Most of the issues with turbo or supercharged cars and the reason you do not see them on the road anymore were the following:

1) Usually turbo/sc was a VERY expensive option, and few cars were ordered with it or bought with it.

2) Overheating led to cracked heads, excessive EGTs, turbo rebuilds, etc...which were expensive, so the cars got junked instead of fixed after driven HARD.

3) Reliability of components was poor, wiring harnesses were placed close to high heat turbo components, etc..

Lots of HUGE issues there. Only time will tell if the EcoBoost is any good. If a turbo car made it to 100k miles without major issues, it was pretty much a win.

Let's see an EcoBoost last 6 years and 150k miles IN NORMAL DRIVING (not a test), without a major turbo problem, blown head gasket or wiring related turbo problem and then the verdict will be in.

Until then, it's just marketing and PR. Just my opinion.

 

And this I have to totally agree with.

 

I don't understand why poeple think that turbo engines are not relaible. Yes, the old "lets slap a turbo on a regular engine" engines didn't last for crap. But todays modern turbocharged engines, like the ecoboost, are built for the task.

Look at the diesel market, all turbocharged and they last for many miles with few problems. And to say that you would only buy a V8 is ignorant, most of your large commercial trucks are all I6's. Yeah, V8's may sound good but if you can get the same power from a 3.5 V6 then why wouldn't you. If they offered a 3.0l V8 ecoboost that had the same power as the V6 ecoboost would you buy it, it is a V8!

Mark

 

How long do y'all expect a 216 ci V6 to last in an F150 that weighs over three tons?

Y'all are praising this engine to the skies. Let's see how many are running without any issues when the 100,000 mile mark is reached.

Turbo's have a nasty habit of getting clogged up with carbon when driven in city traffic and it doesn't take too long for this to occur, either.

 

I too agree that the Ecoboost still has some longevity proving to do. I am not usually a fan of buying a particular engine the first year it is offered.
One more reason to make sure you are well protected with a Ford warranty.

 

Hey you know if you dont like the fact that Im the kind of person who choose's Eight over Six, thats fine... But its comments like these highlighted ones that **** me off to no end...And I'm sorry if I come off a little offensive here, but in truth I am a little offended myself, I mean how dare ANYONE have the audacity to tell me I'm ''Ignorant'' for having my own opinion.

I had the choice back in June if you must know...To get a V8 that makes 360hp and 380lb/ft of torque or a V6 that makes 365hp and 420lb/ft of torque...Can you guess which one I chose???

I have MY reason's for wanting and liking V8's...And you know what? I'm totally fine with the Ecoboost V6, and if you love it and think its the absolute best thing since sliced bread, that's awesome for you! But don't criticize me for not having the same opinion as you...I test drove a few Ecoboost's and they do drive nice...They don't sound good, like my VEEEIGHT, but that's the nature of the beast.

If you have infact read my previous comments the would you know that its not really the Ecoboost itself I have an issue with...Its losing CHOICE. Its Losing the Freedom the get what engine I want because ME,MYSELF and I think its the safer bet...Do you get what I'm saying?

 

the 5.0 and ecoboost debate seems to be a hot topic lately. i was lucky enough to rent a 4x4 crew cab 5.0 last month. I took it on a nice road trip to williston north dakota, the trip started in socal. For most of the drive i couldnt tell much of a difrence between the eco that i own and the 5.0 that i rented. The 5.0 had a larger fuel tank and i liked that alot. My eco was quieter at WOT. The eco felt like it had more power on the highway. With the 5.0 i averaged 18mpg on the highway, i usually get 20 with the eco.

when i got back in town we lined the trucks up, on a private road ofcourse the eco was much faster off the line and it never stopped pulling away from the 5.0. we raced them a few times with difrent drivers and the result was always the same. i was suprised at how much faster the eco was, it surley didnt "feel" to be that much faster.

as for how long either motor will last? who knows, i dont expect to own the eco longer then two years anyways. i expect whipple to have a blower kit for the 6.2 and we will have a new debate

 

The importent thing is that everyone is happy with what they got and respect other people's choice's...Even if its not the same.

I just get tired of people criticizing each other for having a difference of opinion that's my issue.

In my post's I try never to directly criticize the Ecoboost and I try not to let my bias for V8 engines cause me to say something irrational. The only thing I ask of anyone is that I be treated with same respect, and not be called ignorant or a fool for having my own opinoin.

With that said...

Good read about the 5.0L and Ecoboost. From what I hear the 5.0L delivers a little more consistant mileage than the Ecoboost, (Probably attributed to the Turbos) It seems when the Ecoboost gets good mileage its a little higher than the 5.0L highest avarage and when it gets worse mileage its lower than the 5.0L's lowest average.

As far as streight line performance go's, its no seceret that the Ecoboost is the faster engine, as it should be considering its putting down 5 more hp and 40 more lb/ft of torque at a lower RPM.

But it does seem that the 5.0L's are responding very well to mods...I recently posted up an article that shows and all motor 5.0L F-150 with only a Tune and CAI almost breaking into the 12's in the 1/4 mile. So I do beleive that with only simple bolt on's the 5.0L can be built to be faster than the Ecoboost in every way.

I don't know for a fact, but many people speculate that the Ecoboost is close to being tapped out as far as performance go's, while the 5.0L is supposedly capable of making 500hp reliably.

Just out of curiosoty how were both of the trucks you raced equipped? I know you said the 5.0L was a 4X4 crew cab, but how was the Ecoboost equipped? Also do you know what rear end each truck had? From what I've read the 5.0L is normally a few tenth's of a second slow in the 0-60 sprints than an equally equipped Ecoboost.

 

The 5.0 was xlt? And the Eco is a lariat. Same cab. Same truck Basicly.

I wouldn't hesitate to buy a 5.0 if whipple produced a kit for it. Last I heard from whipple is that they werent planing on making a kit for the 5.0 and that they were working on the 6.2. To me arguing over what engine is better is Alot like arguing over a blond or brunette. To me the problem is that neither has a decent set of " bolt-ons" yet. He he he. Pun totally intended!

 

Anybody ever consider a 5liter ecoboost may be in the future

 

That about sum's up how I feel about it.

A different flavor for different drivers!

 

Yeah I have heard talk of an EB 5.0L...Its a pretty heavy rumor right now. I think if and when Ford does Ecoboost a 5.0L it'll mostly act as a replacement for the Current 6.2L V8.