driving a '97 expedition that just rolled over 225K miles...other than rust has been a fantastic vehicle.
Looking at 2014 f150 crews
?: wondering about long term longevity of the V6 eco-boost vs the V8. I know I'd get better mileage with the v6, and stats on HP/torque are obviously good, but just wondering about group's thoughts on how the engines would play out as they age. Seems like the v8 would get less stress (I just do local and highway...no towing or hauling) and therefore last longer, but am I not giving the v6 enough credit?
Thanks in advance!

 

I think MPG's here are pretty much a push. I don't see one engine outlasting another when properly maintained.

However, if I weren't towing or going to work the truck, I'd likely not be willing to pay the premium price for the ecoboost unless I got one heck of a deal on the truck.

 

I think the jury is still out in regards to long-term longevity. In another few years when more of these engines are over 200,000 miles I think we'll have a better picture.

I think the EcoBoost engine is a very well designed and built engine, and I think it's surprised just about everyone in how well it holds up while towing. But there's a lot more to go wrong, and lots more new technology that may or may not show issues in the future. There are two turbos to wear out, direct injection components, and a much higher stressed bottom end. That's not to say that all of these components aren't going to last as long as the rest of the truck. But we don't know.

The 5.0L V8 is a relatively new design but it has less complexity and new technology that can fail. You don't have two chunks of metal spinning 150,000 RPMs on either side of the engine. Just about the only new-ish technology used is the Ti-VCT system that the EcoBoost shares.

Both engines seem to be doing very well, and it's very possible that the small fuel savings that seems to come from the EB may pay for an additional repair or two down the road. But if I were buying a truck for a post-apocalyptic future where repair parts were nonexistant, I'd pick the 5.0L for having less things to fail. But for the real world I don't think you can go wrong with either choice.

 

The Ecoboost will cost a couple thousand more and I've never seen a turbo last as long as the engine. So you should probably figure in a turbo replacement as well if you're going to keep it long term.


The V8 is doing the same amount of work but spreading it out over more cylinders.


Just my $.02

 

The 5.0 and the Ecoboost have both been out about the same amount of time. The 5.0 was in the Mustang and the 3.5 Ecoboost was in Taurus SHO about a year before they were available in the F150. So neither engine has any real world long term reliability. Both engines have had a few minor issues along the way but seem to be doing fine now.

 

The ecoboost and the 5.0L have nearly the same bore and stroke yet the ecoboost is a heavier engine. The block and bottom end components are very stout. There are samples of ecoboost trucks out there with over 100K miles on them already.

If I were to go shopping for a new truck tomorrow, I wouldn't hesitate to own another EB yet I'd proudly buy a 5.0L.

 

It is my understanding that the ecoboost in the truck engine is forged crank, rods and pistons(any can correct me if I am incorrect), the block is a 6 bolt main engine, if the internals are built for and above the specific output expected, then this engine should be sound, that being said, there is a lot of technology in this engine that can go wrong, direct injection engines has a second fuel pump built for high pressure, variable valve timing, the turbo's, etc, etc, etc. All of that being said, Ford has a lot riding on this bet, the other automakers are running the same tech in their cars and trucks too, if you want new, there is no escaping this kind of technology. this is a consequence of a world where the impression is we are running out of oil, we cant go back to distributors and carburetors and drive new, I also would be happy to have the 5.0 coyote engine, not available in the max tow however, but I am happy with the ecoboost!

 

If it's of any interest or value, Ford Racing and Roush/Yates engines took the 3.5 Ecoboost engine and tuned it to turn out over 600 HP using 70% of the stock components....including the block and heads. This little V6 is now powering the Daytona Prototype cars of Michael Shank Racing and Chip Ganassi Racing in the IMSA TUDOR racing series.

 

The 3.5EB is also the premium motor on the Police Interceptor sedans and utilities. For obvious reasons, Ford had to prove to many crotchety fleet managers that "them new fangled turbo motors would last". There were several EB/AWD Interceptor Sedan test mules running around for a while that had very high mileage and got the absolute crap flogged out of them on a daily basis... no issues.

I would have no worries putting 200K on a 3.5EB.

 

I am new 5.0 owner coming from 15 years of v-10. This is a nice motor and with 3.73 gears is only rated a few hundred pounds lower towing when using same GCVW (again 15,300 v8 vs 15,500 eco, can someone tell me the extra 200 pounds GCVW isn't added for the extra 200 pounds towing) and even in the highest eco GCWR of 17,100 it is rated higher than the 6.2 v8 at 100 pounds more towing. Me thinks its a numbers game by Ford to sell more eco motors.


What I suggest is that gear ratio will mean more to the v8 for towing if needed. I think the numbers are being played to sell more v6 at 1-2 mpg to trick government into the production numbers required by standards.


Not taking away the output per CI, the v6 is impressive. Never drove the F150 eco but I will say after driving the police vehicles, they do not last. Not major engine component, but at least one out of five is down every week. Cats and tranny (which they rebuild in shop, not swap for new). We currently have recalls on all the police vehicles and one in shop for over week. Tranny, cat and now rear end. We have the all wheel drive SUV and sedans without a turbo and parts are not standing up. I can only guess what more power from a turbo would have done. The crown vics ruled. Ford guy here, but these police cars are junk from bumper to bumper. 80 percent of cops will say the same thing unless they were in a large fleet of small chevy for last few years. The Fords will seem nice coming over from them. Our fleet is not large, only 10 vehicles, but we put about 40k on a year, change out every two years. These v6 were kept for 2 1/2, some seeing about 90k now and need work monthly, down for week at a time. All 5 v6 are on cat recalls right now.

 

While I appreciate what you're saying, this has absolutely nothing to do with pickup trucks. Your The 5.0L and even 6.2L engines both have catalytic converters.

 

One thing I like is that 200,000 miles is the new 100,000 miles!

 

I am commenting on post 9. The police do not like the motor, and it is not proven effective by the amount of down time. While a major part, like the block, has not been replaced, there has been significant problems otherwise.
Catalytic converter are on all vehicles, correct, but we have recalls on burning them out and throwing engine codes. Again we don't have the turbo models, which are included in the recall, and would have higher exhaust gas temps and pressures.
Transmissions are different, along with rear ends, so realistically there is no comparison, but if one is made I would say it is not favorable.

 

One thing I keep hearing is the ecoboost being a option costing a couple of grand more.
Where I am in Alberta the pricing of the ecoboost and 5.0 is virtually identical. Makes no difference to the price of the truck. I thought it was like that all over. Am I wrong?

 

The EcoBoost option was only $1,095 over the 5.0L on my 2013.