User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 3/13/2015 9:31:12 AM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That 2.7 actually has me intrigued. 325 hp out of that little motherfucker. 164 cubic inches. Dayum.  I noticed they chose iron for the engine block. Strength concern with aluminum? This is about the most high tech stuff you can use to build an engine block today. The 2nd generation Ford turbo engines look extremely well engineered and built. Main bearing caps are cast as part of the block and cooling/oiling capabilities are far beyond the old SBC generation of engine. As always though when dealing with crap like physics there must be tradeoffs. For example just how much room are they leaving on the top end safety and performance margins? I am too dumb in those fields to compare the laptop generation vs the bolt on gen, for performance additives. For example are the Direct Injection components adequate to pump 475 horsepower from the stock 325? I would guess that an extra 50-75 would be doable easily. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2015 9:31:52 AM EDT
[#2]
My truck is in for routine 3rd oil change and tire rotation. Loaner for the day was a regular cab XLT with the 6.2L. I suspect it had the 3.31's because acceleration was quite underwhelming. Sure, after it got to 6th gear, and I was doing 70mph it was still pulling but so does the 3.5EB in my truck.
I think I am a bit spoiled with a tuned 3.5EB. Between the tune and the 3.73 rear end, my truck moves out. I will say this too, if you are concerned about gas mileage and you do not plan to tow max loads, skip the 3.73's and get the 3.31's. It's a 2mpg or 3mpg difference with the same driver behind the wheel of each. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/14/2015 8:29:53 AM EDT
[#3]
Hoping to order my truck today!
 |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/14/2015 8:49:30 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm still going with the 5.0 just because I cant be the guinea pig in the first year of this motor, I need an absolutely bulletproof vehicle and the 2.7 may very well be, but I'm gonna sit on the sidelines for one more vehicle before I . then drive to you're nearest GM dealer ASAP even a Dodge would be better 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/14/2015 8:51:30 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I've got the 5.0 in my 2012 4x4 SCrew. Having talked with others that had the EB, the fuel savings didn't justify the extra cost of the engine. Not to mention the insurance premium between them was about $60 more per year for the EB (more expensive to repair if in a collision?) Plus, I like the rumble of an 8 cylinder. I replaced the muffler with a Magnaflow, dualed out the sides behind the rear tires with resonator tips. I'm consistently getting 15.7/19.9 city/highway... not too far off the EB's advertised figures. ETA: 3:55 rear end w/locker My 2011 EB was still drivable when the brakes WENT OUT at 5k miles and I hit two cars from behind. 18k in damage. Google ecoboost brake failure. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/14/2015 8:52:41 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You can get a 4x4 3.6L EB for $30k, but that's the basic XL. That's the X Plan price I got. But X is roughly invoice, so if you can negotiate, it's definitely possible. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I just can't spend $60k on a truck  Yes. They are impressive but they cost too much. I use a my pickup trucks to do work. 60k is too much money for something I am going to beat around in. They make a perfect rich guys grocery getter though. They come in different trims and start at about $25k, only the fully loaded Platinum is $60k+. The one I priced out and plan to order next week is the loaded Platinum and is roughly $58k out the door including tax tag and title. If I could get a 4x4 EB with no extras for 25k then it would be worth it but they dont come that way. If you want 4X4 and EB then your in the 40k+ price range. At least thats the way it was a few years ago when I was looking at them. It may of changed now but finding a basic truck with EB was damn near impossible back then. You can get a 4x4 3.6L EB for $30k, but that's the basic XL. That's the X Plan price I got. But X is roughly invoice, so if you can negotiate, it's definitely possible. 2011 Loaded Lariat for 31k. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/14/2015 8:56:53 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
My truck is in for routine 3rd oil change and tire rotation. Loaner for the day was a regular cab XLT with the 6.2L. I suspect it had the 3.31's because acceleration was quite underwhelming. Sure, after it got to 6th gear, and I was doing 70mph it was still pulling but so does the 3.5EB in my truck. I think I am a bit spoiled with a tuned 3.5EB. Between the tune and the 3.73 rear end, my truck moves out. I will say this too, if you are concerned about gas mileage and you do not plan to tow max loads, skip the 3.73's and get the 3.31's. It's a 2mpg or 3mpg difference with the same driver behind the wheel of each. 
