User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 7:05:15 PM EDT
[#1]
I have a 5.0 with 3:73s
I'm averaging 17.4 mpg, extended cab and 4x4. Couldn't be happier. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 7:13:37 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: V-6. That engine really needs a new improved Ranger wrapped around it. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Is that 2.7 an inline, or a V engine? V-6. That engine really needs a new improved Ranger wrapped around it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 7:18:05 PM EDT
[#3]
2015 SCrew XLT 4x4 w/ 3:31 gearing, 302A package, FX4 and a 3.5L ecoboost -- about 3200 miles now, 18.5 mpg over its entire life including lot time and test drives, 19 even since I've owned it.
I actually ordered the 2.7, but my jeep died and I needed a vehicle immediately so I went to the lot looking to get a deal on a 2014; I used z plan pricing and rebates applied, so the 48k sticker price came out to 39k before trade in. It was a couple thousand over what I could have got a 2014 for, but the 2015 EB gets about 2 mpg more than the 14 model so over the price of the 5 year loan that difference would have been eaten in cost of ownership and the newer model would retain value better since its a complete redesign from the 14s. I like it, I don't notice any turbo whine -- cabin is very quiet ride. It picks up and goes when I need it to and on the hills I have to drive for my commute, it never needs to downshift and keeps a constant low rpm. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 7:31:33 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How the fuck do I change the oil in my air filter? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
There is no substitute for displacement! I can't see how you can cram all that fuel and air in a small lightweight motor and expect it to pull or last like a larger motor. Maybe I am stuck in the past but turbo charging a small 4 or 6 cylinder motor and ask it to pull a loaded trailer or just work like a real truck in general and your asking for problems in my opinion. Sure if you want a truck to be cool or pull a small trailer or dump runs every other weekend fine it may work for you. Good luck on your purchase I truly hope it works out for you and please keep us informed. You are correct. Gasoline turbos fell out of mainstream favour 15-20 years ago because they don't last. Changing gasoline turbos at 80,000-120,000 miles isn't fun or cheap. Unless the laws of physics have changed since then, they still won't last. Ford's PR on this was good though. They didn't want to call it a Turbo, so it's an "Eco-boost"........ You are aware that you need to change both the oil in the engine and the air filter right? If you dont change those things then yes, you may have problems with your turbo. Also, dont turn the vehicle off when the turbo has just been whipped like a race horse. Give it a minute to cool down a bit before turning off the vehicle. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 7:36:25 PM EDT
[#5]
Thanks guys for posting MPG.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 7:37:19 PM EDT
[#6]
So the paint will chip off my aluminum air filter oil in less than 120,000 miles?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 7:49:38 PM EDT
[#7]
How do the stereos sound?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 7:49:47 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There's several acceleration tests on youtube etc that pit the 3.5 EB agains the new chevy 6.2 with 8spd, the EB is a tick faster to 60 but the 6.2 catches and passes it in the quarter mile for a higher trap speed and lower ET, as expected. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Who told you that the 3.5 is faster from 0-60 than Chevy's 6.2? I can tell you from first-hand experience, in the real world, that that is 100% false. The 3.5 is better than I expected to be, but I still wouldn't buy one. And their mileage is not as good as Ford claims it to be... There's several acceleration tests on youtube etc that pit the 3.5 EB agains the new chevy 6.2 with 8spd, the EB is a tick faster to 60 but the 6.2 catches and passes it in the quarter mile for a higher trap speed and lower ET, as expected. I was talking about the real world, not some rigged test on Youtube. I own the 6.2, and the 3.5 EB sees nothing but taillights. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 7:51:39 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Your 6.2 gets better mileage than an EB? Or poor grammar? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I'm really interested to see how these things last, they make me nervous getting this amount of power from 6 little cylinders. It amazes me the a f150 with a 3.5 v6 can make the same power as my 6.2 and get better mileage doing it. Or poor grammar? I inginear, an can't even eglish Fixed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 8:07:06 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Guesses on gas milage in town and highway? I'm really torn between the V8 and the EB. Planning on 4x4 w/ 3.73. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I've got a 2014 5.0 4x4 w/ the 3.73 rear end, and it's a rocket ship compared to the older generation or the F250 I was coming out of. I've driven the EB and it's a torque monster compared to 5.0, but I'm a fan of N/A motors over turbo'ed, and I like the sound. I've got 15k on mine, without a single issue. Great truck. Guesses on gas milage in town and highway? I'm really torn between the V8 and the EB. Planning on 4x4 w/ 3.73. Full disclosure, I drive like an a$$ hole, and hammer the throttle in most situations; I also drive 90% city. Prior to my 285/65/20 (34.6x11.2x20) tires, and my fox suspension kit, I was getting 14k average over 14k miles. Now I'm getting 11.4, but I also haven't had the PMC flashed to account for my larger tires, so that likely plays into it as well. If you drive a lot of highway, use good quality gas, and don't speed everywhere, I'm sure you could get 15-16 pretty easily. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 8:08:36 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryI was talking about the real world, not some rigged test on Youtube. I own the 6.2, and the 3.5 EB sees nothing but taillights.
