Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums > Performance, Engines & Troubleshooting > 5.0L Coyote
Sign in using an external account
Register Forgot Password?


5.0L Coyote 5.0l Ford OHC Coyote engine for 2011+

Welcome to Ford-Trucks Forums!
Welcome to Ford-Trucks.com.

You are currently viewing our forums as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Ford-Trucks Forums community today!





 
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 04-05-2011, 10:31 AM
jweidert's Avatar
jweidert jweidert is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: California
Posts: 184
jweidert is starting off with a positive reputation.
Though my mind was made up....

I'm convinced on the F-150 (vs F-250), but not convinced yet on the engine. I was leaning toward the EB up until last night when I read through all of the impressive information on the 5.0 page. In fact, I was counting out the 5.0 just based off the fact that on paper alone, it's second from the bottom of the 4 engines, but I now realize it warrants serious consideration.

Tim, I can't remember which thread you posted this in, but I think we are in the same boat....completely torn on the EB vs 5.0. I'm addicted to these forums and have done more reading in the last month than I did in 4 years of college :-) I'm not sure if it's helping or hurting, but after going through all of the 5.0 threads, I'm now wondering if the 5.0 is a safer bet than the 3.5. Here's a summary of my thoughts:

- The Ford torque curve shows a clear torque advantage in the 3.5 vs 5.0. However, the PUT test shows a much narrower gap. Not sure which one to believe, and what the differences are. PUT gave a great review of the 5.0 and are currently testing the 3.5, but not in an apples to apples comparison, which is frustrating.

- MPG results for the 5.0 seem more consistent than the 3.5. It's been difficult to tell if there's really a MPG advantage with the 3.5, and if so, how much it might be for a comparable truck. This goes for unloaded & towing scenarios, both of which are important.

- Seems the EB has the advantage at altitude because of the turbos, and an advantage for towing because of the higher torque, but it's unclear if those advantages are noticeable/significant enough to warrant one engine over the other. It's also unclear if the EB ultimately has to work significantly harder to achieve those results, and what the long term implications are.

- Speculation is that the 5.0 is "held back" from Ford and has more to give, whereas trying to tune/mod the 3.5 (not that this is needed) is much more risky and not advised. Although tuning any engine has risks, if the 5.0 truly has more to give and can be tuned to potentially out-perform the 3.5, seems there is a little more upside with the 5.0.

Both engines seem very capable. Perhaps there's just not enough data out there yet to make a really good informed decision about which would be best for a particular use case. My use case is: 10 tows on average (400 mile round trip) over the Summer of a 6500 - 7500 lb boat (wet with gear). Plan to do a reasonable lift (6" with 35s). Occasional trip to the mountains (6-8K altitude) throughout the year (Lake Tahoe), and most of the time, it's an around town daily driver vehicle. Looking at a Lariat or higher (FX4 if it had a few additional options), SCREW, 4x4 w/ 6.5 bed & 3.73s.

Bottom line, trying to determine the best engine for the long haul. All of the info in the forum is great, just trying to put the pieces of the puzzle together.
__________________
2005 Ford Excursion Limited 6.0 PSD (RIP, Lemon Law)
Desire a 2011+ F150....trying to decide between EB * 5.0
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 04-05-2011, 05:28 PM
tseekins's Avatar
tseekins tseekins is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hampton, Virginia
Posts: 18,976
tseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputation
I'll jump in with both feet first.

In my heart, I truly believe that the 5.0L will be all the motor an average Joe like me will ever need. This thing is a beast and it's what I intend to get.

The EB test drive open my eyes good and wide. The 157" wheel base 4x4 was pulled effortlessly by this little plant. The EB is also available with 4.10 gearing for the ultra serious tow jockey. If I were towing 7K-8K monthly or more, I would likely want the 4.10's only because they are a factory option.

I wonder if the 4.10's would liven the 5.0L up a little or just make it a fuel sucker. The good thing is, the OE 4.10 gear set can be purchased from Ford.

