Trying to decide between the 3.5L Ecoboost or 5Lv8 for my new truck.
Been driving 5.4L for 10 years with no major problems. Are the new turbos reliable? Anyone had problems?

Truck is used mainly for commuting to work, tows a 19' boat on weekends and once a year from Canada to Florida throuugh the mountains.

 

turbos have been reliable for years- this ain't the eighties any more. Go over to pickuptrucks.com and read his story under "News"- its on a towing test between the 3.5 and 5.0. then go to their forums and read all of the towing reports. one dude has been pulling around 8k of fertilizer and he also pulled a load of hay weighing 12400 total lbs. he overloaded that sob and said that it would still burn rubber.

PickupTrucks.com Forums: Ford Trucks

 

It will take 5-10 years for the EcoBoost to establish a history of long TIME durability in real world use.

Any other statement involving long term experience, including information coming from an owner, magazine, web site, or Ford engineer, is mere speculation. The EB has definitely passed some very tough torture testing, but that is not the same thing as long term use on the road.

I am not aware of any turbocharged gasoline motor that has a reputation of being a 200-300,000 mile engine on a regular basis like the mod motors. Maybe Subaru is the closest.

Good luck,
George

 

I would say Buick Grand Nationals. Although they haven't made them since 87.

 

I have a friend with a 1991 turbo diesel Mercedes and apparently these go almost forever...wonder if the Ford Ecoboost is in the same league or not even close to the German tech?

 

The EcoBoost is far and away more sophisticated than the old MB diesel you reference.

But remember that this is one highly stressed V6! The old Mercedes diesel made a whopping 134 horsepower out of a 3.5L diesel engine, compared to the Ecoboost that has nearly the same displacement and makes almost triple the power at over 6,000 RPMs.

 

Hey Nassty:
I'm an old muscle car guy (to the tune of 2 426 hemi cars, couple 390 2-seat AMX's, couple Corvettes). I really wanted a Grand National but the only turbo car I ever had was an '86 Dodge Lancer with the 2.2 turbo. It took out the head gaskets just shy of the 70k mile warranty ending, which mixed coolant and oil, and basically fried the turbo, the lower end, etc. Basically got a full engine rebuild under warranty.

As a serious question, were Grand Nationals known, if driven moderately and cared for (oil changes, cooling down turbos before shut down), to seriously have engine life over 150 or 200k miles with the original turbos intact?

I also had a non-turbo '79 SAAB 900 but remember the turbos from that era well, and they were *OK* but I don't think a lot of them made it to 150k miles on the original turbos. Subaru seems to be doing well with their lower-output turbo motor when they're not in chipped WRX's pusing 20+ lbs of boost.

I seriously hope the EcoBoost gets a stellar long-life reputation, but I'd trust the 2 valve 4.6 in my van to go 250k miles well before I'd trust an EB to go that far only because there is no long history for the EB as yet. Whereas I personally know multiple people who have gone over 300k miles with mod motors--I had a buddy who ran a limo company and the stretch Town Cars would go forever. As do old cop cars now serving as taxis. Speaking of which, I wonder how well the new Police Interceptor Taurus will survive heavy police use with the EB and 4WD. I don't think they'll take the beating that the Crown Vics regularly do. And I wonder how the EB will survive idling for 6 hours a day for years, etc.

George

 

I can't fathom why people think that a gas engine is towards the end of it's life at around 100,000 miles. My brother has a 2000 Chevy Silverado with the 5.3L V8 and he's closing in on 400,000 miles. He just makes sure to change the oil every 3K miles or so, and uses good quality oil and a good quality filter. With proper maintenance I don't see why ANY gas engine shouldn't be able to replicate those numbers.

 

I've seen several in near stock form that went over 200k.Those were daily driven and not flogged at the track on a regular basis.The ones that were heavily modded and flogged at the track were prone to breaking stuff.A lot of the issues occur from poor tuning, too much boost not enough fuel or octane to handle it.Also the stock tranny can handle stock boost (13-14psi)but it needs to be built to handle high boost.FWIW I run 26psi with alcohol injection.

