Notices
2009 - 2014 F150 Discuss the 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014 Ford F150

What engine would you choose?

 
  #1  
Old 10-17-2011, 09:56 PM
Tomahawk's Avatar
Tomahawk
Tomahawk is offline
Postmaster
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Central Illinois
Posts: 4,133
Tomahawk has a superb reputationTomahawk has a superb reputationTomahawk has a superb reputationTomahawk has a superb reputationTomahawk has a superb reputationTomahawk has a superb reputationTomahawk has a superb reputationTomahawk has a superb reputationTomahawk has a superb reputationTomahawk has a superb reputationTomahawk has a superb reputation
What engine would you choose?

My neighbor is going to trade his 2007 F-150 with the 5.4 for a 2012 F-150. He likes his current 5.4 but was thinking about getting the Eco-boost motor. I just wanted to get some owner feedback from those of you that have the Eco-boost motor. He occasionally pulls a small single axle trailer and he also borrows my 10K trailer 2 or 3 times a year.

Thanks!
 
  #2  
Old 10-17-2011, 09:59 PM
cobra11
cobra11 is offline
Freshman User
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 37
cobra11 is starting off with a positive reputation.
I yould get the 5.0 but thats me
 
  #3  
Old 10-18-2011, 05:27 AM
tseekins's Avatar
tseekins
tseekins is online now
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Maine, Virginia
Posts: 29,170
tseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputation
If he's pulling 10K on occasion and a lighter trailer in between then he should get the EB or the 6.2. But most importantly he needs to make sure he has a truck with all the proper equipment.
 
  #4  
Old 10-18-2011, 06:09 AM
NumberDummy's Avatar
NumberDummy
NumberDummy is offline
Ford Parts Specialist
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Simi Valley, CA
Posts: 81,844
NumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputation
How long do y'all expect a 216 cid V6 to hold up in a truck that weighs almost 3 tons?

How long do y'all expect the turbo's to last before they begin to carbon up?

I asled myself these questions...then went with the 5.0L
 
  #5  
Old 10-18-2011, 06:32 AM
meborder's Avatar
meborder
meborder is offline
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Sioux Falls Area
Posts: 5,053
meborder has a spectacular reputation.meborder has a spectacular reputation.meborder has a spectacular reputation.meborder has a spectacular reputation.meborder has a spectacular reputation.meborder has a spectacular reputation.meborder has a spectacular reputation.meborder has a spectacular reputation.meborder has a spectacular reputation.meborder has a spectacular reputation.meborder has a spectacular reputation.
Originally Posted by NumberDummy View Post
How long do y'all expect a 216 cid V6 to hold up in a truck that weighs almost 3 tons?

How long do y'all expect the turbo's to last before they begin to carbon up?
the answer is easy .... 300hrs Didn't you watch the torture tests?

waitin' on the EB for a couple years ... that's just me.
 
  #6  
Old 10-18-2011, 06:33 AM
shortride's Avatar
shortride
shortride is offline
ididmyduty
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: 46th State
Posts: 2,027
shortride has a very good reputation on FTE.shortride has a very good reputation on FTE.shortride has a very good reputation on FTE.
Towing or not the Ecoboost would be a logical choice for me.
 
  #7  
Old 10-18-2011, 06:41 AM
640 CI Aluminum FORD
640 CI Aluminum FORD is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,228
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.640 CI Aluminum FORD has a great reputation on FTE.
I went with the 5.0L myself, but I don't think there's anything wrong with the Ecoboost, Its just not my cup of tea.
 
  #8  
Old 10-18-2011, 06:49 AM
TheWhiteBeast
TheWhiteBeast is offline
Elder User
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 889
TheWhiteBeast is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Originally Posted by NumberDummy View Post
How long do y'all expect a 216 cid V6 to hold up in a truck that weighs almost 3 tons?

How long do y'all expect the turbo's to last before they begin to carbon up?