Yeah I know, all dem youtube tests are rigged bro, the fix is always in
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 8:09:13 PM EDT
[#12]
If you drive the truck as a commuter vehicle like 99.9% of Americans who "need" a truck, the Eco Boost will be fine.
If you actually USE your truck, the fuel savings of the Eco Boost will go away under heavy use and you'll wish you had a big V8. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 8:13:17 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How do the stereos sound? I think it sounds pretty good. In my last F250 I had amped Pioneer Professional door speakers (MRP-F450), as well as two Alpine 10" subs in a custom fit box, powered by an Alpine MRP-M500. The head unit was one of the latest Pioneer Professional ones too; that old system sounded great. I think the Sony 700w setup in my '14 sounds pretty darn good for a factory setup. I have no desire to replace the door speakers/sub, but I will admit the factory sub doesn't thump like a single 8" likely should. I listen to 100% country though, so don't need much bass. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 8:13:31 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yeah I know, all dem youtube tests are rigged bro, the fix is always in
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I was talking about the real world, not some rigged test on Youtube. I own the 6.2, and the 3.5 EB sees nothing but taillights.
Yeah I know, all dem youtube tests are rigged bro, the fix is always in
I don't know about the new ones, but my gm 6.2 walked all over my buddies eco-boost as well..both empty and pulling up to 6000 pd trailers course we go from sea level up to about 3000 ft for most stuff...it is what it is...maybe to be fair, you should go drive a new 6.2? I think all manufacturers have some good ideas, and some bad ideas..pick the one that fits your needs the best and be happy......... |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 8:18:37 PM EDT
[#15]
I did Google it up - What the fuck is a SCREW?
Never mind - Super Crew. The fuck.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 8:20:27 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I did Google it up - What the fuck is a SCREW? Short for Super Crew, 4 door. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 8:21:13 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Short for Super Crew, 4 door. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I did Google it up - What the fuck is a SCREW? Short for Super Crew, 4 door. Thanks. No one likes a SCAB? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 8:21:41 PM EDT
[#18]
Great little review!
