Aoyama has spoken out in tribute of his Gresini Honda team-mate Marco Simoncelli following his death during the Malaysian Grand Prix.

Aoyama and Simoncelli, former rivals in the 250GP class, landed as MotoGP team-mates in 2011 after the Japanese rider switched to the Gresini squad.

Writing on his personal blog, a clearly devastated Aoyama says he is struggling to find the words to describe the situation.

“My team mate Marco crashed during the race. He was fighting hard for his life but unfortunately he passed away. I cannot think of any words to describe this tragic loss.

“He has been my rival since the 250's and since we both started in Moto GP class, I could feel the tension in between us and we were always aware of each other as rookies. And now, we have been competing in the same championship as a team mate. He is such an openhearted person, no matter where he is. I know everyone had a high expectation of him since he has been performing so well.

“He is loved by so many people and I know why. Last week he came second and was on the podium. And this week again he was so powerful on his bike….. but why…..? How…..? That is all I can think right now.

"I would like to give my condolences to Marco's family, fans, teams and staff. Rest in peace Marco.”

With Gresini Honda considering missing the final round of the season at Valencia, Aoyama, who is already confirmed as joining Honda in the World Superbike Championship next year, may have made his last appearance at MotoGP level.

gresini honda

Japanese MotoGP

• Venue: Motegi, Japan
• Date: 30 September - 2 October
• Saturday 1 October: Qualfiying: 0450-0800, BBC Red Button
• Sunday 2 October: 125 & Moto2: 0350-0605, BBC Red button; MotoGP live: 0630-0800, BBC Two; MotoGP re-run: 1230-1400, BBC Two

Simoncelli has just one podium finish to his name in MotoGP - in Brno in August

MotoGP rider Marco Simoncelli has extended his contract to stay with Gresini Honda in 2012.

The 24-year-old has taken two pole positions this season but managed just one podium finish.
The Italian had been linked with a move to another team but has decided to stay on for a third season with Gresini.
He said: "2012 will be an important season for me and I want to give all those people who have believed in this project plenty to get excited about."

MotoGP standings

• Casey Stoner: 284 points
• Jorge Lorenzo: 240
• Andrea Dovizioso: 185
• Dani Pedrosa: 170
• Ben Spies: 146
• Valentino Rossi: 139

Simoncelli has been one of the fastest riders on the grid this season but has been too inconsistent, crashing out of four races.
Team manager Fausto Gresini said: "Over the past two years together we have been able to appreciate Marco's qualities as a rider, as a man and as an extroverted communicator, which made us keen to continue our collaboration.
"Marco's huge determination will give us all a lot of motivation ahead of what promises to be an exciting new season."