Tow vehicle

[Bawshogg]

Try it. You might like it.

[Pnwrider]

Shorter story. All tests show it is basically equal to a NA V8 - even in the hills.

Call me crazy, but I will go with empirical evidence over anecdotal stories. Not hating, just calling it like it is - which is not revolutionary.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

What tests? All the real video tests I saw showed the ecoboost cleaning up! I'm not even an ecoboost owner but wanted one based on YouTube reviews[emoji2]

[Sixball]

So lets think about it, Eco as much or more torque at 2,500 rpm as the big V8 at 5,000 rpm. Get the big v8 and keep your foot on the floor.

My brother has a new expedition Eco its still low mileage but getting as good or better mpg the last years V8 and drives and tows much better.

I have the 2.0l in a new MKC and it runs away from my injected 6 in a 2012 Explorer and also very low mileage but getting 22 mpg. The explorer gets 21mpg. The little MKC is an outstanding drive. I thought I loved the Explorer. Both have AWD. If nothing changes my next vehicle will come with an Eco without a dough.

[IXFE]

I owned BOTH F-150 Ecoboost AND GMC Denali XL 6.2L at the same time for the past two summers. The Eco smokes the old 6.2. Doesn't matter if I'm towing the boat or tooling around town, I picked the Eco every chance I got. If that's an "anecdote" so be it. I call it fact proven if you look at the respective torque curves of these motors.

And nobody in this thread has ever claimed the MPG's were superior, other than maybe while towing (which is true, but who cares?).

I have test driven the '15 Denali with the new 6.2L 8-speed, and it's still not as fun to drive as the Eco, but I'm sure it tows well. My issue with it was throttle response... you really have to lay into it to wake it up. The Eco is not that way; it feels much faster just cuz of the throttle.

I have no axe to grind here and I've owned many a Ford, GM, and Mopar product over the years. I really wish I could take the Eco and put it in the new Denali body style cuz the new Expy is ugly.

Edited December 29, 2014 by IXFE

[get_u_sum]

Caution! If you are a GM guy don't jump I know three guys now that were GM all there lives, until they got into the Eco F-150's . Now they say they will never go back.

Make that 4!! I will never go back to a GM truck... Too many small issues with numerous models over the years.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[nyryan2001]

Shorter story. All tests show it is basically equal to a NA V8 - even in the hills.

Call me crazy, but I will go with empirical evidence over anecdotal stories. Not hating, just calling it like it is - which is not revolutionary.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

There's a website called Youtube, you might have heard of it. It has dozens of 3rd party reviews... All of them have the EB clearly outperforming all but the 6.2s. One has them all with 10k loads climbing from 10k ft to 12k ft up the Ike Gauntlent.

My biggest concern has been reliability coming from a Toyota... Ford seems to have the majority of recalls and issues worked out.

[Falko]

Turbo engines are nice as they are very tunable to get the power where you want it. You don't need to play the valve adjustment game (although I am sure Ford does with the EB, they like the cam timing they came up with) you just bring the boost up. I like the new EB engines, finally someone gets the whole thing about not needing huge displacement. I've just never had luck with Ford vehicles so will probably never buy one.

[ibelonginprison]

If a boosted 2.7 = NA 6.2
Then a boosted 6.0 > *

Just cause of this argument I'm now dropping an LQ4 with a procharger on it in Big Ugle and you all can suckle on my 4mpg exhaust fumes. :p

[ibelonginprison]

Just kidding.

I'm actually trying to find a cheap LQ4 with wiring harness and accessories locally.
I'll swap the cam, add headers, have it dyno tuned and call it a day.

Boost *IS* addicting, though... I supercharged my G and when you rail on it... and the power just keeps building and building and building, man, you can't smack the smile off of my face.

[formulaben]

Yup, I'm a recovering turbo addict...

[Bozboat]

From the Ford web site it states that the max tow package has an upgraded front stabilizer bar and upgraded rear bumper, and it goes from the standard 3.31 rear end to a 3.51 locking rear end. It looks like the regular tow package also has a transmission cooler. Doesn't say if the max package has a bigger one.