Thanks for sharing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 8:21:57 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You really believe the paint issue hasn't been proven through exhaustive testing and analysis? 3 year window motors, doesn't even warrant a response. What major systems do you envision needing a revision? What color is your chevy? Haters love to hate. Forget him |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 8:25:31 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote History |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 8:33:19 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Thanks. No one likes a SCAB? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: I did Google it up - What the fuck is a SCREW? Short for Super Crew, 4 door. Thanks. No one likes a SCAB? Not really, looks neat but its inconvenient because the front doors have to be open to open the back doors.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 8:34:30 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Aluminum will shed paint. (Sorry, not covered under warranty) Window motors will last 3 years. Some major system will need a mid model upgrade. Ford used aluminum hoods (crown victoria, grand marquis) in the 90's  Unless you're thinking of their performance white paint which sheds when you look at it wrong 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 8:35:27 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The only one of those that sounds like a truck is the 5.0. That did it for me. This |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 8:41:48 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You really believe the paint issue hasn't been proven through exhaustive testing and analysis? 3 year window motors, doesn't even warrant a response. What major systems do you envision needing a revision? What color is your chevy? I have an Expedition EL. Blue. 3 window motors, 2 drivers side, 1 passenger. Paint is bubbling and chipping off the hood and liftgate. Not covered unless the metal is pitted. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 8:47:06 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You just lost 99.99% of Arfcom . Been a few years since I've done any thermo, thankfully Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Direct injection gasoline blurs the line between Otto and Diesel cycles. In both torque and thermodynamic efficiency. But to make power, it has to go into a hybrid cycle. Look at P-V diagrams. . Been a few years since I've done any thermo, thankfully That was 9 years ago and I got a D, so I'm smiling and nodding along
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 8:48:17 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The only one of those that sounds like a truck is the 5.0. That did it for me. This Was it the stereo? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 8:53:46 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Was it the stereo? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: The only one of those that sounds like a truck is the 5.0. That did it for me. This Was it the stereo? Only the EB's pump it through the stereo, the 5.0 is natural |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 9:00:57 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I have a 5.0 with 3:73s I'm averaging 17.4 mpg, extended cab and 4x4. Couldn't be happier. Same but crew cab & camper shell. 16.2. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 9:13:21 PM EDT
[#29]
Buy 'em up guys. I want a 2015 EB so bad but wallet says "hell no".
5 yrs, I'll be in the market for a 15 or 16 model yr, never buy new is some of the best advice ever passed along to me. By then you will have worked out the kinks and we'll know which is good and bad. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 9:17:46 PM EDT
[#30]
OP, Just want to know how long before you will have a Tuner for/on it?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 9:22:16 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
89ci? Maybe if it was NA to NA. Should buy the 2013 and get the 6.2L if you need the big displacement advantage, and no other extra advantages at all. 213ci vs 302ci vs. 379ci Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
No replacement for displacement  You made the right choice OP.89ci? Maybe if it was NA to NA. Should buy the 2013 and get the 6.2L if you need the big displacement advantage, and no other extra advantages at all. 213ci vs 302ci vs. 379ci my 2013 has the 6.2 and I highly recommend them if you can find one |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 9:28:08 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: VW never stopped using turbos and they make excellent motors. Yes, a turbo is a wear item and will need a rebuild eventually. If you don't beat on it constantly lets say your 120k estimate is true than after 120k miles (12 years for me at least) I can spend $600 and get my turbo rebuilt and keep getting good performance and gas milage. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: There is no substitute for displacement! I can't see how you can cram all that fuel and air in a small lightweight motor and expect it to pull or last like a larger motor. Maybe I am stuck in the past but turbo charging a small 4 or 6 cylinder motor and ask it to pull a loaded trailer or just work like a real truck in general and your asking for problems in my opinion. Sure if you want a truck to be cool or pull a small trailer or dump runs every other weekend fine it may work for you. Good luck on your purchase I truly hope it works out for you and please keep us informed. You are correct. Gasoline turbos fell out of mainstream favour 15-20 years ago because they don't last. Changing gasoline turbos at 80,000-120,000 miles isn't fun or cheap. Unless the laws of physics have changed since then, they still won't last. Ford's PR on this was good though. They didn't want to call it a Turbo, so it's an "Eco-boost"........ VW never stopped using turbos and they make excellent motors. Yes, a turbo is a wear item and will need a rebuild eventually. If you don't beat on it constantly lets say your 120k estimate is true than after 120k miles (12 years for me at least) I can spend $600 and get my turbo rebuilt and keep getting good performance and gas milage. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 9:45:25 PM EDT
