Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums > Newer Light Duty Trucks > 2009+ F150
Sign in using an external account
Register Forgot Password?


2009+ F150 Discuss the 2009 through 2014 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!





 
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #61 (permalink)  
Old 11-13-2010, 08:29 AM
johndeerefarmer johndeerefarmer is offline
Elder User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 589
johndeerefarmer is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 640 CI Aluminum FORD View Post
I agree with you 100%. I myself and planning on buying a 2011 F-150. But It won't be an Ecoboost. I will be getting a 5.0L V8 myself. Personally I don't for see the V8 going away anytime soon. I mean Ford spent ton's of money developing the 5.0L and 6.2L, and what a waste it would be to confine the 6.2L to limited use production in (Superdutys and Specialty trucks.) And the 5.0L to only Mustangs. As far as the concerns about fuel economy on the 6.2L's behalf I have already heard of quite a few reports of 6.2L powered F-250's seeing 17+mpg. And that may not sound like much, But comparing it to the old 5.4L powered F-250's that got 11mpg, I'd say for the extra power and displacement the fuel economy gain is quite impressive. Now imagine this same engine in an F-150 that weighs 1,000lbs+ less than the F-250. 20+mpg? Now add D.I to this 6.2L, Boom 15 - 20% increase in fuel economy there. Now keep the N/A D.I 6.2L and Make an optional 6.2L Twin Turbo (Ecoboost), and presto! You have a large displacement V8 engine that produce's way more power than any Twin Turbo V6 could ever produce, and yes with SAME flat torque curve. All the while getting decent mileage.

And on that note in real world driving I expect the 5.0L V8 to be pretty damn close to the 3.5L Ecoboost. I expect the 5.0L V8 when driving (unloaded) of course to easily be able to get 20+mpg on the highway, and 16 or 17+ in the city. Which also brings me to another statement, You said its all in how you drive it, (Referencing fuel economy) also 100% true. I have managed to personally achive over 20mpg with both 5.4L Ford and 5.3L GM V8's. I was driving them much like I do every other car/truck. Not giving it to much throttle and letting it shift at no higher than 3,000 RPMS.

Some people say guys like you and I need to catch up with the time's and let technology prevail. But those guys are in the same position as you and I without even realizing it. They say that people like you and I fail to realize that V8's are just big gas hogs. And I say they fail to realize that that's an old way of thinking. Sure 25-30 years ago a 350hp V8 would probably be getting around 7 to 10mpg in a full size truck. Today we can make a 380 - 411hp V8 that get's closer to 20mpg, Ala 6.2L, And even that engine lacks fuel improving things such as D.I and Forced Induction!!!

Sorry if this seems like a rant...Its not meant to be. I'm just sick of these new age people telling me I need to catch up with the times. I don't complain about guys that like to drive green, That's their choice, If they want to drive a Prius or a V6 fullsize truck that's fine with me. But I personally want a V8. Sorry if you think that's impractical of me. But its just what I want. But with that said, I do hope the Ecoboost is successful for Ford. Its just not my cup of tea though I'm sure it will be the perfect engine for many people.

Now on a final note...Do I think the Ecoboost V6 is a replacement for the V8 engine? Personally no, If you remember just a few years ago, All the fuss was trying to convince Ford,GM and Dodge to make small displacement diesel's for their 1/2 ton trucks. Most of them being around 4.0L to 4.5L engines. But since then the price of diesel has sky rocketed, I'm sure the researchers at these company's don't think a small diesel would sell now for two reason's...

#1
Price of diesel fuel is quite a bit more than gasoline now

#2
The cost of developing and building a small diesel would mean that they would have to charge up to 8,000 extra dollars over the top gas engine offered in 1/2 tons. Meaning that your average Joe 25K 1/2 ton suddenly becomes a near 40K truck with only 1 option...The diesel.

Instead of the Ecoboost replacing the modern V8, I like to look at it as a replacement for the baby power stroke that was for all other accounts born a still birth.