The 6.2L isn't available in the regular cab. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/14/2015 8:58:31 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I suspect this is auditory enhancement because the power graphs do not bear this out as being factual. Sames trans gear spacing, and final drive ratio, the 3.5EB is going to pull harder from idle to redline than the 5.0. However, it's quieter. I see they must have re-mapped the 5.0 Coyote because the 3.5EB used to show a higher TQ# across the board. It still does, but the 5.0 now has this bump in it from 3500 to 5250, but the 3.5EB is still pulling harder up to about 4200rpm. A $600 tune will transform the 3.5EB, and the 5.0 has no chance at all in matching it without some serious, serious work. Red = 93 Octane Performance Tune Green = Stock Tune http://www.5startuning.com/wp-content/uploads/93p-vs-stock-b.jpg Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
....but once you get above 3500 or so the 5.0 pulls harder, this is the engine I will be ordering with the 3.73's I suspect this is auditory enhancement because the power graphs do not bear this out as being factual. Sames trans gear spacing, and final drive ratio, the 3.5EB is going to pull harder from idle to redline than the 5.0. However, it's quieter. I see they must have re-mapped the 5.0 Coyote because the 3.5EB used to show a higher TQ# across the board. It still does, but the 5.0 now has this bump in it from 3500 to 5250, but the 3.5EB is still pulling harder up to about 4200rpm. A $600 tune will transform the 3.5EB, and the 5.0 has no chance at all in matching it without some serious, serious work. Red = 93 Octane Performance Tune Green = Stock Tune http://www.5startuning.com/wp-content/uploads/93p-vs-stock-b.jpg 5star tuning has THE weakest 93 performance tune I've driven yet. MPT, Unleashed and SSI all make it feel stock. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/14/2015 9:56:14 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Hoping to order my truck today!
I'm sure you said already but what are you going to order on it? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/14/2015 10:11:24 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
My truck is in for routine 3rd oil change and tire rotation. Loaner for the day was a regular cab XLT with the 6.2L. I suspect it had the 3.31's because acceleration was quite underwhelming. Sure, after it got to 6th gear, and I was doing 70mph it was still pulling but so does the 3.5EB in my truck. I think I am a bit spoiled with a tuned 3.5EB. Between the tune and the 3.73 rear end, my truck moves out. I will say this too, if you are concerned about gas mileage and you do not plan to tow max loads, skip the 3.73's and get the 3.31's. It's a 2mpg or 3mpg difference with the same driver behind the wheel of each. 6.2 wasn't available on the regular cabs. Only the extended and screws. You probably had a 3.7na v6. The ecoboost is only .1 quicker to 60 and in the 1/4 than the 5.0 when identically equipped. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/14/2015 10:56:56 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm sure you said already but what are you going to order on it? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Hoping to order my truck today! I'm sure you said already but what are you going to order on it? I'm waiting on the the dealer to send me the final price on a loaded Ingot Silver 5.0 701A Platinum, once I triple check the options then I'm good to go, hopefully I can get it done this afternoon. 2015 Ford F-150 Platinum, SuperCrew®, 5-1/2' Box, 5.0L V8 FFV Engine, 6-Speed Automatic Electronic Transmission w/Tow/Haul Mode, 4X4, 3.55 Electronic Locking Axle Ratio I added: 36 Gallon Extended range tank Active Parking Box side steps Factory Spray in liner FX4 Package Technology Package Trailer Tow Twin Panel Moon roof Wheel well liners You guys had me second guessing the 5.0 vs 3.5 Eco but I think I'll be happy with the V8, can't go wrong with old faithful. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/14/2015 11:01:31 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You guys had me second guessing the 5.0 vs 3.5 Eco but I think I'll be happy with the V8, can't go wrong with old faithful.
I'm sure you'll like it but remember old faithful is younger than the EB. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/14/2015 11:09:39 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm sure you'll like it but remember old faithful is younger than the EB. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: You guys had me second guessing the 5.0 vs 3.5 Eco but I think I'll be happy with the V8, can't go wrong with old faithful. I'm sure you'll like it but remember old faithful is younger than the EB. I'm really, seriously, considering the 3.5 Eco... later down the road a nice aftermarket CAI and tune would just set it off. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/14/2015 11:10:05 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I went and looked at the 2015's a couple weeks ago and ended up leaving with a 2104 with a 5.0. I'm not sold on the EB engines yet. My cousin had a '14 with the 3.5 EB and had issues with moisture build up in the inter-cooler getting dumped in the intake. A 2104 F150? Holy shit, can I borrow your time machine!? And can it fly? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/14/2015 11:12:44 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm really, seriously, considering the 3.5 Eco... later down the road a nice aftermarket CAI and tune would just set it off. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You guys had me second guessing the 5.0 vs 3.5 Eco but I think I'll be happy with the V8, can't go wrong with old faithful.
