Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums > Newer Light Duty Trucks > 2015 F150
Sign in using an external account
Register Forgot Password?


2015 F150 Discuss the 2015 Ford F150 SPONSORED BY:

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!





 
View Poll Results: Should Ford Have Kept the 6.2L V8 for the 2015 F150?
Yes, it should be able across the lineup. 44 57.89%
Yes, but only on high end models like in 2014 6 7.89%
No, it isnt needed and the previous take rate proves that. 26 34.21%
Voters: 76. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
 
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #16  
Old 08-23-2014, 10:21 PM
Frdtrkrul Frdtrkrul is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Prior Lake, MN
Posts: 334
Frdtrkrul is starting off with a positive reputation.
McSniperliger
I voted yes. Its practically a big block and to see a big block being taken out of the F150 line up sucks. Wish they would introduce a 351 back into the mix. Yes the 5.0L has great potential but sometimes you need a bit more power in a larger engine.
__________________
-History is written by the victor, history is filled with liars.
-1999 F150 5.4L V8 auto XLT Ext. Cab long bed 245K
-Ford Today, Ford Tomorrow, Ford FOREVER!
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 08-23-2014, 10:46 PM
RigTrash601's Avatar
RigTrash601 RigTrash601 is offline
Posting Guru
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Hattiesburg, Ms.
Posts: 1,803
RigTrash601 has much to be proud ofRigTrash601 has much to be proud ofRigTrash601 has much to be proud ofRigTrash601 has much to be proud ofRigTrash601 has much to be proud ofRigTrash601 has much to be proud ofRigTrash601 has much to be proud ofRigTrash601 has much to be proud ofRigTrash601 has much to be proud of
Mitch Thornhill RigTrash601
Quote:
Originally Posted by 03 SVT VERT View Post
I wouldn't be so sure:

5.0L V8 Engine Weight:444lbs
3.5L Ecoboost engine weight: 450lbs
6.2L Engine weight: 580lbs

So you've got an extra 130lbs just in engine weight. Then you've got more weight tied up in the body and chassis to support offering that larger heavier engine. All that extra weight hurts your performance and payload capability. It totally goes against what they were going for with the new truck (smaller, less weight, more capable).

The next generation of ecoboost is said to be in the neighborhood of 400hp with more torque overall and a MUCH better torque curve than the 6.2L, all while being a much lighter engine.

So the question is, is it really worth it for Ford to offer a naturally aspirated 6.2L when they can get better performance all around from their turbo 3.5L? Especially when sales numbers have shown people are more than happy with their smaller displacement engine offerings?
Sales numbers reflect what manufacturers are pushing, look up the percentage of 6.2's built / sold.So those sales numbers also reflect that people were more than happy with the 6.2L also. As far as the performance, my Harley was built more for speed, and my cousin has a 2011 F150 EB (same year) we have pulled trailers together on the same trip, basically the same weight (just under 7K for each) both trucks were crew cabs, both had 3.73 gear sets, etc.. While TOWING, the 6.2L worked alot less harder and actually had better fuel economy, (hard for me to believe also at the time). I am in no way down rating the EB whatsoever, it is a marvel of design, I personally prefer the 6.2L, as a lot more folks do than folks would like to admit. Not saying folks aren't satisfied with the EB or 5.0L, as you have stated, sales numbers prove that out. But Ford did push the EB alot more than any other engine. Back to the fuel economy, mine wasn't ever "stellar", and I never expected it to be, but when towing on the interstate (mentioned above) I averaged better fuel economy, now unloaded, he had way better fuel mileage.
If you paired them off side by side (and we did) he would jump me on the hole shot, but that's it, I came around everytime...and the torque curve was better on the EB in the 2011 / 14 trucks..... (for discussion purposes) they would still be the same as the current platform, all would be lighter.
So, I still say in the new platform, there are areas that the 6.2L is going to outperform the other 2 offerings, naturally the overall cost of ownership in relation to fuel costs, it will never be lower than the other two, but that's the only advantage I can see. Strictly my opinion though.

As far as it being worth it for Ford to offer a naturally aspirated large displacement V8, I still say yes. I may be a "throw back", but there are a lot more folks like me out there, if they don't buy one from Ford, they'll go somewhere else.

Guess I'm just a dinosaur and still adhere to the mind set that there's no substitute to horsepower! I have the utmost respect for all of the Ford engines, except the 3.7L, (sorry, just can't see buying one), I just hate to see Ford drop that bad boy, as I'm sure all manufacturers will eventually as the "eco-Mentalists" have their way... good for debate though!
__________________
Mitch...
2011 F150 Harley Davidson Edition 4x4 (traded)
2014 F250 6.7L PSD,Platinum 4x4, White, Pecan Leather, FX4 package.
2013 Range Rover Sport HSE LUX, Fuji White (Wife's)
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 08-24-2014, 07:10 AM
Fred South Fred South is offline
New User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: I live in Winder, Georgia
Posts: 6
Fred South is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Fred South
2015 F-150

I voted no because I think if your work or play requires that much engine, you probably need to go to a F-250. For 90% of owners, the big engines are just bragging rights.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 08-24-2014, 09:29 AM
ArtsBest ArtsBest is offline
Elder User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 891
ArtsBest is starting off with a positive reputation.
Of course it should be offered along with an ecoboost 5.0.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 08-24-2014, 11:30 AM
Billy Underwood Billy Underwood is offline
New User
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 2
Billy Underwood is starting off with a positive reputation.
The 6.2 is due for an update. It's a little behind the other engines Ford offers in terms of technology. It needs an all aluminum block for starters. Matter of fact they could copy the design of the coyote engine. It would be even more powerful, lighter, and more fuel efficient. I would love to see them bring the engine back in this form. It would be a force to be reckoned with. Oh and where's my Ecoboost 5.0 I've been requesting?
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 08-24-2014, 02:47 PM
BossGasser BossGasser is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Dudeville
Posts: 452
BossGasser is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.BossGasser is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Good discussion.
I agree with many of you.

I heard an old Mustang fire up this morning. Sounded soooo goooood!

We are leaving the era of big engines. Sorry. It's the truth. There is no way around it.
There really is no sensible reason to keep an engine like that in production.
__________________
2014 F350 CC 4x4 BOSS 6.2L w/4.30's
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 08-24-2014, 09:30 PM
xr7gt390's Avatar
xr7gt390 xr7gt390 is online now
Junior User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: North West Indiana
Posts: 92
xr7gt390 is starting off with a positive reputation.
I started up my 4V 390 cid Cougar yesterday just to hear the rumble. There's nothing like the sound of a big V8.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 08-31-2014, 06:45 PM
jntibs jntibs is offline
Freshman User
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 47
jntibs is starting off with a positive reputation.
I voted no because if you need the 6.2 for work, then you need a F250 instead. The big V8's are dead in CAFE class vehicles, at least as far as FoMoCo is concerned. Unless Ford does a u turn and incorporates cylinder deactivation, it's gone for good.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 09-01-2014, 10:28 AM
Aquapools Aquapools is offline
New User
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 14
Aquapools is starting off with a positive reputation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 03 SVT VERT View Post
I wouldn't be so sure:

5.0L V8 Engine Weight:444lbs
3.5L Ecoboost engine weight: 450lbs
6.2L Engine weight: 580lbs

So you've got an extra 130lbs just in engine weight. Then you've got more weight tied up in the body and chassis to support offering that larger heavier engine. All that extra weight hurts your performance and payload capability. It totally goes against what they were going for with the new truck (smaller, less weight, more capable).

The next generation of ecoboost is said to be in the neighborhood of 400hp with more torque overall and a MUCH better torque curve than the 6.2L, all while being a much lighter engine.