I asled myself these questions...then went with the 5.0L
As far as the turbo, what about Cummins diesels with 300k on the clock on the original turbo? Boost makes an engine more efficient, and therefore it doesn't have to work as hard as a n/a engine to get the same/better output. Why must so many people spew this garbage on these boards? Coming from the sport car world I know that this kind of logic is just dumb. If you cause even 1 person to change their mind because of non-factual BS you should feel ashamed. State the facts, not the crap.
 
  #9  
Old 10-18-2011, 07:15 AM
shortride's Avatar
shortride
shortride is offline
ididmyduty
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: 46th State
Posts: 2,027
shortride has a very good reputation on FTE.shortride has a very good reputation on FTE.shortride has a very good reputation on FTE.
Originally Posted by TheWhiteBeast View Post
As far as the turbo, what about Cummins diesels with 300k on the clock on the original turbo? Boost makes an engine more efficient, and therefore it doesn't have to work as hard as a n/a engine to get the same/better output. Why must so many people spew this garbage on these boards? Coming from the sport car world I know that this kind of logic is just dumb. If you cause even 1 person to change their mind because of non-factual BS you should feel ashamed. State the facts, not the crap.
Not that it has a lot to do on the subject but Cummins has been building turbo powered diesel engines a lot longer than Ford and probably have somewhat more experience. Having said that I think only time will tell. I would bet on Ford that it won't be long before we hear some high mileage data on the EB engine.

In defense of NumberDummy, he may not know how well the EB engine is built. The Ecoboost is not just your average 216 cid V6 gasoline powered engine with a couple of off the shelf turbo's.

2011 EcoBoost Durability.mp4 - YouTube
 
  #10  
Old 10-18-2011, 07:19 AM
NumberDummy's Avatar
NumberDummy
NumberDummy is offline
Ford Parts Specialist
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Simi Valley, CA
Posts: 81,844
NumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputation
Originally Posted by TheWhiteBeast View Post
As far as the turbo, what about Cummins diesels with 300k on the clock on the original turbo? Boost makes an engine more efficient, and therefore it doesn't have to work as hard as a n/a engine to get the same/better output.

Why must so many people spew this garbage on these boards? Coming from the sport car world I know that this kind of logic is just dumb. If you cause even 1 person to change their mind because of non-factual BS you should feel ashamed. State the facts, not the crap.
How many years of Ford parts experience do you have? Prolly none. I have 35 years of Ford parts experience.

How many Ford vehicles have you owned in your lifetime, prolly less than 10. I've owned 84, 12 of which I bought new....so I usually know what the hell I'm talking about.

Turbo's installed in 1980's Passenger Cars tended to carbon up after only a few years. The cost to replace one was almost 500 dollars, so I can just imagine what the costs to replace just one Eco Boost turbo today would be.

You are expecting a 216 cid V6 engine originally designed for/installed in 3,000 lb. Passenger Cars to hold up in an F150 that weighs almost three tons. Maybe it will...maybe it won't. Lets hope maybe it will is the answer.

Comparing a Cummins diesel to an Eco Boost is ridiculous, two totally different designs, engineered for two totally different applications.

The OP asked for opinions and I gave mine...If you don't like it, that's your problem.
 
  #11  
Old 10-18-2011, 07:32 AM
shortride's Avatar
shortride
shortride is offline
ididmyduty
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: 46th State
Posts: 2,027
shortride has a very good reputation on FTE.shortride has a very good reputation on FTE.shortride has a very good reputation on FTE.
Originally Posted by NumberDummy View Post
How many years of Ford parts experience do you have? Prolly none. How many Ford vehicles have you owned in your lifetime, prolly less than 10.

Turbo's installed in 1980's Passenger Cars tended to carbon up after only a few years. The cost to replace one was almost 500 dollars, so I can just imagine what the costs to replace just one Eco Boost turbo today would be.

You are expecting a 216 cid V6 engine originally designed for/installed in 3,000 lb. Passenger Cars to hold up in an F150 that weighs almost three tons. Maybe it will...maybe it won't. Lets hope maybe it will is the answer.

