Hey everyone Pickuptrucks.com is doing a full review of the F-150 Ecoboost this week. So far they have only posted the Dyno results they have. I have to admit I was kind of shocked that the 5.0L has a very similer torque curve to the Ecoboost V6. I'll be sure and post their results later this week for you guys. They are going to a long distance drive with two Ecoboost trucks. One unloaded and the other pulling a tralier. Either way, both these engines are HOT!

(2011 F-150 Ecoboost and 5.0L Dyno Charts)
What We're Testing This Week: 2011 Ford F-150 EcoBoost 3.5-liter V-6 - PickupTrucks.com News

 

Looks to me like their graph lines are skewed to the right, 50 to 60 ft.lbs at 2000 rpm? The truck probably wouldn't untrack!

 

I'm only partially interested in the results and very disappointed it's not a 4WD with 3.73 gears. Granted, can't satisfy everyone's testing desires, but this is an apples to oranges comparison from a gearing and drivetrain (2wd vs 4wd perspective). If anything, this type of test will only confuse and/or frustrate prospective buyers because it's not going to show the real differences between both engines in a similar configuration.

 

I agree. The 5.0L they tested back in Feb was a 4X4 with 3.73 rear end. While this Ecoboost they are testing is a 2WD with a 3.55 rear end. So The Ecoboost should for sure have the advantage in fuel econmy over the 5.0L. But the 5.0L they tested came with a set of gears that will better exploit the power it produces. We'll just have to wait and see how it turns out.

Personally its not changing my mind...I'm dead set on the 5.0L V8. I'm sure the Ecoboost is great and the one I test drove was plenty powerful. But the 5.0L is the one for me.

 

I think the 5.0 would put down more power than the ecoboost if it were also 2 wheel drive. Ecoboost is a torque monster though!

 

Considering that both engines are rated at the flywheel from the factory. Meaning they where on a engine dyno when tested. The ecoboost being rated higher means it will make more hp than th 5.0 in all similar conditions.

 

Except it is believed by many that Ford has sandbagged the 5.0 numbers. A 5 HP difference when the 5.0 was tested in a 4WD clearly shows the 5.0 puts out more peak HP. Parasitic driveline losses are usually considered to be around 30% for a 4WD and around 15% for a 2WD. In the K&N printout they are showing Parasitic torque loss greater with a 2WD , now who really believes that. Their Parasitic driveline loss numbers pretty much prove Ford sandbagged the published published 5.0 numbers IMO.

 

You are saying that a 4wd picup in 2wd mode will have 30% drive line loss. You are off your rocks buddy.

I agree that 2wd drive train can be safley assumed at 15%. I would guess that the addition of a transfer case would carry an additional 3% loss at most.

Regarless of the Peak HP and Tq numbers. The ecoboost in equivilant trucks is going to out accelrate empty and towing a 5.0.

 

http://lh3.ggpht.com/_M9nViCiSYVM/TT...800/50vs62.jpg

Here is a dyno comparison of 2011 6.2 in a 4wd that edmunds reports showing"

• Torque: 405 ft-lbs. @ 4500 rpm
• Horsepower: 385 hp @ 5500 rpm"

And yet the 2011 5.0 in a 2WD shows better Dyno numbers. This is with 5 Star Tunings Dyno Dynamics dyno Dyno Specifications that is a single wheel dyno. So apparently I am ON my rocks!

I am not knocking the 3.5, it appears to be a great engine, but it is not the only engine to consider especially if you are considering modifications. I am waiting for a TRUE & FAIR Dyno comparison, I have yet to see one.

 

I've seen drivetrain losses as high as 35% in the SDs (2wd or 4wd in 2wd) so twenties in the 150s is very reasonable. Dynos vary a LOT. The graph in the original link does not look right to me.

 

3% may be about right, or it may be 5-10% more than 2 wheel drive. Either way it looks like the 5.0 has more peak power. Obviously the Ecoboost would win from a stop with all that torque. I was just pointing it out that 5.0 has more peak power. 4x4 get about 10% worse mpg, so it is obviously creating more drag as well as some more weight.

 

Looks to me as tough the 5.0L will hold it's own in any working environment.

 

Its not really accurate to compare a 4wd Super duty to a 2wd F-150 and conclude that 4wd has twice the loss of 2wd. The Super duty has a very different drivetrain with substantially higher loss numbers.
I agree with you though that there hasn't been any fair Dyno comparisons of the 5.0 and the 3.5 yet.

 

I'll take torque over horsepower in a heavy truck.

 

I would be interested in any F150 4X4 numbers that support your assertion that drivetrain losses are substantially lower than the SD. I was unable to find any.