The diesel wars have caused Ford to outprice and outperform the F-series to the point where many business owners I know wouldn't even THINK of giving their drivers a 400HP/800ft-lbs torque monster like the 6.7

It's great in the personal market, but commercially it's not making a whole lot of sense for many people. The utility of being able to tow 14+Klbs easily over mountains is not what most people (at least around here in New York) use F-series pickups for.

A 5.0 Ecoboost would make a lot of sense. I think what some people in this thread are having a tough time with is the "Eco" (economy) part of it. A 6.2 could easily be built up with more valves, or bored/stroked, but it would just use more gas on the highway.

Just for grins, and to counter the "high revs" argument, here's the 3.5L ecoboost vs. 6.2 vs. 5.0 torque curves:



From this thread here at FTE:

https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/1...l-vs-5-0l.html

 

It does have a nice towing rating, but that isn't the point I am trying to make.

An ecoboost F-150 is designed for the average Joe who drives his truck to work Monday through Friday, then drags a camper to the mountains or a boat to the lake on the weekend. 75% of the time he'll be using 15% of the truck's capabilities. The remaining 25% of the time he will be using 70%+ of the truck's capabilities.

Now, keep in mind a Super Duty is primarily designed as a commercial vehicle. Commercial vehicles have a different design philosophy. If I purchase a truck for a work application that only utilizes 15% of the capabilities most of the time I am wasting money. That truck isn't making me money unless it is working at 75% of it's capacity or higher. Think of a semi truck. If you're not dragging a load, you're not making money. Commercial operators want a truck that will run all day at 75% capacity or higher, for years on end. I just don't think an ecoboost would do that for them.

 

That also sounds how a LOT of super duty trucks get used also.

the 3.5 liter ecoboost might not be considered a commercial towing engine, but then again, that doesn't mean it couldn't be.
Maybe if a 5.0 di boosted engine was put in the SD, it would be down rated a bit?
There is literally nothing to keep them from doing it, and the results would be stunning.

A 5.0 boosted DI motor would blow every other gas engine away in performance, and possibly even pull as hard, or harder than the 6.7 diesel engine.

The 3.5 version is 365 HP, and has a steady TQ curve.
If the 5.0 had the same output per liter of displacement, we'd see 522 HP & 586 Ft lbs of TQ.
I don't see why they'd even down rate it in the SD, at that kind of output you'd barely ever hit full output.

That sucker would move like a bat out of hell, and outpull anything currently offered. And it wouldn't jump all over the gears like current gassers do pulling... one of the main reasons guys love the diesel.

 

I think there is a lot of truth to what you are saying. We have one Ecoboost in our family stable and it sees the exact use that you describe. Most times it gets used for the drive between Phoenix and Tucson because it's fun to get 23 mpg on those trips.

However, last night we used the Ecoboost to tow a medium weight trailer and I was flat out amazed. My guess is the trailer weighed somewhere around 6000-6500 lbs. The Ecoboost torque curve is fantastic. It tows more like a diesel than a gasoline engine. My wife was amazed when we told her it was a V6 engine. I can only imagine how awesome a V8 version would be...as long as Ford can build a transmission to compliment the potential power that a V8 Ecoboost might deliver.

I think the commercial segment would jump all over a Super Duty with an Ecoboost V8. Tows almost like a diesel (or maybe just as well) and gets great fuel mileage while unloaded. Total Win-Win in my opinion.

 

It most likely would get a little less mileage than the current 5.0, but the most HP than any other engine.

When we had the v10vs diesel thread, things were very "neck and neck" so to speak...


With a 5.0 turbo di gas engine, the mileage associated with the v10 is feathered back, the TQ curve is very close to diesel, etc. If the 5.0 ecoboost went into the SD's tomorrow, I'd think the only economical way to own a diesel would be if you got free fuel.

 

It's funny that I ran across this thread as I was about to ask a similar question for the SD guys.

Here's a thread that last a few days in the 2009+ F-150 forum: Ram to get diesels in late 2013? at Allpar Chrysler, Dodge, and Jeep News
It seems that the Dodge boys are hedging that a small diesel is the answer for the half ton segment.

Considering the numbers that are being reported on the baby Cummins, the Ecoboost is a pretty sensible option.

A GTDI gasser is thousands of $$$ cheaper to purchase and maintain over a life cycle and may be as capable if done correctly.

Thoughts?

 

You might want to check the dateline on that article.

I can see where someone who thinks a turbo-gasser will be a turbo-diesel equivalent, would also fall for that article.

 

Horsepower by itself is a very misleading number in a pickup.

How about Horsepower @ RPM?

 

Otherwise known as "torque".

 

HP / TQ on the 3.5 ecoboost is fabulous.

A 5.0 ecoboost would far outperform the 6.2, 6.7 diesel.

 

I doubt that a 5.0 Ecoboost at 500hp/580TQ in a SD platform would get much better mileage than the 6.2 if it was made available. It would do a better job of bridging the gap between top gas vs. deisel options, though. It would deffinitely be a faster truck than the 6.7PS but wouldn't match the torque output and fuel mileage. I think it is a fantastic idea and I would opt for the turbo gasser in a new SD if it were available and I was in the market. Probably be $4500 cheaper than the deisel, too.

 

A bit backwards there, Art.

HP = (Torque x RPM)/5252

Torque at speed = horsepower. You can make a million ft-lbs of torque, but if it's only at 1 RPM you only have 190 HP.

 

Even if it relatively close, I doubt many would opt for the 6.2.

 

Well, obviously we both would without a doubt be all over this engine option. But, there are buyers that a more simple and cheaper 6.2 would be their choice. Just like all the die hards that choose the 5.0 in the F150 over the EB.

 

You are right, although I believe a 5.0 ecoboost would be much more successful then the 3.5 ecoboost.

1. it's a v8.
2. it would out- power any other engine.
3. it wouldn't come close to diesel engine option costs, or maintenance expenses.