Do I really need a 6.2L Super Duty?
 

With our new addition 2012 HD F150L 3.5L EB, rated to tow 11,300 lbs, I thought i would raise the question . Its always interesting to compare newer and older technology. No worries still love the SD 6.2L.

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-Z....2%2520stk.jpg

Looks like that 6R140 sucks down a ton of power.

Ford must be doing something goofy with the 6.2 Fueling or Timing as well, since there is a sudden very random 20 ft-lb torque increase in a span of 500 RPM.

Good topic.
My 2006 6.0 f350 that I used to pull my 8000 lb work trailer daily, with 80,000 miles on it, started acting up recently. I was having to borrow my wife's 2011 f150 ecoboost to pull my trailer until I could get the 6.0 repaired. I have to admit the ecoboost f150 pulled the trailer just as good as the f350 diesel. In my work I have to haul up to 2500 lbs of material in the bed, that's where the line was drawn on the f150 ecoboost. With the heavy trailer and 5-600 lbs in the bed of the f150, it was a wet noodle. Pulled and stopped just fine. But pretty saggy going down the road. I told my wife the perfect combination might be a ecoboost3.5 in a super duty frame.

I got flustered with the 6.0 and traded it in for a 2012 f250 6.2. So far i like the gasser 6.2. It's not getting the fuel mileage that everybody else is claiming. I don't think it will handle pulling the 5th wheel toy box. But I can put a load in the bed and pull the work trailer with a firm suspension, bigger bearings, bigger brakes, and proper load range E tires.

http://i401.photobucket.com/albums/p...t/BF6E3B34.jpg

That's quite a difference! WOW... :-hair

Now...I don't own a 6.2L SD just yet...but will be placing an order next month. However...I've said it once...and I'll say it again. The 6.2L just seems to come up short on the torque. I could care less on hp...but torque is what I am after. With my 9 yr old V10 2v...I have 425 ft/lbs. Going to the 6.2L...I am going backwards.

Just wish FORD would have introduced the 6.2L with minimum 3 valves per cylinder...and a better tune with more torque.

Hey...I am still TOTALLY UP for my 2012 SD 6.2L...but a guy can wish...LOL! :-X04


biz
;)

Those are impressive numbers. I'm waiting for Ford to drop that motor in the AWD Explorer, then I'll be buyin' one for sure.

I'm hoping a 5 star tuned 6.2 makes it to an Ohio meet at some point. We saw what a stock 6.2 w/ 4.30's does on that hill with 15k+ lbs, now I want to see what a tuner does to it. I just don't have the cojones to add one to my truck.

Part of the step up on on power at 4000 rpms the 6.2L is the computer nanny

I talked to Mike M a couple of weeks ago when the next OH meet was. I would like to make it but have RV shows planned every month so the sooner the date is set the better at least for me. I would like to bring both trucks to see how they do for sure.

Our test trailer is cat scaled right at 12k lbs a tad over the HD150 rating. I didnt get a chance to drive very far but i will have more seat time today. The truck has the HD package with LT tires. The truck handled the weight surprisingly well, not squirmy at all (to my surprise).

As for the power / shifting with Fords map..:-X18 (mores in it) Towing this weight one thing that did jump out at me is the lack of engine braking the 3.5L has in tow/haul mode when decelerating. Thats one advantage the 6.2 V8 has is much improved engine braking with 2 xtra cylinders. :-jammin

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-n...Large%2529.JPG

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-C...Large%2529.JPG

:-huh Can you share that link with the 6.2L w/4.30's towing 15k up a hill? I've never seen it...


biz
:-X04

You're joking right? I've spammed the forum with it! :-X04

Anyways, here the results thread, video of me draggin' the trailer up the hill at the last Ohio meet. Tom (Crazy001) is narrating.

https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/1...nd-videos.html

Hey Thanks! Yeah...just watched your run...and the 6.2L was reving nice! Well done...

That is the main reason I am going with the 4.30 gears. Up here in ABQ at 1 mile high...we hit mountain passes at 10k and 12k all the time. Thin air and less torque...got to have the 4.30's.


biz
:D

Doesn't Ford post ratings of 420 lbft and 369 HP for the Ecoboost? And their ratings for the 6.2 are higher. These must be flywheel figures Ford is talking about?

Yes...it is my understanding that FORD does use figures from the flywheel.


biz
:-X21

Really need a SD??
 