I'm sure you'll like it but remember old faithful is younger than the EB. I'm really, seriously, considering the 3.5 Eco... later down the road a nice aftermarket CAI and tune would just set it off. I don't see going back to non-turbo'd engines after owning mine. I saw the other day that Navigators get more HP and TQ in there's, I wonder if they will bump up the F150 to match. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/14/2015 11:13:35 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No Ford is using early 1980s technology. Turbos have been around a LONG time. Gasoline Turbos died in popularity by the late 1990s, due to fact they just don't last. They don't even require fully synthetic oil. Which is insane. The Employment Prevention Agency and Ford don't care about engine longevity, why would they. They won't last like the 5.0 will, which is great tried and tested engine. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Great synopsis. People don't understand how the Ford tech is changing the ball game right now. It is sad that the 302 will not benefit from a factory Ecoboost setup. The next generation Ecoboost will be the cat's meow from what I see. No Ford is using early 1980s technology. Turbos have been around a LONG time. Gasoline Turbos died in popularity by the late 1990s, due to fact they just don't last. They don't even require fully synthetic oil. Which is insane. The Employment Prevention Agency and Ford don't care about engine longevity, why would they. They won't last like the 5.0 will, which is great tried and tested engine. The 5.0 Coyote has nothing in common with the 302 of yesteryear beyond the displacement. It's a new engine, and it's not tried and tested as you claim. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/14/2015 11:15:51 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I would love to have the 3.5 EB motor. I just don't want the rest of the truck. Agree'd, Ive always said my ideal 1/2 is a chevy truck with a 3.5EB engine with dodge pricing. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/14/2015 11:17:03 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I don't see going back to non-turbo'd engines after owning mine. I saw the other day that Navigators get more HP and TQ in there's, I wonder if they will bump up the F150 to match. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: You guys had me second guessing the 5.0 vs 3.5 Eco but I think I'll be happy with the V8, can't go wrong with old faithful. I'm sure you'll like it but remember old faithful is younger than the EB. I'm really, seriously, considering the 3.5 Eco... later down the road a nice aftermarket CAI and tune would just set it off. I don't see going back to non-turbo'd engines after owning mine. I saw the other day that Navigators get more HP and TQ in there's, I wonder if they will bump up the F150 to match. I still have time to change my mind, I'll let you know how it goes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/14/2015 11:20:01 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I got better MPG, or more consistent, from both my 5.7 Hemis (06 Durango Limited, 11 JGC Laredo) than my EB FX4. The only Hemi I had that got worse than my EB was my 12 SRT8 Jeep, but thats a different Hemi Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Unfortunately the sound of the EB leaves much to be desired. It'll never sound like a V8, no matter what exhaust you get. You can do a few tricks to get the turbos a bit louder, and that helps for most people. I love the sound of turbos. I came from an i4 Jeep Patriot, the EB sounds way more beastly when I put it to the floor. Still, its pretty neat having a 6 cylinder which produces more torque and hp than the v8 and sounds stealth bomber quiet and gives me the advertised mpg -- I think I can live with performance and gas efficiency over a lower rumbling sound. I got better MPG, or more consistent, from both my 5.7 Hemis (06 Durango Limited, 11 JGC Laredo) than my EB FX4. The only Hemi I had that got worse than my EB was my 12 SRT8 Jeep, but thats a different Hemi Sounds like when you're behind power, you use it and therefor your mileage sucks. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/14/2015 11:28:27 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
CGI = Compacted Graphite Iron, much better block material for high output truck engine. This is about the most high tech stuff you can use to build an engine block today. The 2nd generation Ford turbo engines look extremely well engineered and built. Main bearing caps are cast as part of the block and cooling/oiling capabilities are far beyond the old SBC generation of engine. As always though when dealing with crap like physics there must be tradeoffs. For example just how much room are they leaving on the top end safety and performance margins? I am too dumb in those fields to compare the laptop generation vs the bolt on gen, for performance additives. For example are the Direct Injection components adequate to pump 475 horsepower from the stock 325? I would guess that an extra 50-75 would be doable easily. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
That 2.7 actually has me intrigued. 325 hp out of that little motherfucker. 164 cubic inches. Dayum.