[#33]
Consumer reports Has the 2013 ecoboost as a Do not buy do to higher than normal warranty work and reliability concerns. My father in law has a 2013 ford f150 fx2 extended cab he has it tuned and he gets 17.5 driving like and old man. He only has 20k miles on it and its been pretty much totally fine had to go back to the dealership once for a rear end that was leaking all over the driveway. Ive seen him tow 7000lbs the rear looked to be sagging but it had no problems pulling the load.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 9:58:29 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You are correct. Gasoline turbos fell out of mainstream favour 15-20 years ago because they don't last. Changing gasoline turbos at 80,000-120,000 miles isn't fun or cheap. Unless the laws of physics have changed since then, they still won't last. Ford's PR on this was good though. They didn't want to call it a Turbo, so it's an "Eco-boost"........ Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
There is no substitute for displacement! I can't see how you can cram all that fuel and air in a small lightweight motor and expect it to pull or last like a larger motor. Maybe I am stuck in the past but turbo charging a small 4 or 6 cylinder motor and ask it to pull a loaded trailer or just work like a real truck in general and your asking for problems in my opinion. Sure if you want a truck to be cool or pull a small trailer or dump runs every other weekend fine it may work for you. Good luck on your purchase I truly hope it works out for you and please keep us informed. You are correct. Gasoline turbos fell out of mainstream favour 15-20 years ago because they don't last. Changing gasoline turbos at 80,000-120,000 miles isn't fun or cheap. Unless the laws of physics have changed since then, they still won't last. Ford's PR on this was good though. They didn't want to call it a Turbo, so it's an "Eco-boost"........ You should tell that to Volvo. My XC90 has 137k on it and is doing just fine. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 10:01:04 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yeah I know, all dem youtube tests are rigged bro, the fix is always in
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I was talking about the real world, not some rigged test on Youtube. I own the 6.2, and the 3.5 EB sees nothing but taillights.
Yeah I know, all dem youtube tests are rigged bro, the fix is always in
It must have been, with that result. Because here in the real world, from my own personal experience, the 6.2 is quicker than the 3.5 EB.....from 0-60, in the 1/8 mile, in the quarter mile. Not in some video that someone I don't know put up on Youtube, but in my own experience....and it's not even close. The mileage difference isn't all that much, either; just a couple mpg better with the 3.5. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 10:10:14 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It must have been, with that result. Because here in the real world, from my own personal experience, the 6.2 is quicker than the 3.5 EB.....from 0-60, in the 1/8 mile, in the quarter mile. Not in some video that someone I don't know put up on Youtube, but in my own experience....and it's not even close. The mileage difference isn't all that much, either; just a couple mpg better with the 3.5. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I was talking about the real world, not some rigged test on Youtube. I own the 6.2, and the 3.5 EB sees nothing but taillights.
Yeah I know, all dem youtube tests are rigged bro, the fix is always in
It must have been, with that result. Because here in the real world, from my own personal experience, the 6.2 is quicker than the 3.5 EB.....from 0-60, in the 1/8 mile, in the quarter mile. Not in some video that someone I don't know put up on Youtube, but in my own experience....and it's not even close. The mileage difference isn't all that much, either; just a couple mpg better with the 3.5. Just to confirm you did race a 2015, right? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 10:23:53 PM EDT
[#37]
 And this is why an education is important. Why has no one questioned this idiot graph? Horsepower and torque cross at 5252 rpm by definition. You can measure torque, then work the math to calculate HP, then graph it. Not only do they not cross at 5252 rpm, they are shown crossing at different rpms.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 10:45:06 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:And this is why an education is important.
Why has no one questioned this idiot graph? Horsepower and torque cross at 5252 rpm by definition. You can measure torque, then work the math to calculate HP, then graph it. Not only do they not cross at 5252 rpm, they are shown crossing at different rpms.
The horsepower and torque are on different scales. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 11:01:18 PM EDT
[#39]
The 2015 Ford is setting the standard to measure all the rest by. It is an awesome truck and the 3.5EB in sport mode will make it one fun truck to drive. I am sold on the 3.5 as this is the 4th truck I have owned with one. The 2.7 is a very small engine for a full size truck. The 5.0 is OK but it is old school in today's world. I put a 2 inch level on my truck earlier this week and I am contemplating a tune for it.