...Been thinking the same thing. ..I'm in the market for a new truck and will be pulling the trigger w/in the next year. My current truck is a 97 Toyota Tacoma, Extended Cab, 4x4., V6, Auto. Great truck. Had it since new.
I'll either buy a Tundra or a Ford. I have to say, my Taco has made me a believer in Toyota. Not one single problem with my truck. The new Tundras have terrible interior but I love the 5.7 L V8.
Back on point.
Love the F150. My dad just bought an '11 Ecoboost XLT 4x4. Nice truck.
I'm quite sure a 150 would do all that i'd ever ask. The only thing I routinely tow is a 5x10 foot trailer and a Suzuki GSXR600 racebike and the Taco, with 153k on the clock, still tows great (at 15MPG). Best unladen is usually 18 MPG. Since this is no problem for my truck, i know for the 150 it would be kids' play no matter which engine.

As for the 250, i love the looks of the truck and i like the over-built quality of the truck. I'd never need a diesel, but have often wondered why anyone would buy a 250 wo buying the diesel. The 6.2 doesn't offer much more Hp than the Ecoboost. Torque is comparable too. The 6.2 is available in the Lariat and Platinum. I hate the faux wood grain in the Lariat and i'm not crazy about the tailgate bling on the Plat. In the 150, i would have to go with the FX4 as i'm not crazy about chrome. However, i think it works on the 250.
I'd be all about the 250 with the 6.2 if it had a little more balls. Just seems like it'd be a bit of a dog in such a heavy truck. Sure, i could spring for a supercharger but...
I want to get the absolute most truck for my money. I hope to one day own a camper of sorts (if only to justify owning a larger heavier truck)
My truck would not be a daily driver as the "company" provides me a vehicle.
I can get the 6.2 in the 150, but why pay high 40s or even into the 50s for a 150. why not just get a 250?

The 5.7 in the Tundra is a strong engine. But, the Tundra's MPG sucks. so, may as will have the 250 with the 6.2. Except the Tundra weighs less and the power would be more readily felt.

The Ecoboost is a great engine and i believe this is what all mfgs will soon be focusing on. Like to see a larger displacement twin turbo for the SD.

In the end. If i'm honest with myself, I have no need for a 250. But I'm quite sure, i want one. I've driven all the aforementioned trucks except the 6.2 powered F250. Looks like i need to.

You've said it all badfish. Go drive the 250. Sounds like you've got some time to think about it. Are you planing on a 2013 MY?

Yup, take a test drive. The 6.2 (especially with 4.30 gears) will absolutely not be a dog.

I agree.I test drove a CC/SB with 3.73's and it moves!Now a SD with the 5.4 I thought was a turd.

not sure when I'll pull the trigger. No rush. My Tacoma sits in the drive mostly. Its not a comfortable ride. Ok when its just me dragging the race bike from track to track but for a road trip its not ideal. I want an enclosed trailer, maybe a 10-12 footer. The taco would pull it, but wouldn't like it. I'll drive a 6.2 F250 If I can find one.

Not trying to diss your 97 Toyota Tacoma, Extended Cab, 4x4., V6, Auto...but really it is no comparison to a SD...in HP and Torque.

First...with the trailer that you plan on towing...the SD will not even notice it. These 3/4 and 1 ton trucks are not rocket rides...or meant to be. The are BIG heavy trucks made for towing or hauling loads.

IMHO...you sit in a SD 6.2L...and give it a drive...IT will be night and day over the '97 taco. Even though it is an apples to oranges comparision.

Good luck either way, but IMHO...the F150 with Eco...sounds just what you are after.


biz
:-wink

Im sure your are 100% correct. The F150 would do all i'd ever need it to do. Trust me. I know my little Tacoma isn't even comparable to the F150, or for that matter, the new Tacomas which are much larger, and more capable than mine. I decided long ago however, that i'll never own anything other than a full size, so the "mid size" trucks are out. I WILL buy a Ford. I'll probably end up with a 150. But for ****es and giggles, i'm gonna go drive a 6.2 L 250. :-X04
My dad has a '94 F250 RC, LB with the 460 for the cattle trailer and his 21' Ranger, even though his new 150 Eco would be fine i bet. But, he laughs and says the 150 is his weekend truck and he wouldn't be caught dead driving that new truck through the pasture. funny. He has an '86 F150 with like 50k orig. miles that i'm trying to talk him out of.

Hey...no one here is going to doubt that you should go test drive a SD 6.2L...if you can find one. They are hard to find on the dealer lots. The COOL factor over the F150...is like 10x...IMHO. :-X04

Know what you mean...my dad has a '09 F150 Platinum 5.4L...and would NEVER use it like a truck. Keeps it washed...and clean more so than the cars.

