You are correct. I know because i own a 2011 Mustang 5.0. I know very well how the engine performs.



My guess is that with a custom tune on both engines the 3.5l will gain even more hp and ground on the 5.0. Pretty easy to add PSI when the turbos are there.






And with the other statements that theres more left on the table. Adding TT to the 5.0 and what not. You are getting way way out there. You could add TT and a roots and n20 to the 3.5l and it will make more hp. I guess i dont know where you draw your debate line at?

Either way both engines look promising. Im not pro 5.0 or pro 3.5. I just dont like seeing the ecoboost get a bad rep from people that have no idea what they are talking about. Contrary to what said people will tell you.


I havent decided which engine will be in my new truck as of yet, im still kind of waiting for some real world numbers on MPG on each of the engines, including the 6.2.

 

At least we finally get to argue over which engine is better instead of which is worse, which IMO would be the argument of past Ford offerings. I am interested in seeing which motor will produce better MPG figures when towing under 2500 lbs at low rpm mixed driving. It appears the 5.0 has enough low end torque to keep the engine speeds down , but what happens with a small displacement engine before and after the turbos spool. Will power be insufficient before spooling and MPG suffer after?

 

Agreed, we have a good problem on our hands here. Which is best for what job, not which will we regret.

Im not sure of the size of the turbos being used, but i would assume they arent to large. Therefore im betting there is no turbo lag if thats what your talking about. Some people have complained about turbo lag during testing but id be willing to bet money that has more to do with te Fly by wire delay that is in all new trucks. Its my beliefe that custom tuning will yield some very impessive gains for the 3.5l engine.

My bet is that the 5.0 will more than atiquate for 90% of what people need. Heck the 5.4l did what more than 90% of people needed. If it wasnt for the compeition stepping up the HP wars then the 5.4l would still look very tuff. It makes 320hp/390ft lbs. Only because there was a 385 hp hemi, and 400 hp tundra does it look slow. Most 90's half ton pick ups only made 245hp/350 ft lbs and got worse gas milage doing it, and they where really slow. Its just escalation of expectation. People want there cake and want to eat it to. Its gotten way past what can the truck actually tow.

So with that said the 5.0 making 360/385 it will be able to tow what ever you need without issue. Heck my 99 5.4l with maybe 300 hp tows my 7500lb 24ft enclosed race trailer @75mph on the interstate every weekend with out issue.

Im expecting that towing 2500 lbs will be in the 12-13.5 range for mpg pending wind resistance. Just a guess based on what i have seen.

 

That is not what I was talking about. I was wondering which engine would tow light to medium loads more efficiently. Obviously at a certain point the turbos have to spool to move weight, when they do does any economy advantage the Ecoboost have disappear. So far I have been getting 15.5-16 mpg towing 2500 lbs in mixed driving with a 5.0.

 

How much of your annual mileage is towing? If it is only a small percentage of the total then it doesn't matter much. I only tow about 5000 miles a year out of 30000 miles total. So if I get better fuel economy the majority of the time that is all I care about.
All things being equal I don't think there will be much difference in fuel economy.
But, the ecoboost develops more torque and more horsepower at a lower rpm than the 5.0 so I suspect it will be a nicer towing experience.
I'll find out in a few weeks when mine comes in. And I'll give a report on what I find.
My trailer is about 8300 lb.
Al

 

97%..................

 

Full disclosure: "It makes 320hp/390ft lbs" on e85 which no one uses.

310/365 would make more sense.

Heck I just heard last week that Ford says EB makes 450/460 ft lbs on premium...

 

Really? Where did you hear that?

 

Oh Crap I read in on a forum. Now try to recall which one!

 

Says you..... In the mid west we all use it if we can. Its cheaper and if you can make more power.....kinda a no brainer.

 

I too chose the 5.0L after attending the same event at AutoClub Speedway in Fontana (think it was 11/13/10). Roger Penske built the track, the name was changed recently.

Dunno if this is relevant or not. Several years ago, Edmunds tested all the new full sized pickups (Ford, Chebbie/GMC, Dodge, Titan, Tundra). The 305 HP 5.4L when dyno'd: 242 HP

 

3.5 > 5.0

oh wait... ?

 

OK... Hey look I'm a corn grower myself, But much of the mid west, you can't even find E85, and its not a "no brainer". Only has 2/3 the energy of reg gas. So unless its 2/3 the price... it costs you more, and you get 2/3 the range regardless of price.

And everyones looking to get less out of a tank right now...

 

Im not going to start an E85 debate, because honestly i would love to, because there are several miss conceptions about e85, but it is going to take us to far off topic.

So....

FORD FTW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

I drove the ecoboost and the new 6.2 back to back yesterday and the ecoboost is not even close to the 6.2. At least not off the showroom floor. I went to buy a ecoboost and after driving both i went home to rethink it.