I noticed they chose iron for the engine block. Strength concern with aluminum? This is about the most high tech stuff you can use to build an engine block today. The 2nd generation Ford turbo engines look extremely well engineered and built. Main bearing caps are cast as part of the block and cooling/oiling capabilities are far beyond the old SBC generation of engine. As always though when dealing with crap like physics there must be tradeoffs. For example just how much room are they leaving on the top end safety and performance margins? I am too dumb in those fields to compare the laptop generation vs the bolt on gen, for performance additives. For example are the Direct Injection components adequate to pump 475 horsepower from the stock 325? I would guess that an extra 50-75 would be doable easily. The flow rate of DI injectors is off the charts, the high pressure fuel pump will determine overall max flow rate. That is assuming the low pressure fuel pump can keep up, I installed a walbro 255 inline to help thr low pressure pump. So when its all said and done I have three fuel pumps but DI injectors are untouched and moving lots of fuel (e85). |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/14/2015 12:49:46 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I still have time to change my mind, I'll let you know how it goes.
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You guys had me second guessing the 5.0 vs 3.5 Eco but I think I'll be happy with the V8, can't go wrong with old faithful.
I'm sure you'll like it but remember old faithful is younger than the EB. I'm really, seriously, considering the 3.5 Eco... later down the road a nice aftermarket CAI and tune would just set it off. I don't see going back to non-turbo'd engines after owning mine. I saw the other day that Navigators get more HP and TQ in there's, I wonder if they will bump up the F150 to match. I still have time to change my mind, I'll let you know how it goes.
After driving both engines, I went with the 3.5 and I don't regret it a single bit. I drove a 5.0 a couple of weeks ago, after owning my truck for 2 years, and the difference is even more than I remember. Just yesterday, I loaded a 91 octane tune from MPT on my truck, and holy crap, it's an absolute animal! I can't believe there's so much hidden power in that engine, and all it takes is $420 to tap into it. If you want power, with the option to increase it even further, you just have to go with the EcoBoost. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/14/2015 1:21:38 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: After driving both engines, I went with the 3.5 and I don't regret it a single bit. I drove a 5.0 a couple of weeks ago, after owning my truck for 2 years, and the difference is even more than I remember. Just yesterday, I loaded a 91 octane tune from MPT on my truck, and holy crap, it's an absolute animal! I can't believe there's so much hidden power in that engine, and all it takes is $420 to tap into it. If you want power, with the option to increase it even further, you just have to go with the EcoBoost. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I still have time to change my mind, I'll let you know how it goes. After driving both engines, I went with the 3.5 and I don't regret it a single bit. I drove a 5.0 a couple of weeks ago, after owning my truck for 2 years, and the difference is even more than I remember. Just yesterday, I loaded a 91 octane tune from MPT on my truck, and holy crap, it's an absolute animal! I can't believe there's so much hidden power in that engine, and all it takes is $420 to tap into it. If you want power, with the option to increase it even further, you just have to go with the EcoBoost. Damn, there's only a $561 difference between the 5.0 + standard tow package and the 3.5 Eco + max tow package. Did you do the CAI too? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/14/2015 1:55:47 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Damn, there's only a $561 difference between the 5.0 + standard tow package and the 3.5 Eco + max tow package. Did you do the CAI too? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: I still have time to change my mind, I'll let you know how it goes. After driving both engines, I went with the 3.5 and I don't regret it a single bit. I drove a 5.0 a couple of weeks ago, after owning my truck for 2 years, and the difference is even more than I remember. Just yesterday, I loaded a 91 octane tune from MPT on my truck, and holy crap, it's an absolute animal! I can't believe there's so much hidden power in that engine, and all it takes is $420 to tap into it. If you want power, with the option to increase it even further, you just have to go with the EcoBoost. Damn, there's only a $561 difference between the 5.0 + standard tow package and the 3.5 Eco + max tow package. Did you do the CAI too? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/14/2015 1:56:43 PM EDT
[#24]
That's a bargain, in my opinion. Honestly, I would pay $2000 more to have the EcoBoost. No, my truck is completely stock except for the MPT tune. I do have 3.73 gearing, which really helps off the line. Even driving at 30mph, it roasts the tires if I floor it now. I can only imagine having this tune with a 2015 and its weight reduction. I don't think you can get the EcoBoost with anything greater than 3.55 gearing anymore, though, which is silly.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/14/2015 2:27:12 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Will you actually tow? And how often? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I still have time to change my mind, I'll let you know how it goes. After driving both engines, I went with the 3.5 and I don't regret it a single bit. I drove a 5.0 a couple of weeks ago, after owning my truck for 2 years, and the difference is even more than I remember. Just yesterday, I loaded a 91 octane tune from MPT on my truck, and holy crap, it's an absolute animal! I can't believe there's so much hidden power in that engine, and all it takes is $420 to tap into it. If you want power, with the option to increase it even further, you just have to go with the EcoBoost. Damn, there's only a $561 difference between the 5.0 + standard tow package and the 3.5 Eco + max tow package. Did you do the CAI too? I probably won't tow much at all, though with the new truck I'd probably be volunteered to tow the range plates and trailer on the next few range trips. The difference in the overall price is about $250, I figured why not. The (Standard) Class IV Trailer Hitch Includes: • 4-pin/7-pin wiring harness • Class IV trailer hitch receiver • Smart Trailer Tow Connector *Tows up to 5,000lbs. Max Trailer Tow Package includes: • 3.55 Electronic-locking rear axle • 4-pin/7-pin wiring harness • Auxiliary transmission oil cooler • Class IV trailer hitch receiver • Smart Trailer Tow Connector (standard on LARIAT and higher) • Integrated Trailer Brake Controller • Upgraded front stabilizer bar • Upgraded rear bumper * Tows up to 12,000lbs ETA, the Max Tow package isn't available on the 5.0, I suppose Ford thinks 5000lbs is max for the engine. it's only available on the 3.5 Eco, so if it's there, why not? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/14/2015 2:32:12 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I probably won't tow much at all, though with the new truck I'd probably be volunteered to tow the range plates and trailer on the next few range trips.