Good luck either way! FORD is at the top of there game right now...so quality products all the way around.


biz
:-wink

Nope. You can haul all the groceries home you want to with that half ton v6.

But if you want ot haul a truck camper and pull a boat, forget it!!!

First, I've owned a boat... and a boat owner I am not cut out to be. No thanks. What a pain. I'll from now on only have friends with boats.
I'm quite sure, a 150 would drag around any race bike trailer i would ever own as well as get the groceries. My wife and i were talking the other day though about how neat it would be to have a small camper (windstream preferably cuz they're shiney) and obviously a 250 would be better. Jeez, i hope i can find a 6.2L to drive. I'm down in south Florida (aka Cuba) so i don't know...

I would drive one down the worst roads you know of. Other than that experience, I live mine. You will experience hop-shake at some point unloaded on bad roads. Other than plowing, I always think I would like the car ride and mpg of a 150 but then you start pricing and you're at 250 pricing. I like the look of the Tundras too. But they get same mpgs as me I think - 13.6? I've had mine for going on two years come April. Like it when I was the one around with a 2011.

This picture by Fordmdb shows the "v6" doing a lot more than haul groceries. This forum and what people read in here helps them make decisions which then affect their lives so let's try to keep it close to factual if we can.

https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/p...ictureid=92751

Yup, I don't see me EVER towing anything that big. So, I reckon I have my answer. Still love the look of the 250 though.

what happened to the picture???....

1badfish, the question you should be asking yourself is, "do I want the 3.73's or 4.30's, should I get leather, nav, fx4, etc".. :-X22

I don't need a 1 ton, heck 90% of my driving is empty, but when I do need it, it's there waiting, ready to whoop some...well, you know the rest. }>

Small Update!

Just completed another trip with the eb150 and 5ver, this one the longest at 700 miles round trip, Avg 10.2 going and 9.2 coming back. Driving was 95% interstate at 65-70 mph. Truck pulls well; it really shines accelerating and holding the higher 5th and 6th gears; however not much engine braking in this little V6 as you decelerate and the stability is not as good as the F350 6.2 naturally, its not bad it just pushed around a little as its at its max weight, basically i was more aware of 5ver as cross winds hit.

Have a bunch of data log equipment on truck some info during trip:
EGT = 1312 f max
ECT = 214 f max
Trans Temp = 201 f max
Boost Air Temps = 124 f max
Air Charge Temps = 82 f max
Engine Load = 177% max
boost = 16 psi max
timing - high engine loads at 2000 rpms = -1 to 0 advance from TDC
Steady state Boost at 65-70 about 5-6 psi
Knock sensor retard - didn't vary much -2 max seen

Truck specs are max payload, max tow package 3.73 gears

A pic as we were headed back.

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-g...s/s800/002.JPG

You can't really compare the dyno curve of an ecoboost in a half-ton to the 6.2L in a 1-ton. If they ever put the ecoboost in a 1-ton chassis it would definitely see a hp/tq reduction for reliability. How much? I don't know. But, it wouldn't suprise me if it's greater than the hp/tq drop we see going from the 6.2L in the half-ton to the 6.2L in the 1-ton.

Either way, personally I'll stick with the Super Duty. I find it too easy to overload the rated capacities of an F150. Power isn't everything, you need to have the frame, springs, axles, ect to back that power up.:D

I agree.. I guess one can dream of a v8 eb in a SD.

I haven't exactly written the 6.2L off yet either. It's worth keeping in mind that the 6.2L is still very early in it's development. It's a brand new engine architecture, whereas the Ecoboost V6 is part of the Duratec V6 family, which dates back to the 90's.

I have no doubt the 6.2L has a lot of potential which Ford has chosen to leave untapped until they see what the competition is doing. I'm sure they're waiting to see what GM does with their HD trucks once their next gen gas engines are released.

Agree, The heads on the 6.2L are a little old school, Ford should have went to the 4v set up with similar controls as the 5.0L on the release of the 6.2L motor both Raptor and SD. I have heard rumor of that being a next upgrade maybe..
again my 2 cents.

Excellent reporting info! It great to see the 3.5L Eco being worked...and getting real results.

Regarding the engine braking issue. I'm assuming you were in Tow haul mode. Which is good, but for more engine braking effect...did you try the SelectShift or manual mode? Wonder if using the tranny to help with slowing down would have made a big difference?

Would have been nice to see...if the tranny temps started to climb using SelectShift?

Still good to hear the F150 is up to the task with that large a load. :-X22


biz
;)