YES the sound system is very good in this one!!! 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 11:01:32 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The horsepower and torque are on different scales. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted:And this is why an education is important. Why has no one questioned this idiot graph? Horsepower and torque cross at 5252 rpm by definition. You can measure torque, then work the math to calculate HP, then graph it. Not only do they not cross at 5252 rpm, they are shown crossing at different rpms. The horsepower and torque are on different scales.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/11/2015 11:49:14 PM EDT
[#41]
I like my 3.5 EB, though I have had a couple issues with it. I love that with $200, you can add a tune and gain approximately 100HP and 100lbft.
 It's quicker than anything I've put it up against, and I'm getting spectacular mileage on mine. 2012 FX2 (RWD model) with 3.15 gears. I get 18 city, and up to 25+ highway @ 65 mph on summer gas. I've even gotten 30 mpg in a 30 minute stretch of highway driving before, according to the on board calculator.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2015 12:17:34 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How the fuck do I change the oil in my air filter? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
There is no substitute for displacement! I can't see how you can cram all that fuel and air in a small lightweight motor and expect it to pull or last like a larger motor. Maybe I am stuck in the past but turbo charging a small 4 or 6 cylinder motor and ask it to pull a loaded trailer or just work like a real truck in general and your asking for problems in my opinion. Sure if you want a truck to be cool or pull a small trailer or dump runs every other weekend fine it may work for you. Good luck on your purchase I truly hope it works out for you and please keep us informed. You are correct. Gasoline turbos fell out of mainstream favour 15-20 years ago because they don't last. Changing gasoline turbos at 80,000-120,000 miles isn't fun or cheap. Unless the laws of physics have changed since then, they still won't last. Ford's PR on this was good though. They didn't want to call it a Turbo, so it's an "Eco-boost"........ You are aware that you need to change both the oil in the engine and the air filter right? If you dont change those things then yes, you may have problems with your turbo. Also, dont turn the vehicle off when the turbo has just been whipped like a race horse. Give it a minute to cool down a bit before turning off the vehicle. Get a K&N Air Filter!
You have to change the oil in those... |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2015 6:45:12 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Get a K&N Air Filter!
You have to change the oil in those... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
There is no substitute for displacement! I can't see how you can cram all that fuel and air in a small lightweight motor and expect it to pull or last like a larger motor. Maybe I am stuck in the past but turbo charging a small 4 or 6 cylinder motor and ask it to pull a loaded trailer or just work like a real truck in general and your asking for problems in my opinion. Sure if you want a truck to be cool or pull a small trailer or dump runs every other weekend fine it may work for you. Good luck on your purchase I truly hope it works out for you and please keep us informed. You are correct. Gasoline turbos fell out of mainstream favour 15-20 years ago because they don't last. Changing gasoline turbos at 80,000-120,000 miles isn't fun or cheap. Unless the laws of physics have changed since then, they still won't last. Ford's PR on this was good though. They didn't want to call it a Turbo, so it's an "Eco-boost"........ You are aware that you need to change both the oil in the engine and the air filter right? If you dont change those things then yes, you may have problems with your turbo. Also, dont turn the vehicle off when the turbo has just been whipped like a race horse. Give it a minute to cool down a bit before turning off the vehicle. Get a K&N Air Filter!