It should also be noted that, I have heard many rumors that when the F-150 does receive a redesign in the 2014 or 2015 Ford is planning on using much lighter weight materials such as high grade aluminum instead of Cast Iron on huge high weight things such as the Frame...This could potentially reduce the overall weight of the trucks 1,000+lbs. Which in turn would make it easier for Ford to meet their new C.A.F.E regulations, and thus keeping the V8 engine in 1/2 ton's alot easier. So imagine this...

2014-2015 F-150
1,000+lbs reduced weight over its predecessor.
Direct Injection = Standard on all engines
Forced Induction = Optional on select engines.
3.7L V6
3.5L Ecoboost
5.0L V8
6.2L V8

All able to achieve 20+MPG.

This is the future I hope for with 1/2 ton trucks. And very well could be seeing as the 5.0L and 6.2L were made to be upgraded, unlike the 5.4L and 4.6L.

Cheers!
I hope that you drive like an old lady, other wise you can expect the 5.0 to be staying above 5000 rpm where it makes some power. Redline is over 7000.

As far as mileage reports for the 6.2, that engine is tuned differently for the SuperDuty. Latest from Ford said 13/18 for it in the F-150
__________________
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
  #62 (permalink)  
Old 11-13-2010, 09:22 AM
excaliber551 excaliber551 is offline
Elder User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 508
excaliber551 is starting off with a positive reputation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by johndeerefarmer View Post
As far as mileage reports for the 6.2, that engine is tuned differently for the SuperDuty. Latest from Ford said 13/18 for it in the F-150
So the 6.2 is more likely to see 10/15 since it's more than like the 3:15-1 gearing and coasting downhill test they use to get their MPG's.
Reply With Quote
  #63 (permalink)  
Old 11-13-2010, 11:27 AM
bill11012's Avatar
bill11012 bill11012 is offline
Modular motor junkie
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,190
bill11012 has a great reputation on FTE.bill11012 has a great reputation on FTE.bill11012 has a great reputation on FTE.bill11012 has a great reputation on FTE.bill11012 has a great reputation on FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by excaliber551 View Post
So the 6.2 is more likely to see 10/15 since it's more than like the 3:15-1 gearing and coasting downhill test they use to get their MPG's.
I really don't think the 6.2 F150 will be anywhere near that low.
The V10 Superduty can get 10/15.
__________________
My V10 will out pull your PSD any day of the week,
If its close to stock and of the same age as my V10.

My IDI can't out pull anything.
Reply With Quote
  #64 (permalink)  
Old 11-13-2010, 02:01 PM
phillips91 phillips91 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Kingsport Tn
Posts: 3,215
phillips91 is a name known to allphillips91 is a name known to allphillips91 is a name known to allphillips91 is a name known to allphillips91 is a name known to allphillips91 is a name known to all
Quote:
Originally Posted by johndeerefarmer View Post
I hope that you drive like an old lady, other wise you can expect the 5.0 to be staying above 5000 rpm where it makes some power. Redline is over 7000.
Just because peak power is at a higher rpm doesn't mean that it lacks low end power. It's like comparing the 3v 5.4 to the 2v 5.4. Peak tq was 2,500 on the 2v and around 3,700 on the 3v, but both still made the same low end tq.
__________________
Josh P. Moderator Super Duty Forum