So the question is, is it really worth it for Ford to offer a naturally aspirated 6.2L when they can get better performance all around from their turbo 3.5L? Especially when sales numbers have shown people are more than happy with their smaller displacement engine offerings?
When you say the next generation of Ecoboost is said to be in the neighborhood of 400 hp are you referring to the 2015 F 150?
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 09-04-2014, 07:24 AM
LIExpy's Avatar
LIExpy LIExpy is offline
New User
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 19
LIExpy is starting off with a positive reputation.
Adding direct injection and aluminum block to the 6.2L would certainly improve weight, power and gas mileage over today's design. Would like to see big the V8 continue in the F150 platform as an option. What ultimately won out for us choosing the Ecoboost over the 6.2L was the fact that we are mostly going to daily drive the pickup and only occasionally tow (travel trailer). MPGs while towing appeared to be a wash between the two and again if one was slightly better, we don't camp (at a distance) that much to make a difference. Choice on dealer lots were thin with 6.2L and even more so looking to get one with 3.73s. Only saw 3.55s here locally. The reliability reputation of the 6.2L was tough to turn away from however and of course that sound.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 09-05-2014, 03:04 PM
1NiceHarley's Avatar
1NiceHarley 1NiceHarley is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 273
1NiceHarley is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Ford needs to offer the large V8 across the line to keep some customers. Will that number be a large number? No. but it will draw some people to or back to the F150.
Personally I want a 5.0 Ecoboost.
__________________
Troy - 2002 Ford F-150 Harley Davidson Edition. Play toy
2004 Ford Excursion EB 2wd 6.0L. Family/Boat hauler. Dome light mod, High idle mod. EGR delete, Blue spring fuel pressure. Towing mirrors. Diamond Eye exhaust. Ed's FICM Eco tuned. SGII to monitor. Sinister Diesel Coolant filter. SCT SF3 custom tune by BackRoadPerformance.
2008 Centurion Avalanche C4. The boat!
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 09-06-2014, 07:27 PM
johndeerefarmer johndeerefarmer is offline
Elder User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 593
johndeerefarmer is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDDL-UP View Post
If the 6.2L were available ACROSS the F-150 lineup there would be A LOT more takers. Ford offering it only on high end models was a way to PUSH more high end sales - Ford FAIL at the expense of an excellent engine - the 6.2.
The 6.2 is a gas hog and to met CAFE standards they did not want to offer it in many models. By putting it in the high end trucks they didn't sell as many but could still say that they had a large displacement V8 available.
__________________
2015 F-350 SCREW 4x4 Lariat with 6.7 PSD & Off Road Package, Ruby Red Metallic, 3.55 with E-locker, 20" wheels and tires, chrome packeage, B&W gooseneck hitch, Weathertech mats, Line X bedliner
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 09-09-2014, 07:19 PM
efx4's Avatar
efx4 efx4 is offline
Elder User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: South Jersey
Posts: 983
efx4 is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
I voted no mostly because it's seat of the pants power is close tho the 3.5 and can't come close enough to the 3.5's gas mileage. However, if a large V8 like the 6.2 was to be in the lineup, it would have to have more power and better fuel economy; kind of like what GM did with their 6.2 V8.
__________________
2013 Keystone Outback 33' Travel Trailer
2013 F-150 Max Tow Ecoboost Lariat
2014 Ford Fusion SE Ecoboost
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 09-09-2014, 08:46 PM
LIExpy's Avatar
LIExpy LIExpy is offline
New User
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 19
LIExpy is starting off with a positive reputation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by efx4 View Post
I voted no mostly because it's seat of the pants power is close tho the 3.5 and can't come close enough to the 3.5's gas mileage. However, if a large V8 like the 6.2 was to be in the lineup, it would have to have more power and better fuel economy; kind of like what GM did with their 6.2 V8.
I'm not a fan of cylinder deactivation however as GM chose to do and discounted looking at one due to that fact. Now, an all aluminum engine and updated head design would get you much closer added to the new 2015 F150s massive weight reduction and you might have something.
__________________
2014 F150 Lariat SC SB, 3.5L Eco, 502A, Offroad package, 20" chrome package
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 09-10-2014, 01:11 AM
Prof_Bob's Avatar
Prof_Bob Prof_Bob is offline
Freshman User
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Temecula, CA
Posts: 32
Prof_Bob is starting off with a positive reputation.
goalwin goalwin
As much as it pains me to say this, I voted 'No'.

The 3.5 EcoBoost is one heck of an engine, and as much as I love the sound of a good V8 and hate to see them put out to pasture, the better engine...realistically...is the EcoBoost, and it's "Future-Resistant."
__________________
...Bob...

2005 F-250 Lariat 4x4 V10, 4.5" Rough Country lift, 315/70/17 Yokohama Geolandar A/T-S on Moto Metal wheels
pulling 2004 Four Winns 234 300HP V8 MPI
Reply With Quote
Old 09-10-2014, 01:11 AM
 
 
 
Reply

Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums > Newer Light Duty Trucks > 2015 F150

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 Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Add 2 cylinders to the 6.2....... MitchPeters 6.2L V8 1 07-22-2014 09:56 PM
Could Ford Engineers bring back SVT Lightning? ncalf150 Lightning, Harley-Davidson F-150, Roush F-150 & Saleen F-150 4 06-29-2014 10:33 PM
F250 6.2L - Potential Buyer FirstResponder Super Duty & Heavy Duty 14 03-18-2014 11:23 PM
6.4l dodge gas... Lets go ford! ncl 6.2L V8 15 09-28-2013 10:28 PM
New Roush Supercharger on my 2011 Ford F-150 Limited Lariat jaytee04 2009+ F150 18 09-03-2012 06:35 AM



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 AC1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
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