You have to change the oil in those... Jeenyus, simply jeenyus. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2015 7:55:25 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I like my 3.5 EB, though I have had a couple issues with it. I love that with $200, you can add a tune and gain approximately 100HP and 100lbft. It's quicker than anything I've put it up against, and I'm getting spectacular mileage on mine. 2012 FX2 (RWD model) with 3.15 gears. I get 18 city, and up to 25+ highway @ 65 mph on summer gas. I've even gotten 30 mpg in a 30 minute stretch of highway driving before, according to the on board calculator. Tailwinds FTW? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2015 8:27:32 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There has been more technological advancement in the car industry in the last 20 years than every year prior. A turbo engine today is far superior to anything built in the 70's or 80's. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
There is no substitute for displacement! I can't see how you can cram all that fuel and air in a small lightweight motor and expect it to pull or last like a larger motor. Maybe I am stuck in the past but turbo charging a small 4 or 6 cylinder motor and ask it to pull a loaded trailer or just work like a real truck in general and your asking for problems in my opinion. Sure if you want a truck to be cool or pull a small trailer or dump runs every other weekend fine it may work for you. Good luck on your purchase I truly hope it works out for you and please keep us informed. You are correct. Gasoline turbos fell out of mainstream favour 15-20 years ago because they don't last. Changing gasoline turbos at 80,000-120,000 miles isn't fun or cheap. Unless the laws of physics have changed since then, they still won't last. Ford's PR on this was good though. They didn't want to call it a Turbo, so it's an "Eco-boost"........ There has been more technological advancement in the car industry in the last 20 years than every year prior. A turbo engine today is far superior to anything built in the 70's or 80's. It is, however: Stress on the turbo remains the same as 1980s. Unless physics has changed. Turbo lubrication is same as 1980s, actually it's worse. Fully synthetic oils today's aren't actually fully synthetic anymore. The original Mobil 1 was a true PAO, today they are a high percentage PAO. The more worrying part is how many guys will put fully synthetic oil in AND change it every 3,000 miles. Metals have not significantly advanced either. DI while it adds power and fuel economy, we just don't know yet whether the injectors will stand the test of time. There already unsettling reports that the injectors may not have the life span we would like. Replacing them will be very expensive. So the Eco-boost has turbos which we know for certain do not last as long as a regular NA engine. DI which "may" have longevity issues, with the injectors. Did I mention this is made by Ford. Saab, Volvo and VW all have 30 + years experience with Turbos. Even with those guys, they don't last like their NA engines do, hence the decline in popularity. Turbos are coming back because it's one way to meet the communist regulations of the EPA. What could be better for business than making vehicles that don't last. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2015 8:33:33 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
my wife has the Escape...we lined up at a light with my '78 280z and she left me standing practically.....ate my lunch/blew my doors off. The 78' Z  was a pig, my Dad had one while I had a 75' [first year FI]. I could blow his car out of the water without even trying. Top end was where you could really see a huge difference, the 75' loved running above 5K RPM.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2015 8:47:39 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It is, however: Stress on the turbo remains the same as 1980s. Unless physics has changed. Turbo lubrication is same as 1980s, actually it's worse. Fully synthetic oils today's aren't actually fully synthetic anymore. The original Mobil 1 was a true PAO, today they are a high percentage PAO. The more worrying part is how many guys will put fully synthetic oil in AND change it every 3,000 miles. Metals have not significantly advanced either. DI while it adds power and fuel economy, we just don't know yet whether the injectors will stand the test of time. There already unsettling reports that the injectors may not have the life span we would like. Replacing them will be very expensive. So the Eco-boost has turbos which we know for certain do not last as long as a regular NA engine. DI which "may" have longevity issues, with the injectors. Did I mention this is made by Ford. Saab, Volvo and VW all have 30 + years experience with Turbos. Even with those guys, they don't last like their NA engines do, hence the decline in popularity. Turbos are coming back because it's one way to meet the communist regulations of the EPA. What could be better for business than making vehicles that don't last. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
There is no substitute for displacement! I can't see how you can cram all that fuel and air in a small lightweight motor and expect it to pull or last like a larger motor. Maybe I am stuck in the past but turbo charging a small 4 or 6 cylinder motor and ask it to pull a loaded trailer or just work like a real truck in general and your asking for problems in my opinion. Sure if you want a truck to be cool or pull a small trailer or dump runs every other weekend fine it may work for you. Good luck on your purchase I truly hope it works out for you and please keep us informed. You are correct. Gasoline turbos fell out of mainstream favour 15-20 years ago because they don't last. Changing gasoline turbos at 80,000-120,000 miles isn't fun or cheap. Unless the laws of physics have changed since then, they still won't last. Ford's PR on this was good though. They didn't want to call it a Turbo, so it's an "Eco-boost"........ There has been more technological advancement in the car industry in the last 20 years than every year prior. A turbo engine today is far superior to anything built in the 70's or 80's. It is, however: Stress on the turbo remains the same as 1980s. Unless physics has changed. Turbo lubrication is same as 1980s, actually it's worse. Fully synthetic oils today's aren't actually fully synthetic anymore. The original Mobil 1 was a true PAO, today they are a high percentage PAO. The more worrying part is how many guys will put fully synthetic oil in AND change it every 3,000 miles. Metals have not significantly advanced either. DI while it adds power and fuel economy, we just don't know yet whether the injectors will stand the test of time. There already unsettling reports that the injectors may not have the life span we would like. Replacing them will be very expensive. So the Eco-boost has turbos which we know for certain do not last as long as a regular NA engine. DI which "may" have longevity issues, with the injectors. Did I mention this is made by Ford. Saab, Volvo and VW all have 30 + years experience with Turbos. Even with those guys, they don't last like their NA engines do, hence the decline in popularity. Turbos are coming back because it's one way to meet the communist regulations of the EPA. What could be better for business than making vehicles that don't last. lololololol Wanna know how I know you haven't bought a turbo vehicle made in the last 20 years? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2015 9:01:12 AM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You are aware that you need to change both the oil in the engine and the air filter right? If you dont change those things then yes, you may have problems with your turbo. Also, dont turn the vehicle off when the turbo has just been whipped like a race horse. Give it a minute to cool down a bit before turning off the vehicle. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: There is no substitute for displacement! I can't see how you can cram all that fuel and air in a small lightweight motor and expect it to pull or last like a larger motor. Maybe I am stuck in the past but turbo charging a small 4 or 6 cylinder motor and ask it to pull a loaded trailer or just work like a real truck in general and your asking for problems in my opinion. Sure if you want a truck to be cool or pull a small trailer or dump runs every other weekend fine it may work for you. Good luck on your purchase I truly hope it works out for you and please keep us informed. You are correct. Gasoline turbos fell out of mainstream favour 15-20 years ago because they don't last. Changing gasoline turbos at 80,000-120,000 miles isn't fun or cheap. Unless the laws of physics have changed since then, they still won't last. Ford's PR on this was good though. They didn't want to call it a Turbo, so it's an "Eco-boost"........ You are aware that you need to change both the oil in the engine and the air filter right? If you dont change those things then yes, you may have problems with your turbo. Also, dont turn the vehicle off when the turbo has just been whipped like a race horse. Give it a minute to cool down a bit before turning off the vehicle. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2015 9:02:48 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I wish you guys would just buy all the EBs and drive down the price of diesel offerings. kthx |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2015 9:04:45 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It is, however: Stress on the turbo remains the same as 1980s. Unless physics has changed. Turbo lubrication is same as 1980s, actually it's worse. Fully synthetic oils today's aren't actually fully synthetic anymore. The original Mobil 1 was a true PAO, today they are a high percentage PAO. The more worrying part is how many guys will put fully synthetic oil in AND change it every 3,000 miles. Metals have not significantly advanced either. DI while it adds power and fuel economy, we just don't know yet whether the injectors will stand the test of time. There already unsettling reports that the injectors may not have the life span we would like. Replacing them will be very expensive. So the Eco-boost has turbos which we know for certain do not last as long as a regular NA engine. DI which "may" have longevity issues, with the injectors. Did I mention this is made by Ford. Saab, Volvo and VW all have 30 + years experience with Turbos. Even with those guys, they don't last like their NA engines do, hence the decline in popularity. Turbos are coming back because it's one way to meet the communist regulations of the EPA. What could be better for business than making vehicles that don't last. You do realize companies like BMW don't even offer NA engines anymore? Have you even watched the torture test? I strongly suggest you do. Unless Ford completely rigged this and rebuilt the turbos in the middle of the testing your whole post is busted. 
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