The difference in the overall price is about $250, I figured why not. The (Standard) Class IV Trailer Hitch Includes: • 4-pin/7-pin wiring harness • Class IV trailer hitch receiver • Smart Trailer Tow Connector *Tows up to 5,000lbs. Max Trailer Tow Package includes: • 3.55 Electronic-locking rear axle • 4-pin/7-pin wiring harness • Auxiliary transmission oil cooler • Class IV trailer hitch receiver • Smart Trailer Tow Connector (standard on LARIAT and higher) • Integrated Trailer Brake Controller • Upgraded front stabilizer bar • Upgraded rear bumper * Tows up to 12,000lbs Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I still have time to change my mind, I'll let you know how it goes.
After driving both engines, I went with the 3.5 and I don't regret it a single bit. I drove a 5.0 a couple of weeks ago, after owning my truck for 2 years, and the difference is even more than I remember. Just yesterday, I loaded a 91 octane tune from MPT on my truck, and holy crap, it's an absolute animal! I can't believe there's so much hidden power in that engine, and all it takes is $420 to tap into it. If you want power, with the option to increase it even further, you just have to go with the EcoBoost. Damn, there's only a $561 difference between the 5.0 + standard tow package and the 3.5 Eco + max tow package. Did you do the CAI too? I probably won't tow much at all, though with the new truck I'd probably be volunteered to tow the range plates and trailer on the next few range trips.
The difference in the overall price is about $250, I figured why not. The (Standard) Class IV Trailer Hitch Includes: • 4-pin/7-pin wiring harness • Class IV trailer hitch receiver • Smart Trailer Tow Connector *Tows up to 5,000lbs. Max Trailer Tow Package includes: • 3.55 Electronic-locking rear axle • 4-pin/7-pin wiring harness • Auxiliary transmission oil cooler • Class IV trailer hitch receiver • Smart Trailer Tow Connector (standard on LARIAT and higher) • Integrated Trailer Brake Controller • Upgraded front stabilizer bar • Upgraded rear bumper * Tows up to 12,000lbs See, Max Tow with the Ecoboost used to be 3.73 gear. I don't like that they changed it. Heck, you used to be able to get 4.10 gear with the EcoBoost as well. Now I'm pretty sure 3.55 is as big as you can get. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/14/2015 2:43:37 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: See, Max Tow with the Ecoboost used to be 3.73 gear. I don't like that they changed it. Heck, you used to be able to get 4.10 gear with the EcoBoost as well. Now I'm pretty sure 3.55 is as big as you can get. Yep, 3.55 is max on the Ecoboost, the 3.73 is available on the 5.0. I think I'll be good with it, on top of the eventual CAI and tune the only other changes I plan on doing is a 2.5" level, 3" rear block and 285/65/20 (34.5") tires. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/14/2015 5:44:44 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The 5.0 Coyote has nothing in common with the 302 of yesteryear beyond the displacement. It's a new engine, and it's not tried and tested as you claim. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Great synopsis. People don't understand how the Ford tech is changing the ball game right now. It is sad that the 302 will not benefit from a factory Ecoboost setup. The next generation Ecoboost will be the cat's meow from what I see. No Ford is using early 1980s technology. Turbos have been around a LONG time. Gasoline Turbos died in popularity by the late 1990s, due to fact they just don't last. They don't even require fully synthetic oil. Which is insane. The Employment Prevention Agency and Ford don't care about engine longevity, why would they. They won't last like the 5.0 will, which is great tried and tested engine. The 5.0 Coyote has nothing in common with the 302 of yesteryear beyond the displacement. It's a new engine, and it's not tried and tested as you claim. That is true. In fact, it doesnt even share displacement. The new 5.0 Coyote is 4951cc engine. The old 302 "5.0" was actually only 4942cc so it really was only a 4.9
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/14/2015 6:21:47 PM EDT
[#29]
So I whipped out the plastic to order the 3.5 Eco and they tell me that the Inventory Manager only works on weekdays. Now I have another whole day to change my mind back to the 5.0 V8.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/14/2015 7:04:52 PM EDT
[#30]
Get the ecoboost -- you're getting the top of the line everything else, don't stop at the engine.... It's more hp and torque AND better mpg.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/14/2015 9:00:19 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Get the ecoboost -- you're getting the top of the line everything else, don't stop at the engine.... It's more hp and torque AND better mpg. I will. The price difference came out to be $481 for the 3.5 Eco and Max tow over the 5.0, seems a little off to me but the Inventory Manager will send me an invoice with the options list first thing Monday. I'm getting a new BOV (grocery getter)! |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/16/2015 1:30:37 PM EDT
[#32]
The 3.5 Ecoboost Platinum has been officially ordered!