So in summary, for the fella who tows 6500-8500 monthly I think either engine will perform just fine. I believe a 5.0L truck properly equipped is rated to pull 9800 lbs. Not too shabby for a pony car engine!
__________________
Tim
SCPO United States Coast Guard Retired
2011 F-150 XLT 4x4 Ecoboost
2010 Ford Focus
2004 Expedition XLT 4x2

FTE Guidelines
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 04-05-2011, 06:05 PM
jweidert's Avatar
jweidert jweidert is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: California
Posts: 184
jweidert is starting off with a positive reputation.
I agree with your points, although the Ford 4.10 gears go back to Ford's option strategy thread I started a week or two back. So far, the only model I've seen it available in a SCREW 6.5 bed is the FX4. Nothing wrong with the FX4....I like it, but wish it had a few more options. I don't want to beat a dead horse on the option thing though, which is why I'm also torn on waiting for the '12s to see if Ford corrects some of this and makes certain options more widely available (I'm willing to pay for the options I want )

I think your assessment makes a lot of sense for the person who tows monthly/more frequently. For the 10 times I tow over the Summer months primarily, that's not as big of a consideration. I think many of us are trying to balance performance with relative economy (as is relates to a heavy truck).

Perhaps we should lobby for a Ford loaner program....borrow a truck for one week, test it out with a few different engines, then make the decision based off first hand experience. :-)

I'm back to my reading, and appreciate everyone who share's their experiences with either engine so that the rest of us may learn and figure out what to purchase....
__________________
2005 Ford Excursion Limited 6.0 PSD (RIP, Lemon Law)
Desire a 2011+ F150....trying to decide between EB * 5.0
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 04-05-2011, 06:27 PM
jweidert's Avatar
jweidert jweidert is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: California
Posts: 184
jweidert is starting off with a positive reputation.
Just a quick FYI, I was playing around with the Ford configurator....if you want 4.10 on a FX4, you are "stuck" with the EB....no choice for the 5.0. I haven't tried all configs, just the one I'm interested in.
__________________
2005 Ford Excursion Limited 6.0 PSD (RIP, Lemon Law)
Desire a 2011+ F150....trying to decide between EB * 5.0
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 04-10-2011, 05:50 AM
bent-1 bent-1 is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Weirton WV
Posts: 150
bent-1 is starting off with a positive reputation.
Here's a review of the 3.5 vs 5.0

Road Test Review: 2011 Ford F-150 XLT 5.0-liter V-8 - PickupTrucks.com News
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 04-10-2011, 10:20 AM
jweidert's Avatar
jweidert jweidert is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: California
Posts: 184
jweidert is starting off with a positive reputation.
Thank you for the article, I read though this a few weeks back. This is the article that put the 5.0 on my list. The other potential major consideration is the fuel tank size. I haven't been able to confirm whether or not the 36 gallon tank in a SCREW 6.5 bed is available only with the 5.0, or if you can get it with the EB as well. My dealer confirmed that the 26 (IIRC) gallon tank is the only tank available for the EB regardless of vehicle configuration, which could be a potential deal breaker if true. The EB's MPG does not appear that much better over the 5.0 to where the smaller tank makes sense and significantly reduces the range of the vehicle.
__________________
2005 Ford Excursion Limited 6.0 PSD (RIP, Lemon Law)
Desire a 2011+ F150....trying to decide between EB * 5.0
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 04-10-2011, 08:58 PM
powerstroke72's Avatar
powerstroke72 powerstroke72 is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: SW Virginia
Posts: 23,361
powerstroke72 has a superb reputationpowerstroke72 has a superb reputationpowerstroke72 has a superb reputationpowerstroke72 has a superb reputationpowerstroke72 has a superb reputationpowerstroke72 has a superb reputationpowerstroke72 has a superb reputationpowerstroke72 has a superb reputationpowerstroke72 has a superb reputationpowerstroke72 has a superb reputationpowerstroke72 has a superb reputation
Your dealer is correct. For now, the only tank available with the EB is the 26 gallon regardless of wheelbase. At least according to the order guide that is. Also, Tim (tseekins) asked the Ford rep when he had his EcoBoost test drive and he confirmed this, if I recall correctly.
__________________
John
2013 Jeep Wrangler Unlimited Rubicon 10th Anniversary Edition, Black / Black Leather
2013 Ford Taurus SHO, Tuxedo Black / Black Leather
2011 F-350 4x4 Lariat Ultimate, Oxford White / Pale Adobe 6.7L PSD 3.55 ELD / Gone but not forgotten.
Moderators, Guidelines, and How They are Enforced / FTE Forum Guidelines

RIP Paul / Hdslider.....you are truly missed.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 04-10-2011, 09:10 PM
tseekins's Avatar
tseekins tseekins is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hampton, Virginia
Posts: 18,976
tseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputation
Quote:
Originally Posted by powerstroke72 View Post
Your dealer is correct. For now, the only tank available with the EB is the 26 gallon regardless of wheelbase. At least according to the order guide that is. Also, Tim (tseekins) asked the Ford rep when he had his EcoBoost test drive and he confirmed this, if I recall correctly.
In fact, the ecoboost rep didn't know that a 36 was available on the other engine choices. When I corrected him, his question to me was "why would you need a larger tank"? I said, "really"?
__________________
Tim
SCPO United States Coast Guard Retired
2011 F-150 XLT 4x4 Ecoboost
2010 Ford Focus
2004 Expedition XLT 4x2

FTE Guidelines
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 04-11-2011, 12:00 AM
jweidert's Avatar
jweidert jweidert is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: California
Posts: 184
jweidert is starting off with a positive reputation.
Well, let's see. The EB is maybe 1-2 mpg better (probably closer to 1, if not dead even)....not enough of a difference to warrant 10 fewer gallons. You would think if Ford marketed this as THE tow engine (which they are), most people are traveling long distances while towing and would want/expect the bigger tank. Doesn't make sense at all. If the EB was pulling 4-5 mpgs better, the smaller tank would make sense, but it's not...not even close.

I had nothing better to do this afternoon then drop by my local Ford dealer for an hour or so. Dealer let me take out a 5.0 Platinum (SCREW, 4x4, 3.73, 5.5 bed) and an XLT, 2wd, extended cab, 6.5 bed, EB (this was the only EB they had, otherwise I would have tried the make the comparison more close).

I did two identical 20 mile loops on the freeway, reset the MPG gauge at the exact same point for each vehicle, and drove them identically...1/2 of the loop was flat highway, other was rolling hills, with a decent steep grade at the the end. I set the cruise control at 70mph for both trucks and didn't touch it except to exit and turn around. If I was to bet, my money would have been on the EB since it was all around lighter and only 2wd, not a SCREW 4x4,

Both trucks averaged 18mpg almost to the tenth on the LCD screen. I was impressed with both vehicles especially going up the steep grade....if either down shifted, it was very subtle, but both held 70 VERY well, and no significant rev of the engine. The torque & TT was about the only noticeable difference, definitely put me back in my seat a little more in the EB than the 5.0 through most of the RPM range. Again, I was VERY impressed with BOTH engines.

My conclusion (and a very elementary one at best) is that the 5.0 works consistently over a wider operating range. The EB is more efficient until those turbos kick in and tends to be a little more "jumpy", with fuel economy tied to a much lighter foot on the throttle vs the 5.0. It's probably a better long range flat highway vehicle from a MPG standpoint, but the moment you introduce any hills, rolling terrain, etc, the engine appears to work a little harder and evens out any MPG gains over the 5.0

Seems to boil down to torque, acceleration (both favor the EB) vs sound and overall steady consistent performance (5.0). Not sure if this helps anyone else....I'm still torn.

The next test I do will be with a 4500lb boat behind each, but I'm going to wait until the dealer has an EB more closely matched with the 5.0 that I drove.

One more interesting note....dealer had three EBs at the beginning of the week, none left when I went in today. They didn't sell one 5.0 this week, but sold just about every EB they have.
__________________
2005 Ford Excursion Limited 6.0 PSD (RIP, Lemon Law)
Desire a 2011+ F150....trying to decide between EB * 5.0
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 04-11-2011, 05:19 AM
tseekins's Avatar
tseekins tseekins is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hampton, Virginia
Posts: 18,976
tseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputation
^^^^^^ Excellent report sir, thank you.

I would like to see these same of reports in a year when some users have 12k-15K miles on their trucks.
__________________
Tim
SCPO United States Coast Guard Retired
2011 F-150 XLT 4x4 Ecoboost
2010 Ford Focus
2004 Expedition XLT 4x2

FTE Guidelines
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 07-02-2011, 07:27 PM
jonbar87's Avatar
jonbar87 jonbar87 is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 357
jonbar87 is starting off with a positive reputation.
https://www.linkedin.com/pub/jonathan-barnes/56/718/6a4
Quote:
Originally Posted by jweidert View Post
Well, let's see. The EB is maybe 1-2 mpg better (probably closer to 1, if not dead even)....not enough of a difference to warrant 10 fewer gallons. You would think if Ford marketed this as THE tow engine (which they are), most people are traveling long distances while towing and would want/expect the bigger tank. Doesn't make sense at all. If the EB was pulling 4-5 mpgs better, the smaller tank would make sense, but it's not...not even close.

I had nothing better to do this afternoon then drop by my local Ford dealer for an hour or so. Dealer let me take out a 5.0 Platinum (SCREW, 4x4, 3.73, 5.5 bed) and an XLT, 2wd, extended cab, 6.5 bed, EB (this was the only EB they had, otherwise I would have tried the make the comparison more close).

I did two identical 20 mile loops on the freeway, reset the MPG gauge at the exact same point for each vehicle, and drove them identically...1/2 of the loop was flat highway, other was rolling hills, with a decent steep grade at the the end. I set the cruise control at 70mph for both trucks and didn't touch it except to exit and turn around. If I was to bet, my money would have been on the EB since it was all around lighter and only 2wd, not a SCREW 4x4,

Both trucks averaged 18mpg almost to the tenth on the LCD screen. I was impressed with both vehicles especially going up the steep grade....if either down shifted, it was very subtle, but both held 70 VERY well, and no significant rev of the engine. The torque & TT was about the only noticeable difference, definitely put me back in my seat a little more in the EB than the 5.0 through most of the RPM range. Again, I was VERY impressed with BOTH engines.

My conclusion (and a very elementary one at best) is that the 5.0 works consistently over a wider operating range. The EB is more efficient until those turbos kick in and tends to be a little more "jumpy", with fuel economy tied to a much lighter foot on the throttle vs the 5.0. It's probably a better long range flat highway vehicle from a MPG standpoint, but the moment you introduce any hills, rolling terrain, etc, the engine appears to work a little harder and evens out any MPG gains over the 5.0

Seems to boil down to torque, acceleration (both favor the EB) vs sound and overall steady consistent performance (5.0). Not sure if this helps anyone else....I'm still torn.

The next test I do will be with a 4500lb boat behind each, but I'm going to wait until the dealer has an EB more closely matched with the 5.0 that I drove.

One more interesting note....dealer had three EBs at the beginning of the week, none left when I went in today. They didn't sell one 5.0 this week, but sold just about every EB they have.

Excellent review of both. Thanks so much!
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 07-12-2011, 09:58 PM
Fat Diesel's Avatar
Fat Diesel Fat Diesel is offline
Postmaster
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Morgan Hill, CA
Posts: 2,894
Fat Diesel is a name known to allFat Diesel is a name known to allFat Diesel is a name known to allFat Diesel is a name known to allFat Diesel is a name known to allFat Diesel is a name known to all
Go with the 5.0. Yes I am biased! But if you need a reason the Eco Boost has turbos that can fail right? I know Ford turbos are way better than they used to be but still a consideration long term.
__________________
Andy
2014 Fusion Energi Plug-In Hybrid Daily Driver
2012 Race Red Boss 302 Track Car
Early 99 F250 PSD 4x4 CC 6spd Common Mods 300,000+ Miles, No longer driven daily
1964 Falcon Convert 289 Toploader 9" 4 Wheel Disks
Nov '10 Recipient: "dedicated report-back tech thread poster" award!
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 07-13-2011, 05:40 AM
tseekins's Avatar
tseekins tseekins is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hampton, Virginia
Posts: 18,976
tseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputation
Quote:
Originally Posted by tseekins View Post
I'll jump in with both feet first.

In my heart, I truly believe that the 5.0L will be all the motor an average Joe like me will ever need. This thing is a beast and it's what I intend to get.

The EB test drive open my eyes good and wide. The 157" wheel base 4x4 was pulled effortlessly by this little plant. The EB is also available with 4.10 gearing for the ultra serious tow jockey. If I were towing 7K-8K monthly or more, I would likely want the 4.10's only because they are a factory option.

I wonder if the 4.10's would liven the 5.0L up a little or just make it a fuel sucker. The good thing is, the OE 4.10 gear set can be purchased from Ford.

So in summary, for the fella who tows 6500-8500 monthly I think either engine will perform just fine. I believe a 5.0L truck properly equipped is rated to pull 9800 lbs. Not too shabby for a pony car engine!
Belay my last! I got the EB and I'm thankful as hell that I did. Oodles and gobs of power throughout the RPM range, awesome gas mileage and my list of accolades is growing daily.

I still maintain that the 5.0L is an awesome engine and I damned near picked the one with the V-8 but I didn't like the color or options. The 3.5L fell in my lap and I can safely say that I would have been just as proud either way.
__________________
Tim
SCPO United States Coast Guard Retired
2011 F-150 XLT 4x4 Ecoboost
2010 Ford Focus
2004 Expedition XLT 4x2

FTE Guidelines
Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2011, 05:40 AM
Reply

Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums > Performance, Engines & Troubleshooting > 5.0L Coyote

Tags
157, 2011, 35, 6500, dressed, eb, engine, f150, f250, ford, fully, vs

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Forum Jump



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:40 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.5.2 ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.
Advertising - Terms of Use - Privacy Statement - Jobs
This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. FordŽ is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company.

vbulletin Admin Backup