View Poll Results: Which 2015 F150 engine would you pick?
Naturally aspirated 3.5L V6
6
2.02%
5.0L V8
135
45.45%
2.7L EcoBoost V6
43
14.48%
3.5L EcoBoost V6
113
38.05%
Voters: 297. You may not vote on this poll
Question of the Week: Which 2015 Ford F150 Engine Would You Pick?
#91
09-23-2014, 06:10 PM
Junior User
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Palm Beach Gardens, FL
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'll vote for the 2.7 Eco, cause I don't tow and put a lot of miles in, plus I think the technology is great on paper. Having said that I ordered the sport lariat and I don't have the option of the 2.7, so I'll be driving the 3.5 Eco, hopefully it will have most of the same properties plus more power.
#92
10-17-2014, 08:25 PM
I love the 5.0. never owned one though. But the truck I do own is a '97 150 with the 5.4 V8.Its got 260,000 miles on it and no leaks. With plenty of ***** to haul within and slightly above its payload. And still gets 15 city 18 to 19 highway. Damn fine motor. But as for new I'd try the 2.7 Eco.
#93
10-17-2014, 11:12 PM
Lead Driver
the 5.4 L was an excellent engine. I've owned a couple of them, and ever vfelt it lacked for *****. Both the 5.0 and 3.5 beat it handily, and I've driven both, and I own one of them.
#94
10-20-2014, 06:15 PM
Which engine
Chose the 5.0 because it sounded great, had way more giddy up and go than my 02 F150 screw, would tow practically anything I ever cared to drag behind it, and and yeah I said it twice. And for the difference in price for the eco boost (750.00 more in 2011 when I bought) I would never make the money back. Never regretted it.
#95
10-21-2014, 12:26 PM
Former Vendor
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: West Chester
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Both are great engines, but I would lean toward the 3.5L EcoBoost because of the gains to power & mpg by just messing around with a tune. The 5.0L would need a bit more than just a handheld programmer... but it would sound a million times better than the EB when finished (personal opinion) 
#96
10-21-2014, 01:22 PM
Hotshot
Ford has done a tremendous job with the Ecoboost engines...both in marketing and in performance. This new 2.7L EB has gotten very good reviews for its power and torque, and of course so has the 3.5L. I have no doubt these engines will also have very good longevity despite a hard life in a truck.
That being said, there are three problems.
The first is fuel economy. While the V6 turbos have the *potential* to achieve very good mpg, in practice they don't. Its much like the cylinder deactivation schemes of the competitors. How often are truck engines not working very hard? Basically when they are unloaded, going a steady speed across basically flat landscapes. Not when they are loaded, towing, going uphill, taking off from a stop lights, being used in 4x4, or basically everything a truck normally does. My previous car was a 2012 VW GTI. Great car, 4 cylinder turbo, direct injection , VVT...just like Ford's EB designs. That car would get very good mpg unless you were making the engine work. Its relatively easy to not make the engine of a tiny, lightweight VW work. Its a lot harder with a truck.
The second problem is the stigma of a 6 cylinder engine in a "tough" vehicle. For the past 100 years, the 'real man vehicles' have always had V8's, whether it be a truck or car. It it absolutely true that six cylinder engines are delivering tremendous power now, at or exceeding the previous generation's V8 power levels. Case in point - the city I live in replaced their police cruiser fleet with Taurus and Explorer units now. Very nice, AWD, and 300+ hp. The old Crown Vics had 250 hp. When a cop drives by accelerating hard in the new V6 cruisers, they sound pretty lousy. When a cop used to accelerate hard in a CVPI, that old 4.6L V8 growled and sounded nice. Most people like powerful sounding vehicles...why do you think people are always revving their V8 muscle cars and trucks, or their Harley's? They like the sound. It sounds intimidating and exciting. It sends a message to other people. Ford marketing has done a tremendous job trying to convince people the turbo V6 engines are the premium engine, the best engine, the way to go. But, they sound pretty lousy. And I think that takes away from that visceral element that especially men connect with when they buy a V8 truck, or car.