 |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/16/2015 1:32:30 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The 3.5 Ecoboost Platinum has been officially ordered!
https://scontent-mia.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfp1/v/t1.0-9/11071607_10152630915265899_4360562076331619823_n.jpg?oh=d652adf48fccfd6f2c5be7e6293c0e09&oe=558864C4 Good choice in color. Now order an SCT X4 tuner from MPT and unleash the BEAST! |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/16/2015 1:52:43 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That's a bargain, in my opinion. Honestly, I would pay $2000 more to have the EcoBoost. No, my truck is completely stock except for the MPT tune. I do have 3.73 gearing, which really helps off the line. Even driving at 30mph, it roasts the tires if I floor it now. I can only imagine having this tune with a 2015 and its weight reduction. I don't think you can get the EcoBoost with anything greater than 3.55 gearing anymore, though, which is silly. What's the expected life of the turbos and how much are they to replace? Do you expect your turbos to go out sooner now that you put the tune on it and if so how much sooner? I saw the post about the ford tests at 100% at 10 mins 1500 times, but real world are we talking a turbo replacement at 150k for a stock truck and sooner with a tune? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/16/2015 2:30:23 PM EDT
[#35]
Price for a turbo is $595 a side for a reman....
So it would be about the same as purchasing a good set of tires. http://www.turbochargerpros.com/turbochargers/2012/Ford/F_Series_Trucks/Turbocharger.html |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/16/2015 2:38:30 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Turbo failure is usually due to the bearings in the turbo failing. The cause of bearing failure in turbos is usually due to the oil coking when a hot turbo is shut down. The oil is no longer circulating when you shut down the engine and the hot turbo can cook the oil. The 80's was a huge time of transition. Fuel injection, intake manifolds, ignition were way behind pollution control requirements. By the 90's, engines were making enough power through improving all those areas that turbo's were not needed for most applications. The turbo's in gasoline engines in the 80's were a quick bolt on solution to provide power. The turbos on the Ecoboost engine are water cooled to prevent coking. When the engine is shutdown, the water continues to circulate by natural convection and cools the turbo to prevent coking. Water cooling is what changed on gasoline engine automotive turbo's since the 80's. Also, testing was done on Ecoboost engines specifically to prove that even under extreme conditions the turbo will be cooled sufficiently by the water cooling system to prevent oil coking. ETA: Somebody already posted a link describing the water cooling test. 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"........ 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. The 80's was a huge time of transition. Fuel injection, intake manifolds, ignition were way behind pollution control requirements. By the 90's, engines were making enough power through improving all those areas that turbo's were not needed for most applications. The turbo's in gasoline engines in the 80's were a quick bolt on solution to provide power. The turbos on the Ecoboost engine are water cooled to prevent coking. When the engine is shutdown, the water continues to circulate by natural convection and cools the turbo to prevent coking. Water cooling is what changed on gasoline engine automotive turbo's since the 80's. Also, testing was done on Ecoboost engines specifically to prove that even under extreme conditions the turbo will be cooled sufficiently by the water cooling system to prevent oil coking. ETA: Somebody already posted a link describing the water cooling test. That's great they water cooled the turbos. It's actually a very good idea. The problem is the engine already has a lot of overheating issues, this was just 5 seconds on google: http://www.f150online.com/forums/v6-engines-including-ecoboost/476614-3-5-ecoboost-overheating.html http://www.f150online.com/forums/towing-hauling/489004-overheating-ecoboost-when-towing.html http://www.reddit.com/r/Ford/comments/2eqrrm/2014_flex_w_ecoboost_just_pissed_itself/ http://www.fordproblems.com/trends/ecoboost-engine/ Like I said FORD was making this. It does not change the basic fact of turbo charging, that you have metal parts moving at 80,000 - 120,000 RPM. The engine from top to bottom is an abortion. It will go down as the gasoline equivalent of their 6.0 diesel fiasco. IF you must have forced induction in a gasoline engine, for longevity, supercharging is a MUCH better alternative. There are better options. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/16/2015 11:08:50 PM EDT
[#37]
5 seconds on google shows me that every engine ever made is junk.