Also trying to figure out if I wait for the 2015 with the aluminum body that shaves off 700 lbs, or go for a deal on a 2014. The 2.7 l Ecoboost is pretty amazing for how small it is.

What do you guys think about the durability of a turbo engine? I mainly drive it back and forth to work about 20 miles a day, so I only put on mileage on trips. Maybe 12,000 miles per year.

I was also considering the Ram diesel. Just a little scared about buying a Fiat diesel. Anyone run that engine for any miles?

Was also considering a Silverado but Consumer Reports gave it a very bad reliability rating.

I would suggest that 20 miles a day is not going to be enough to keep the diesel happy. My two diesel trucks were pre emissions but still did t like short trips. The newer diesels with all of the filter regeneration stuff seem to like even longer trips.

[justgary]

So are they really cramming 30 PSI of boost into those things? What kind of life do they expect out of the engine?

[pknappe]

Getting ready to pick up my 2014 FX4 Ecoboost tomorrow. Black to match the boat

[Sixball]

Boos is in the 12psi range the turbos are rated for 150,000 miles. Spinning at 170,000 rpm. Give or take.

[Sixball]

The Dyno Lab ran a 3.5 Eco 362 hours at full throttle. I don't know if the thing went bang or they just quit running it. Something tell me non of us will beat the snot out of one like that.

[justgary]

12 PSI is more reasonable. I thought I read here that it was much more.

So is the boost electronically controlled? Can you dial the wick up even more?

[Bawshogg]

Someone is not thinking 2.7l.....or there is a BUNCH of misinformation floating around.......http://articles.sae.org/13388/

[Bawshogg]

Boos is in the 12psi range the turbos are rated for 150,000 miles. Spinning at 170,000 rpm. Give or take.

You are referencing the 3.5l correct?

[Bawshogg]

Getting ready to pick up my 2014 FX4 Ecoboost tomorrow. Black to match the boat

Good choice.

[IXFE]

Someone is not thinking 2.7l.....or there is a BUNCH of misinformation floating around.......http://articles.sae.org/13388/

Interesting... Just as soon as Indmar adopts the 6.2L, Ford dumps it.

Does it matter? Probably not. But I still find it interesting.

Also, this new F150 has "CAFE" written all over it. It's pretty amazing that by going to aluminum they achieved the same power:weight ratio with a 2.7L. And selling 1/3 of the volume on that engine (and none on the old 6.2L) should do wonders for Ford's CAFE rating.

Edited December 30, 2014 by IXFE

[Bawshogg]

6.2l is not gone. It's just gone from the F150.

It's still the base engine in the super duty platform.

I think you are smart enough to see exactly WHY Ford got back into the marine game now don't you?

Over forecasted demand for the 6.2 back in 2011 may have something to do with it......

[justgary]

Thanks, Baws. I guess they know what they are doing, but 29 PSI seems like a lot of boost. When one goes, it will be a spectacle.

[Bozboat]

Baws How much boost do the TwinTurbo's put out in the 3.5?

[IXFE]

6.2l is not gone. It's just gone from the F150.

It's still the base engine in the super duty platform.

I think you are smart enough to see exactly WHY Ford got back into the marine game now don't you?

Over forecasted demand for the 6.2 back in 2011 may have something to do with it......

Good point... The 6.2L is a rare bird in anything other than an actual Raptor.

Side question, Boss: I had my truck in at d***'s last week to finally have my speedo recalibrated for the 275/65R20 tires I have. They did it at "no charge" but the service rep said it wasn't perfect but as close as they could get. Thing is... it's still reading slow by almost 10%. Does this sound accurate? Are their certain sizes they can't (or won't) correct for? I'm baffles because I seem to recall reading on the F150 forum that recalibration was a cinch.

[Bawshogg]

You can only program for tire sizes that would have come stock.

Ford has really clamped down on what we can do as far as programming the last year or two.

You need this in more ways than one:http://www.5startuning.com/product/1-7015-x4/

Edited December 30, 2014 by Bawshogg