The third problem is that Ford's 5.0L is a very, very good engine. In stock form it can easily produce more horsepower than the 3.5L turbo and nearly as much torque. It also gets essentially the same fuel economy, and holds the notion it might be mechanically simpler and thereby more reliable in the long run than a turbo. AND, for the trump card, it sounds terrific. To top it all off, it is an exceptionally smooth and refined engine. It feels like it was lifted from under the hood of an executive Mercedes rather than from a Ford pony car. For its first round in the pickups, it was intentionally detuned to below the 3.5L's horsepower to make it look inferior. Oddly Ford has given it back some of its power in the 2015 while not increasing the 3.5L's output. This engine is "direct-injection ready" and if fitted, would probably further increase torque.
SO, even though I respect the EB engines, and admit their excellent low down torque characteristics, for the reasons outlined above would continue to opt for the 5.0L.
That being said, there are three problems.
The first is fuel economy. While the V6 turbos have the *potential* to achieve very good mpg, in practice they don't. Its much like the cylinder deactivation schemes of the competitors. How often are truck engines not working very hard? Basically when they are unloaded, going a steady speed across basically flat landscapes. Not when they are loaded, towing, going uphill, taking off from a stop lights, being used in 4x4, or basically everything a truck normally does. My previous car was a 2012 VW GTI. Great car, 4 cylinder turbo, direct injection , VVT...just like Ford's EB designs. That car would get very good mpg unless you were making the engine work. Its relatively easy to not make the engine of a tiny, lightweight VW work. Its a lot harder with a truck.
The second problem is the stigma of a 6 cylinder engine in a "tough" vehicle. For the past 100 years, the 'real man vehicles' have always had V8's, whether it be a truck or car. It it absolutely true that six cylinder engines are delivering tremendous power now, at or exceeding the previous generation's V8 power levels. Case in point - the city I live in replaced their police cruiser fleet with Taurus and Explorer units now. Very nice, AWD, and 300+ hp. The old Crown Vics had 250 hp. When a cop drives by accelerating hard in the new V6 cruisers, they sound pretty lousy. When a cop used to accelerate hard in a CVPI, that old 4.6L V8 growled and sounded nice. Most people like powerful sounding vehicles...why do you think people are always revving their V8 muscle cars and trucks, or their Harley's? They like the sound. It sounds intimidating and exciting. It sends a message to other people. Ford marketing has done a tremendous job trying to convince people the turbo V6 engines are the premium engine, the best engine, the way to go. But, they sound pretty lousy. And I think that takes away from that visceral element that especially men connect with when they buy a V8 truck, or car.
The third problem is that Ford's 5.0L is a very, very good engine. In stock form it can easily produce more horsepower than the 3.5L turbo and nearly as much torque. It also gets essentially the same fuel economy, and holds the notion it might be mechanically simpler and thereby more reliable in the long run than a turbo. AND, for the trump card, it sounds terrific. To top it all off, it is an exceptionally smooth and refined engine. It feels like it was lifted from under the hood of an executive Mercedes rather than from a Ford pony car. For its first round in the pickups, it was intentionally detuned to below the 3.5L's horsepower to make it look inferior. Oddly Ford has given it back some of its power in the 2015 while not increasing the 3.5L's output. This engine is "direct-injection ready" and if fitted, would probably further increase torque.
SO, even though I respect the EB engines, and admit their excellent low down torque characteristics, for the reasons outlined above would continue to opt for the 5.0L.
#97
10-22-2014, 05:18 AM
Elder User
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Live VT, Work MA
Posts: 768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ford has done a tremendous job with the Ecoboost engines...both in marketing and in performance. This new 2.7L EB has gotten very good reviews for its power and torque, and of course so has the 3.5L. I have no doubt these engines will also have very good longevity despite a hard life in a truck.
That being said, there are three problems.
The first is fuel economy. While the V6 turbos have the *potential* to achieve very good mpg, in practice they don't. Its much like the cylinder deactivation schemes of the competitors. How often are truck engines not working very hard? Basically when they are unloaded, going a steady speed across basically flat landscapes. Not when they are loaded, towing, going uphill, taking off from a stop lights, being used in 4x4, or basically everything a truck normally does. My previous car was a 2012 VW GTI. Great car, 4 cylinder turbo, direct injection , VVT...just like Ford's EB designs. That car would get very good mpg unless you were making the engine work. Its relatively easy to not make the engine of a tiny, lightweight VW work. Its a lot harder with a truck.
The second problem is the stigma of a 6 cylinder engine in a "tough" vehicle. For the past 100 years, the 'real man vehicles' have always had V8's, whether it be a truck or car. It it absolutely true that six cylinder engines are delivering tremendous power now, at or exceeding the previous generation's V8 power levels. Case in point - the city I live in replaced their police cruiser fleet with Taurus and Explorer units now. Very nice, AWD, and 300+ hp. The old Crown Vics had 250 hp. When a cop drives by accelerating hard in the new V6 cruisers, they sound pretty lousy. When a cop used to accelerate hard in a CVPI, that old 4.6L V8 growled and sounded nice. Most people like powerful sounding vehicles...why do you think people are always revving their V8 muscle cars and trucks, or their Harley's? They like the sound. It sounds intimidating and exciting. It sends a message to other people. Ford marketing has done a tremendous job trying to convince people the turbo V6 engines are the premium engine, the best engine, the way to go. But, they sound pretty lousy. And I think that takes away from that visceral element that especially men connect with when they buy a V8 truck, or car.
The third problem is that Ford's 5.0L is a very, very good engine. In stock form it can easily produce more horsepower than the 3.5L turbo and nearly as much torque. It also gets essentially the same fuel economy, and holds the notion it might be mechanically simpler and thereby more reliable in the long run than a turbo. AND, for the trump card, it sounds terrific. To top it all off, it is an exceptionally smooth and refined engine. It feels like it was lifted from under the hood of an executive Mercedes rather than from a Ford pony car. For its first round in the pickups, it was intentionally detuned to below the 3.5L's horsepower to make it look inferior. Oddly Ford has given it back some of its power in the 2015 while not increasing the 3.5L's output. This engine is "direct-injection ready" and if fitted, would probably further increase torque.
SO, even though I respect the EB engines, and admit their excellent low down torque characteristics, for the reasons outlined above would continue to opt for the 5.0L.
That being said, there are three problems.
The first is fuel economy. While the V6 turbos have the *potential* to achieve very good mpg, in practice they don't. Its much like the cylinder deactivation schemes of the competitors. How often are truck engines not working very hard? Basically when they are unloaded, going a steady speed across basically flat landscapes. Not when they are loaded, towing, going uphill, taking off from a stop lights, being used in 4x4, or basically everything a truck normally does. My previous car was a 2012 VW GTI. Great car, 4 cylinder turbo, direct injection , VVT...just like Ford's EB designs. That car would get very good mpg unless you were making the engine work. Its relatively easy to not make the engine of a tiny, lightweight VW work. Its a lot harder with a truck.
The second problem is the stigma of a 6 cylinder engine in a "tough" vehicle. For the past 100 years, the 'real man vehicles' have always had V8's, whether it be a truck or car. It it absolutely true that six cylinder engines are delivering tremendous power now, at or exceeding the previous generation's V8 power levels. Case in point - the city I live in replaced their police cruiser fleet with Taurus and Explorer units now. Very nice, AWD, and 300+ hp. The old Crown Vics had 250 hp. When a cop drives by accelerating hard in the new V6 cruisers, they sound pretty lousy. When a cop used to accelerate hard in a CVPI, that old 4.6L V8 growled and sounded nice. Most people like powerful sounding vehicles...why do you think people are always revving their V8 muscle cars and trucks, or their Harley's? They like the sound. It sounds intimidating and exciting. It sends a message to other people. Ford marketing has done a tremendous job trying to convince people the turbo V6 engines are the premium engine, the best engine, the way to go. But, they sound pretty lousy. And I think that takes away from that visceral element that especially men connect with when they buy a V8 truck, or car.
The third problem is that Ford's 5.0L is a very, very good engine. In stock form it can easily produce more horsepower than the 3.5L turbo and nearly as much torque. It also gets essentially the same fuel economy, and holds the notion it might be mechanically simpler and thereby more reliable in the long run than a turbo. AND, for the trump card, it sounds terrific. To top it all off, it is an exceptionally smooth and refined engine. It feels like it was lifted from under the hood of an executive Mercedes rather than from a Ford pony car. For its first round in the pickups, it was intentionally detuned to below the 3.5L's horsepower to make it look inferior. Oddly Ford has given it back some of its power in the 2015 while not increasing the 3.5L's output. This engine is "direct-injection ready" and if fitted, would probably further increase torque.
SO, even though I respect the EB engines, and admit their excellent low down torque characteristics, for the reasons outlined above would continue to opt for the 5.0L.
As mentioned in a previous post somewhere, in my mind the only real reason for the 2.7L to exist is a pure fuel economy play otherwise it overlaps with the 3.5L from a use standpoint. If the 3.5 is more of a 16/21mpg type of rig in everyday use to me the 2.7L would have to beat those figures handily in the same configuration (ie. 4wd super or crew cabs) ......for it to make sense to me it has to be more of a 19/26mpg type of vehicle in everyday use, otherwise, why bother with it vs. the 3.5L if you are Ford?
I'm still shaking my head at the prices of these things though.....damn......
#98
10-22-2014, 06:08 AM
Hotshot
Interesting points......I find it somewhat sketchy that we still have no official mpg figures on the 2.7L and even the MT review on the 2.7L talks about power and accelerations etc. but not one darn mention of fuel economy.
As mentioned in a previous post somewhere, in my mind the only real reason for the 2.7L to exist is a pure fuel economy play otherwise it overlaps with the 3.5L from a use standpoint. If the 3.5 is more of a 16/21mpg type of rig in everyday use to me the 2.7L would have to beat those figures handily in the same configuration (ie. 4wd super or crew cabs) ......for it to make sense to me it has to be more of a 19/26mpg type of vehicle in everyday use, otherwise, why bother with it vs. the 3.5L if you are Ford?
I'm still shaking my head at the prices of these things though.....damn......
As mentioned in a previous post somewhere, in my mind the only real reason for the 2.7L to exist is a pure fuel economy play otherwise it overlaps with the 3.5L from a use standpoint. If the 3.5 is more of a 16/21mpg type of rig in everyday use to me the 2.7L would have to beat those figures handily in the same configuration (ie. 4wd super or crew cabs) ......for it to make sense to me it has to be more of a 19/26mpg type of vehicle in everyday use, otherwise, why bother with it vs. the 3.5L if you are Ford?
I'm still shaking my head at the prices of these things though.....damn......
Other than that, if it only gets 2 mpg better than the 3.5L, why not just get the gutsier 3.5L? I know the 2.7L will be slightly cheaper, but as you say, the prices of pickups are way out of control now.
#99
10-22-2014, 06:35 AM
The prices of them really aren't that different from the current generation. A couple of weeks ago I built a 2015 F150 on the website equipped comparably to my 2013. MSRP was around 1,500 more, but the same packages also had more options. Like MyFordTouch, the 4-camera system, and a few others. I don't think that's unreasonable.
Also remember that to stay competitive in the market there will be deep discounts after launch. I got over $10,000 off MSRP when I bought my 2013, and I would expect the same deals to be around in a year from now. If not, I'm sure GM and Ram will offer me a deal. The only folks who are going to pay near MSRP are those who have to have it first.
Also remember that to stay competitive in the market there will be deep discounts after launch. I got over $10,000 off MSRP when I bought my 2013, and I would expect the same deals to be around in a year from now. If not, I'm sure GM and Ram will offer me a deal. The only folks who are going to pay near MSRP are those who have to have it first.
#100
10-22-2014, 07:28 AM
Hotshot
I never can understand why American automakers play such games with pricing. Try buying something European...for the most part, you'll be very lucky if you can dicker down a thousand or two. Virtually no factory incentives. The big three think nothing of slashing $10k off a truck or SUV.
#101
10-22-2014, 08:19 AM
Elder User
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Live VT, Work MA
Posts: 768
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe Ford has sworn the press to silence regarding fuel economy until official numbers are released in November by the EPA. Some press folks like Jalopnik have said the "best" they could get with the 2.7 was 24mpg driving it slow, according to the trip computer, but who knows. Basically Ford's target with this engine was the 28 highway as seen in the Ram 1500 Ecodiesel. I think it might have a hard time hitting that number, but then again if it could do 26mpg it might still be compelling.
Other than that, if it only gets 2 mpg better than the 3.5L, why not just get the gutsier 3.5L? I know the 2.7L will be slightly cheaper, but as you say, the prices of pickups are way out of control now.
Other than that, if it only gets 2 mpg better than the 3.5L, why not just get the gutsier 3.5L? I know the 2.7L will be slightly cheaper, but as you say, the prices of pickups are way out of control now.
Regarding the prices.......as Tom stated the 2015 prices aren't that much more than 2014........my point is that any of the prices over the past 5+ years are crazy for me.......for what I do with my two trucks, there is no way I want to spend $40K+ or take on a $600/mo payment and subject a new vehicle to that.........again , when a reasonably equipped crew cab pickup starts costing what a slightly used Porsche costs I pause.....
#102
10-22-2014, 08:49 AM
Hotshot
Regarding the 2.7L, it is an interesting motor. I'm intrigued it is built out of CGI vs. the aluminum of the 3.5L. CGI is very durable. It also appears to have some better turbo tech vs the 3.5L. If I were actually going to buy a 2015, I might actually consider the 2.7L although ultimately buy the 5L. I'm very curious to see real world results with this engine.
Regarding costs, its true that truck costs have risen quite a bit over a decade. In defense, though, new-gen trucks have become very good. This aluminum F-150 will actually be a very good value given the R&D which went into it, and the cost of the body / bed / frame, and engines.
Regarding costs, its true that truck costs have risen quite a bit over a decade. In defense, though, new-gen trucks have become very good. This aluminum F-150 will actually be a very good value given the R&D which went into it, and the cost of the body / bed / frame, and engines.
#103
10-25-2014, 11:37 AM
Have a problem with the direct acting mechanical bucket type valve lifters in the base 3.5L non eco boost engine even though the engine has been redesign wth dual OH camshafts with variable timming. The buckets are shimed to create the proper gap between the camshaft lobe and the bucket. As the bucket wears the gap increases a creates valve clater noise. There are many different shim thicknesses available to achieve the proper gap. If the buckets are not properly shimmed at the factory the engine will make undesireable noise from the get go.
The old 3.5L eco boost also incorporates the direct acting mechanical bucket type valve lifters.
The
The new 2.7L eco boost and old 5.0L V8, both incorporate a rollers finger follower type valve lifter, which is much less noisey than the bucket type lifters and require no adjustment.
If the 2015 5.0L still has 21 MPG ,highway rating equal to the 2014 rating or maybe 22 MPG, based on the truck weight reduction,
and the 2015, 2.7L has a 27 MPG highway rating my engine selection goes to the 2.7L.
Based on the 2015 FoMoCo published curb weights, the 5.0L engine is 55 lbs greater than the 2.7L engine.
Noticed the 5.0L rating for 2015 has increased from 2014 from 360 to 385 HP
and 380 lb-ft to 387 lb-ft torque. Believe the 5.0L was derated in 2014 to compete with the 3.5L EB.
The old 3.5L eco boost also incorporates the direct acting mechanical bucket type valve lifters.
The
The new 2.7L eco boost and old 5.0L V8, both incorporate a rollers finger follower type valve lifter, which is much less noisey than the bucket type lifters and require no adjustment.
If the 2015 5.0L still has 21 MPG ,highway rating equal to the 2014 rating or maybe 22 MPG, based on the truck weight reduction,
and the 2015, 2.7L has a 27 MPG highway rating my engine selection goes to the 2.7L.
Based on the 2015 FoMoCo published curb weights, the 5.0L engine is 55 lbs greater than the 2.7L engine.
Noticed the 5.0L rating for 2015 has increased from 2014 from 360 to 385 HP
and 380 lb-ft to 387 lb-ft torque. Believe the 5.0L was derated in 2014 to compete with the 3.5L EB.
#104
10-27-2014, 09:10 AM
Still VERY disappointed that there is no Luxury package option or technology package option with a 2.7L Lariat.
I think I would go for the 5.0 - bu this is contingent upon the new mileage ratings to be announced in November.
I think I would go for the 5.0 - bu this is contingent upon the new mileage ratings to be announced in November.
#105
10-27-2014, 09:58 AM
Lead Driver
Seems like they are not allowing the 20" wheels with the 2.7. That makes some sense, those wheels are HEAVY.