http://www.cumminsforum.com/forum/94-98-powertrain/84257-help-overheating.html http://www.cumminsforum.com/forum/89-93-powertrain/518098-over-heating-please-help-me.html http://www.cumminsforum.com/forum/4th-gen-powertrain/471532-2012-2500-overheating.html http://coloradofans.com/forums/185-engines-technical-discussion/217041-2015-colorado-overheating-issue.html http://corvettec7fiasco.blogspot.com/2014/12/2015-chevrolet-corvette-c7-z06.html http://www.cargurus.com/Cars/Discussion-ds615604 So far the 3.5 Eco-boost is proving to be one of the longest running modern engines in current inventory, As well as one of the best selling. They are great engines!!! It was a great engine in 2007, and continues to be a great engine from what I am seeing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/16/2015 11:30:00 PM EDT
[#38]
i'll get excited about them when they stop putting "eco" in front of the description and stick them on V8s
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/17/2015 4:32:30 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Maybe you know, or read differently, but the engineers at Ford have stated otherwise in on the record publications. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I am just not 100% on the EB stuff yet. The Ford v8s are proven long term. Maybe a few years down the road but right now... The 3.5EB has been around longer than the Coyote, or exactly the same amount of time, at a minimum. The Coyote is an improved design of the "5.0 Cammer" which was a 4.6 DOHC engine that goes back to 1993. Most of the geometry and design is the same as the other MOD motors with a few subtle differences. the EB platform has only been in development since around 2005. Maybe you know, or read differently, but the engineers at Ford have stated otherwise in on the record publications. Coyote is just the most recent iteration of the modular family, which debuted in 1991. V6, V8, V10 and technically the V12 that Aston Martin still uses. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/17/2015 5:04:06 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
5star tuning has THE weakest 93 performance tune I've driven yet. MPT, Unleashed and SSI all make it feel stock. Cool. Rock on. I didn't want the firmest shifts of some of the other tuners. Livernois had some good hype early on then got firmer in their shift maps. Steered me away from them too. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/17/2015 5:19:28 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How doe the EB sound? How would you compare it to the 5.7 in the ram? I have a '14 5.7 RAM...my brother in law has a '14 EB F150... Normally, the EB is pretty quiet, Ford is known for doing that. When he has to pull up a hill or gives it some ass, you can faintly hear the turbos spool (man, I love that sound). Looking under the hood, it seems a different intake would be pretty interesting to install the way it is run. The 5.7? American muscle man...the 5.7 is a really nice sounding engine. I've had many sports cars in my life and truth be told, I'm kind of burnt out on them. I've left the Ram bone stock and it makes a good amount of engine noise just driving...sounds nice. Personally...I'm kind of against putting loud exhaust on trucks anyway...they are designed to hold on optimal RPMs for power and tend to drone like mad. My former '03 Cobra or '04 GTO on the other hand? 6-speed FTW...raking through the gears on those cars was beautiful... |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/17/2015 6:10:12 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I have a '14 5.7 RAM...my brother in law has a '14 EB F150... Normally, the EB is pretty quiet, Ford is known for doing that. When he has to pull up a hill or gives it some ass, you can faintly hear the turbos spool (man, I love that sound). Looking under the hood, it seems a different intake would be pretty interesting to install the way it is run. The 5.7? American muscle man...the 5.7 is a really nice sounding engine. I've had many sports cars in my life and truth be told, I'm kind of burnt out on them. I've left the Ram bone stock and it makes a good amount of engine noise just driving...sounds nice. Personally...I'm kind of against putting loud exhaust on trucks anyway...they are designed to hold on optimal RPMs for power and tend to drone like mad. My former '03 Cobra or '04 GTO on the other hand? 6-speed FTW...raking through the gears on those cars was beautiful... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