Comparing a Cummins diesel to an Eco Boost is ridiculous, two totally different designs, engineered for two totally different applications.
Not to be augmentative but which Ford car was the 3.5L engine with 6 bolt mains, forged crank shaft, direct fuel injection with diesel style pistons originally designed for? I know my Fusion had a 3.5 and a few of the other Ford cars has a 3.5 but I didn't know they were the same designed engine as the EB.
 
  #12  
Old 10-18-2011, 07:55 AM
NumberDummy's Avatar
NumberDummy
NumberDummy is offline
Ford Parts Specialist
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Simi Valley, CA
Posts: 81,844
NumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputationNumberDummy has a superb reputation
Originally Posted by shortride View Post
Not to be augmentative but which Ford car was the 3.5L engine with 6 bolt mains, forged crank shaft, direct fuel injection with diesel style pistons originally designed for? I know my Fusion had a 3.5 and a few of the other Ford cars has a 3.5 but I didn't know they were the same designed engine as the EB.
The Fusion/Milan/Taurus/Sable and etc 3.5L is not the same as an Eco Boost 3.5L, only the cid is the same.

I rented a new Mustang ragtop with the Eco Boost earlier this year, put over a 1000 miles on it over the course of 4 days. It ran like a striped assed ape, but....

A Mustang doesn't weigh almost three tons, and obviously will be unable to do the same things as an F150.
 
  #13  
Old 10-18-2011, 08:02 AM
shortride's Avatar
shortride
shortride is offline
ididmyduty
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: 46th State
Posts: 2,027
shortride has a very good reputation on FTE.shortride has a very good reputation on FTE.shortride has a very good reputation on FTE.
Originally Posted by NumberDummy View Post
The Fusion/Milan/Taurus/Sable and etc 3.5L is not the same as an Eco Boost 3.5L, only the cid is the same.

I rented a new Mustang ragtop with the Eco Boost earlier this year, put over a 1000 miles on it over the course of 4 days. It ran like a striped assed ape, but....

A Mustang doesn't weigh almost three tons, and obviously will be unable to do the same things as an F150.
That's new one on me. I didn't know Ford was putting an Ecoboost engine in the Mustang.
 
  #14  
Old 10-18-2011, 08:13 AM
TheWhiteBeast
TheWhiteBeast is offline
Elder User
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 889
TheWhiteBeast is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Originally Posted by NumberDummy View Post
How many years of Ford parts experience do you have? Prolly none. I have 35 years of Ford parts experience.

How many Ford vehicles have you owned in your lifetime, prolly less than 10. I've owned 84, 12 of which I bought new....so I usually know what the hell I'm talking about.

Turbo's installed in 1980's Passenger Cars tended to carbon up after only a few years. The cost to replace one was almost 500 dollars, so I can just imagine what the costs to replace just one Eco Boost turbo today would be.

You are expecting a 216 cid V6 engine originally designed for/installed in 3,000 lb. Passenger Cars to hold up in an F150 that weighs almost three tons. Maybe it will...maybe it won't. Lets hope maybe it will is the answer.

Comparing a Cummins diesel to an Eco Boost is ridiculous, two totally different designs, engineered for two totally different applications.

The OP asked for opinions and I gave mine...If you don't like it, that's your problem.
Hold on, let me pull mine out and let's measure. If you are talking about the K cars with turbos, then yes, those were CRAP. The EcoBoost is actually engineered much like a diesel engine. You are entitled to your own opinion, and I am entitled to think you are wrong. Who will win? We won't know for a few years, but I have a feeling about this motor. It has all the right stuff to be bullet proof. The days of powdered metal rods, hypueretic pistons and crappy turbos are over, so I would like to believe.

I HAVE A DREAM! Lol.
 
  #15  
Old 10-18-2011, 08:14 AM
TheWhiteBeast
TheWhiteBeast is offline
Elder User
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 889
TheWhiteBeast is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Originally Posted by shortride View Post
That's new one on me. I didn't know Ford was putting an Ecoboost engine in the Mustang.
And no, there is no ecoboost in a mustang.
 

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: What engine would you choose?


Contact Us - About Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
 
  • Ask a Question
    Get answers from community experts
Question Title:
Description:
Your question will be posted in: