I think a Turbo 5.0L would be a great replacement for the 6.2L, 460ish-hp and over 500lb/ft of torque at a lower RPM, that's got HD truck written all over it.

However I also agree with 03SVT. The 6.2L is not an old engine by any means, considering Ford used the 5.4L in their truck between the years of 1997 to 2010. The 6.2L has only been used since 2011, I doubt that Ford would invest that much money into an engine only to cut its life span short a few years into its production run, they wouldn't recoup any of cost from re-tooling their factory's or anything.

I think its very likely, that Ford will make a bored out version of the 6.2L to offer as their mid-range gas engine, filling the void that the V-10 once did. I had heard some rumors awhile back that Ford was considering boring the 6.2L out to 7.0L and making that a mid-range engine, this seems more likely in the HD trucks, seeing as they don't have to adhere to the same strict C.A.F.E standards that their 1/2 ton brothers do.

Personally I don't think the 6.2L will be going anywhere anytime soon, as far as its numbers on paper go, its still competitive, making slightly less power/torque than the 6.4L Hemi, but still over performing the 6.0L Vortec. Nothing a little DI/TI-VCT won't solve.

And granted it sounds like the 2016 Super Dutys will be made out of Aluminum and if its anything like the 2015 F-150's we can expect to see close to 1000lbs come off the curb weight, thus allowing for more performance without making major upgrades to the engines.

 

I don't think either engine is a good fit for a 3/4 or 1 ton truck and expect it to haul heavy loads, it might do it on flat level land put not when its got grades to pull.

 

The 3.5 ecoboost kicks **** across the board.
It beats engines with more HP because the TQ band pulls hard from low down.
There are some instances that some large v8's might out perform it, but overall, if you jumped in an ecoboost 3.5 truck and didn't know it was a v6 turbo engine, you would pick it hands down.

I think the only reason the 3.5 ecoboost hasn't taken almost all of the market share of ford engines, is that it's a v6. They should "ecoboost" the 5.0 and put it in the superduty trucks. The 5.0 is apparently cast with direct injection in mind, so very doubtful that the 6.2 has a turbo future.

A 5.0 v8 ecoboost superduty could have better mileage than the 6.2, and more power than even the diesel trucks. Probably why they dont offer one.

 

The 3.5 ecoboost is only a few years behind ford diesel power ratings.
If you haven't towed with one, be prepared to be surprised, for a 3.5 v6 it has a crazy amount of low end TQ, and power, and refinement as well. Not everyone wants a noisey, expensive to own diesel.

 

Wish I could repa ya. Additionally, not everyone wants to or is prepared to pay $8000 for an engine. The only downside of a turbo V-8 gasser is that it'll never see the MPG's of the 6.7L. But 8K buys a lot of gasoline.

 

If an aftermarket super charger kit was more affordable it would be the way to go. A super charger on the 6.2 would be an absolute beast due the bigger ci.


Now that would not be the answer for everyone as some guys do really need the diesel option....but there are a ton and I mean a ton of people that have a 6.7 and do not need it.


The SC option would be perfect for me and I really think there are a lot of people like myself. I prefer the size and styling of the SD over the 150 and my trailer is not that heavy....maybe 9500-10k loaded and I don't pull it every weekend. In this instance a SC on my 6.2 would just simply kick some major ***!


I don't think there is anything wrong the 6.2 as it does what it is supposed to and I really don't see Ford getting rid of it just yet.


Its hard to say if a 3.5 Eco would be good in an SD......I would have to say based on the power output it would because it makes what the 6.2 does roughly. But I truly think more ci and forced induction is the way to go in a heavy truck gas engine.


As mentioned....I don't think Ford will ever do that because a large (5.0 or bigger) forced induction V8 gas engine would definitely steal a ton of sales from the oil burners.


The best option is a diesel electric hybrid! a small diesel engine to power a big electric motor! then you get sick instant TQ and the mpg!


I am still hopeful and waiting for the aftermarket world to do better with the SC kits.......wishful thinking anyway

 

I completely agree on the diesel electric. Or even diesel-hydraulic. Or a modern steam engine.

 

A gas electric would also work just fine...... It would give the instant TQ needed and during un loaded driving the gas engine could shut down and it cruise solely on electric for crazy mpg!

The tech is already there the McClaren P1 and new Porsche Spyder use this technology...... No they are not 7,000 pound trucks pulling heavy loads but the tech is there!

 

How about this

http://wrightspeed.com

http://www.wired.com/2014/09/fedex-w...sel-ev-trucks/

 

I would choose neither engine. In fact, I would rather have a 5.4 in a Super Duty over a 5.0 or EB, regardless of the hp/tq outputs.

The Chevy and GMC HD fans are scratching their heads for the same reasons as to why they can't get the "more powerful" 6.2 Vortec found in 1500s and Denali/Escalades and are stuck with the 6.0 Vortec. It's quite simple, the 6.2 Vortec is a Camaro/Corvette engine that quickly brings to life a 1/2 ton truck or SUV, but the 6.0 Vortec is a proven platform for reliable, everyday heavy use.

Sure, there are plenty of people lugging around loads across the country using an EB, 5.0 or 6.2 Vortec. But when it comes to a fleet of gas trucks laden daily with a utility bed and skid steer trailer, the 6.2 Boss or 6.0 Vortec are the engines designed internally for the abuse.

The 5.0 is a sweet little engine for an F150, my dad has one. But there's a reason it's used in the Mustang and not the Super Duty. Same for the EB.

My opinion, I bet the 6.2 Boss remains unchanged for quite some time as to output, much like the 6.0 Vortec which has been at 385 ft lbs for years. Since diesel sales have been so strong for all the makes, there's not much incentive to develop or spend much resources on base V8 engines. Much like the 6.4 Hemi is not likely to be a "game changer" that shifts gas vs diesel sales overall.

Another thing that hasn't been mentioned is how much the hulkier six speed Torqshift would tax an EB or 5.0 if they were in a Super Duty???

 

The 6r140 would be awesome behind a 5.0 ecoboost, because it can lock the TQ converter more often.
Might just need a slightly looser TQ converter, but maybe not even, depending on VVT turbo ability.

 

I wanted an engine I could rely on.
An engine that wasn't a delicate flower.
The 6.2 was perfect.

 

And what makes the 6.2 a brute force to be reckoned with with VS oversized displacement turd?
Not saying it is either, but in your opinion, what makes it better?

 

I bought my heavy duty pickup to haul my 5th wheel camper.
Reliability, durability, and cost of ownership are my main concerns.
Quite frankly I can't understand how this engine can be defined as a "turd."
Have you driven one Parkland?
Happy Thanksgiving!

 

Happy thanksgiving!

I have driven them, they are nice.
I just don't see the justification for worrying about the ecoboost "wearing out" faster than a big NA v8 with a similar rating. It seems like almost everything everyone worried about on the 3.5 has turned out to be more speculative than fact.