How doe the EB sound? How would you compare it to the 5.7 in the ram? I have a '14 5.7 RAM...my brother in law has a '14 EB F150... Normally, the EB is pretty quiet, Ford is known for doing that. When he has to pull up a hill or gives it some ass, you can faintly hear the turbos spool (man, I love that sound). Looking under the hood, it seems a different intake would be pretty interesting to install the way it is run. The 5.7? American muscle man...the 5.7 is a really nice sounding engine. I've had many sports cars in my life and truth be told, I'm kind of burnt out on them. I've left the Ram bone stock and it makes a good amount of engine noise just driving...sounds nice. Personally...I'm kind of against putting loud exhaust on trucks anyway...they are designed to hold on optimal RPMs for power and tend to drone like mad. My former '03 Cobra or '04 GTO on the other hand? 6-speed FTW...raking through the gears on those cars was beautiful... It's exceptionally easy, to be honest. The intake kits only replace up to the first set of band-clamps on the tubing after the split. Not much digging around at all. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/17/2015 6:18:43 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Good choice in color. Now order an SCT X4 tuner from MPT and unleash the BEAST! Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: The 3.5 Ecoboost Platinum has been officially ordered! https://scontent-mia.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfp1/v/t1.0-9/11071607_10152630915265899_4360562076331619823_n.jpg?oh=d652adf48fccfd6f2c5be7e6293c0e09&oe=558864C4 Good choice in color. Now order an SCT X4 tuner from MPT and unleash the BEAST! Thanks, I'm still in the homework stages of the tune. I've seen a few from 5 Star and Livernois too. The truck probably won't be in until late May, early June anyways so it'll give them all some more time to tweak the 2015 tunes. In the meantime I'm shopping for a level kit and 35" tires. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/17/2015 11:06:05 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's exceptionally easy, to be honest. The intake kits only replace up to the first set of band-clamps on the tubing after the split. Not much digging around at all. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
How doe the EB sound? How would you compare it to the 5.7 in the ram? I have a '14 5.7 RAM...my brother in law has a '14 EB F150... Normally, the EB is pretty quiet, Ford is known for doing that. When he has to pull up a hill or gives it some ass, you can faintly hear the turbos spool (man, I love that sound). Looking under the hood, it seems a different intake would be pretty interesting to install the way it is run. The 5.7? American muscle man...the 5.7 is a really nice sounding engine. I've had many sports cars in my life and truth be told, I'm kind of burnt out on them. I've left the Ram bone stock and it makes a good amount of engine noise just driving...sounds nice. Personally...I'm kind of against putting loud exhaust on trucks anyway...they are designed to hold on optimal RPMs for power and tend to drone like mad. My former '03 Cobra or '04 GTO on the other hand? 6-speed FTW...raking through the gears on those cars was beautiful... It's exceptionally easy, to be honest. The intake kits only replace up to the first set of band-clamps on the tubing after the split. Not much digging around at all. It's very easy to do and should take you about an hour depending on the kit you ordered. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 10:47:41 PM EDT
[#45]
You know the only thing that chaps my ass, the tundra is the only pickup that retains 63% of it's value after 5 years
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 11:00:03 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You know the only thing that chaps my ass, the tundra is the only pickup that retains 63% of it's value after 5 years
Not a big factor really, Tundra's are getting pretty long in the tooth and that value will drop tremendously when an upgrade (new model) is introduced. Got to paw a 2015 3.5 EB last week at a SBS comparison seminar and I must say they are one hell of a nice truck. Sticker on it was a tad over $67K, the Silverado we put up against it was $58K and was similarly equipped. Brand loyal Ford owners will probably stick with the F150 even though the insurance rates are going to go up on them due to collision repair costs. Either way, congrats on your new truck !!! |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 11:08:01 PM EDT
[#47]
Ford is doing some interesting things with turbos nowadays.
Kinda like Chrysler did back in the 80's with much success at the time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 11:12:15 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Brand loyal Ford owners will probably stick with the F150 even though the insurance rates are going to go up on them due to collision repair costs. my 2015 F150 insurance rates went up $8 a month coming from a 2010 jeep patriot. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/30/2015 11:40:18 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The 3.5 Ecoboost Platinum has been officially ordered! Great choice! I have been very happy with my 2012 eco f150, not a single issue in 42k. My Father in law bought an early 2011 ecoboost new, his just hit 95k, he did just have to buy a battery for his.. other than that its been 100%. We would both buy again. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/31/2015 12:10:56 AM EDT
[#50]
I just bought a 2013 with the 5.0. Could not be happier. Quiet, but has a little stank when you give it some gas.
|
|
|
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.
