Peak torque in the 3.5 is quite low in the RPM band. Lower than the 5.0 (and gobs more). The reason you see lower econ is usually driver pushing more than they need to and with steeper gears. The motor is far from "struggling". The 3.5 will beat the pants off just about anything in class and the 2.7 was very impressive as well. About the only reason I can see justifying the 5.0 is for sound of a glorified car or for the snowplow prep package. Not because the 3.5 can't plow, but because of the electronic power steering it comes with.

 

I thought the 5.0L had electric power steering also. IIRC, when I purchased the 2011 that I had, a 6.2L, it was the only one of the of the line up with hydraulic power steering, not sure about the 3.7L V6 at the time.

 

I have seen lots of 3.5's work good, but up here in Canada they have boat loads of trouble. Turbos=heat, heat in -30 C weather means condensation, which creates a lot of trouble. There will always be a really strong market for n/a, simpler engines in this type of climate.

The 5.4 had higher max tow than the 3.5 due to its torque curve from idle

 

Please explain. The 3.5EB makes more torque at 2000 rpm than the 5.4 motor makes at max.

 

I think the Ecoboost PCV system is the source of troubles in cold weather, not condensation of water from the intake.

 

'Sup, QT? Been browsing the 2015 threads, amazing how folks get tied in a knot over some of this stuff. I had read about the mileage test from TFL, 30 miles, come on.....Also the one where they've (Car & Driver, or whoever) had the 2.7 for 1000 miles,you know everyone of the different drivers have romped on it! No telling how many hole shots it has in the first 1000 miles. (I know I would have!)
Anyway, I think they 2.7L is one BAMF, to be the size it is! I've watched a few tests on YouTube and it is actually very quick 0-60! I just can't see any hard working truck achieving mileage it seems some folks expect. You see the same thing on the Super Duty threads.

 

(citation required)

But here, I'll provide you a few:
2010 F150 Towing Guide: http://www.ford.com/resources/ford/g...vF150sep09.pdf
In very specific configurations, the 5.4 was rated for 11,300lbs.

2011 F150 Towing Guide: http://www.ford.com/resources/ford/g..._F150nov18.pdf
The 3.5EB was the only motor rated for 11,300lbs, save one very specific config with the 6.2. It was also available in quite a few more configurations at 11,300 than the 5.4 ever was.

These ratings held until 2015, when the 3.5EB was bumped up to 12,200 in certain configurations, due to the weight reduction from the aluminum body panels and other weight savings.

And a turbocharged motor will always (well, within reason) have a better torque curve than an N/A motor, regardless of size. The peak values on the N/A motor might be better if the displacement is large enough, but the turbo will always reach max torque at a lower RPM.

 

You ain't kidding. Some people act just like the towns people in South Park, "Rabble rabble rabble! I dewnt like that! Rabble rabble rabble! They stole my job!!"

 

Here's the updated Fast Lane Truck video. This is worth the watch. Well done FLT.

 

I didn't see many EB trucks when I was home in Maine last summer and likewise, the diesel trucks are way out numbered by the gassers as well.

I couldn't decide if it was the ultra conservative Maine way or the cold climate.

 

I'd own any of the engines out now in F150s barring the non turbo v6......it's really a matter of personal preference as the cost difference is minimal from one to another it's not like the diesel cost vs gas in the Superdutys......the great thing is Ford has you covered go buy what you like ....even though I wouldn't want it the plain regular v6 wasn't in fact horrible but I just have a hot rod bone me

 

I stand corrected, I have never owned an ecoboost so it was all here say on the tow rating, for some reason I always heard it was a couple hundred pounds less than the 5.4L. I was told for the reasons I stated, but the papers say they are the same.

The 3.5 ecoboost still has trouble here regardless, I have seen them quit due to condensation myself, others experience shutter and spit when getting on the power, where they kinda fall on their face. In good weather they work great, and some have no trouble at all, but regardless it gives them a bad rap.

 

You've already shown that your social circle is highly biased to the point that common knowledge is skirted. Might do you good to question your current knowledge and watch and learn from different people. Not meant as an insult, just a genuine suggestion in good will. You clearly have a good attitude.

Everything has problems. Did you already forget about spark plugs denting the hood? Probably so because there is a fix that is accepted as the norm. Same thing will happen with the Ecoboost. Some effective fixes will become common knowledge and worked into what is considered normal mods & maintenance.

Again, I think as time goes by the focus will be less on water from air stream and more on contamination from the PCV system. And we won't get to that point until more people get out of warranty and experiment with their own solutions instead of Ford's silly, cost constrained fixes.

 

I agree and have full confidence that Ford will get it right eventually, from what I have seen the 2.7 looks like they applied some big time changes, and on paper looks sweet, and with everyone's reviews praising the motor that puts out plenty of power. The problem is shelling out 30-70k when your buddy has already had issues with the previous gen, just saying a pile of 5.0's up here and I didn't tell them to do it.

 

I see ecoboosts every where here, smidgy where are you up here?