2000 F-250 5.4, manual, 4x4, 4.10 rear.
1992 Bronco 5.0, auto, 4x4, 3.73 rear

www.ford-trucks.com/guidelines.html
Reply With Quote
  #65 (permalink)  
Old 11-13-2010, 02:19 PM
johndeerefarmer johndeerefarmer is offline
Elder User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 589
johndeerefarmer is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by phillips91 View Post
Just because peak power is at a higher rpm doesn't mean that it lacks low end power. It's like comparing the 3v 5.4 to the 2v 5.4. Peak tq was 2,500 on the 2v and around 3,700 on the 3v, but both still made the same low end tq.
You need to check out the torque curve of the new 5.0 v.s. the long stroke 5.4 and you will change your mind.
__________________
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
  #66 (permalink)  
Old 11-13-2010, 02:30 PM
phillips91 phillips91 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Kingsport Tn
Posts: 3,215
phillips91 is a name known to allphillips91 is a name known to allphillips91 is a name known to allphillips91 is a name known to allphillips91 is a name known to allphillips91 is a name known to all
Quote:
Originally Posted by johndeerefarmer View Post
You need to check out the torque curve of the new 5.0 v.s. the long stroke 5.4 and you will change your mind.
I haven't seen the torque curve for the 5.0, but the same topic about the 6.2 got a lot of discussion in the SD forum. Peak tq is 4,500 and the stroke is much shorter than the 5.4/6.8 and guys were worried it wouldn't have any low end power because of that, but the dyno runs we have seen on it show it still making great low end tq. I assumed they would do the same with the 5.0, but I may be wrong.
__________________
Josh P. Moderator Super Duty Forum

2000 F-250 5.4, manual, 4x4, 4.10 rear.
1992 Bronco 5.0, auto, 4x4, 3.73 rear

www.ford-trucks.com/guidelines.html
Reply With Quote
  #67 (permalink)  
Old 11-14-2010, 05:07 PM
640 CI Aluminum FORD 640 CI Aluminum FORD is offline
Posting Guru
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,006
640 CI Aluminum FORD has a great reputation on FTE.640 CI Aluminum FORD has a great reputation on FTE.640 CI Aluminum FORD has a great reputation on FTE.640 CI Aluminum FORD has a great reputation on FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by johndeerefarmer View Post
I hope that you drive like an old lady, other wise you can expect the 5.0 to be staying above 5000 rpm where it makes some power. Redline is over 7000.

As far as mileage reports for the 6.2, that engine is tuned differently for the SuperDuty. Latest from Ford said 13/18 for it in the F-150
Well yes as a matter of the fact I do drive my trucks nicely. I wouldn't say I drive like a grandma by any means. But rarely do I get the urge to drive any way other than in the most practical manner. Personally I think the 5.0L will be plenty for the F-150's needs. I may catch some heat for stating this but I intend to do very little if ANY towing with my soon to be F-150. I currently drive a 2003 Ford Ranger and in reality the Ranger is enough for my needs in terms of hauling..etc...etc. I'm getting an F-150 for two reasons,

#1
I've worked for the money and I'll buy any vehicle I want regardless of what the government tells me I should be driving.

#2
I do have a decent social life and I've learned that hauling people,(friends, Girlfriend, Family) whoever around in the Ranger, is really not all that comfortable. And before anyone say's just get a Taurus...No that voids reason #1 out. I'm not much of a fan of sedan type cars.

But even so I have seen Torque curve's for the 5.0L and I'll post were I have seen them...Its a Youtube Video. And yes I know the Ecoboost has a wonderful diesel like torque curve, But as of right now. Its not the engine for me, and since the 6.2L is not available in all models of F-150, that leave's me with the 3.7L and 5.0L and I'm going with the 5.0L.

They are shown at the end of the video.
YouTube - #21 of 22 2011 Ford F-150 BFT Roundup -- 2011 Ford Ecoboost Drag Race Times vs Ford V8 Chevy Dodge

Personally I'm going to test drive all trucks before I buy, even the 3.7L V6 and Ecoboost. But I am sure that unless the 5.0L turns out to be just a complete worthless flop of an engine...It'll be the one under the hood of my new truck.
Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2010, 05:07 PM
Reply

Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums > Newer Light Duty Trucks > 2009+ F150

Tags
1997, 20, 2003, 2007, 50, 54, f150, fast, ford, mpg, oversquare, truck, turbo, undersquare, v6, v8

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 On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Forum Jump



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:16 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.5
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