 

I would say either engine will be great for your needs. The ecoboost will have a slight edge in the fuel economy side and total power. If you are scared of turbos than get the 5.0, 3.7, or 6.2. All 4 of the engines are new and it will be several years to know the real story. My hunch is they all will be just as good as the 5.4 or better. I personally feel that poor turbos are a thing of the 80's. I picked the EcoBoost because I couldn't get the 5.0 with the Max Tow. And I wanted decent fuel economy so the 6.2 was out. And after owning the EcoBoost for almost a month and a half. I couldn't be happier, I love it! The Torque is unbelievable. I wanted a diesel to pull my Travel trailer, but with the way the diesel prices are headed I opted for Ecoboost gas instead. The torque makes me forget about the diesel I am very happy with my decision!

 

I really like the Ecoboost engin and I have faith in it in a F-150 BUT,Having been a police officer from 1997-2004 I don't see such a rosey future in the police market for the AWD taurus. Real world Police use gives a new meaning to the words "Torture Test"
I KNOW a 97 crown vic will ford water up on the headlights and just keep running fine (since the belt got wet there was a slight drop in voltage). Try that for a test.

 

Check out this video. Episode 1 Ford F 150 EcoBoost Torture Test - YouTube

 

Hi Lawrence. Welcome to FTE. I, as well as most readers of this forum, are well aware of this test, and being a Detroiter, it is over a year ago that I saw that exact engine being torn down at the Detroit Auto Show in January, 2011. The pieces did look pretty darn good.

My concern is that no amount of short term torture testing, no matter how brutal it seems, can duplicate the time and variety factor of thousands of engines (or any other car parts) out in the field, in actual use. Stuff happens in the real world, like spark plug blowouts in the 2V mod motors, spark plugs sticking in the 3V mod motors, leaking head or intake manifold gaskets, etc. All those engines were thoroughly tested as well.

And with the EcoBoost having the turbos layered on top of the other engine systems, we legitimately need, in my opinion, a number of years before the real world reliability of the EcoBoost can be really proved to me and other skeptics like me. I love new technology and hope the EcoBoost is a wild success, and as time goes on, it continues to look promising, but there has not been enough time yet, IMO. I am also concerned about the intake valve deposit problems that affect all direct injection engines to some degree over the long term. (Do a google search and you can see how bad the VW/Audi problems have been.)

Thanks for joining the forum; hope we see your posts in the future.

George

 

I've just crested 9000 miles on mine and she continues to impress me daily, not just the engine but the entire truck. She runs like a singer.

A few months ago this same question was going around the 2009+ forum and there were numerous responses of 20K+ miles driven while towing mostly with no issues. Let's hope this trend continues.

Ford blew it big time with the 6.0L. The 5.4L of all ilks had issues throughout it's life that should have been sorted out but never really was.

The 5.4L is the only engine that I've heard of that has had any chronic cam phaser issues even though all multi valve Ford engines use cam phasers.

I want to believe that Ford took the extra time and pain to address all past issues before delivering the EB to the truck world.

 

So, in a few more years, you have decided that the EB is good............. but that is EB 1.5. Now, they will be on EB 3.0. Thus, it has not proven itself and will need multiple years to do so as there are so many changes vs 1.5.

At what point is an engine proven? Is a manufacturer supposed to not come out with new engines?? Are they supposed to keep them the same for decades, to satisfy some peoples definition of "proven?"

With EPA requirements advancing to rapidly, engine technology will change and upgrade rapidly. At some point, you have to buy something based on faith.

Or, do you "assume" that because 2009 EB's are going great at 3-5 years (they are 1.0's), that they will all be reliable. After all, they will all be twin turbo V6's??

I'm sorry, I just don't get this type of statement. EB V6's have been out since the 2009MY. We are now coming up on the 2013MY. 4 years is not enough?? What is??