Ecoboost vs 5.0 or?
Super Moderator
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 40,024
Likes: 1,519
From: Maine, Virginia
We will never know the true % because Ford stacked the deck..You might see more maxtow's on the road if the 5.0 had this option. I bet you see similar tactics with the new 2.7L.. There will be some options exclusive to this model that wont be offered across the board. I know maxtow wont be one of them. Maxtow may not be a big seller across there fleet and only a certain kind of buyer but it doesn't matter the EB is a nice engine and we will see how it fairs in the 15's.
Is ford stacking the deck by building most SD trucks with the diesel? Hell, its an 8k option. The 6.2 in the f150 cost more than the Eb, I hear no complaints about that.
Super Moderator
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 25,479
Likes: 742
From: Isanti, MN
Senior User
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 299
Likes: 0
Tom, you know in the end we sit here and debate over FORD trucks and we both own one. Taste Great..Less Filling.. We are lucky we got good looking trucks and choices in both the 1/2 ton and 3/4 ton markets. Funny thing is we both could end up with different trucks in a few years any way..
Super Moderator
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 25,479
Likes: 742
From: Isanti, MN
Tom, you know in the end we sit here and debate over FORD trucks and we both own one. Taste Great..Less Filling.. We are lucky we got good looking trucks and choices in both the 1/2 ton and 3/4 ton markets. Funny thing is we both could end up with different trucks in a few years any way..
Thread Starter
|
More Turbo
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 583
Likes: 43
From: Hawthorne,Ca.
correct me if I am wrong but I thought the EB was only making up about 35-40% of all F150 sales. It might have recently changed..I wouldn't call that flocking..the remaining sales have to be 5.0 and some 6.2 (small% and the 3.7)..I am sure those numbers will increase in 15 since 2 of the 4 offerings are EB. I like the EB motor,,but does it matter whether a truck is at 2600 rpm's on a V6 or 3000 rpm's on a V8 if they both get the same MPG's while towing..
Logistics Pro
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,738
Likes: 103
From: FL
Junior User
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
yeah well up here dealers advise me against the eco boost for my needs . If you are a weekend warrior meening you go to work with a lunch box or a breifcase and use your truck for week end pulling or hauling then eco is the way to go. But if your truck has 1000lbs in the box 24/7 then 5.0 is the way to go. Eco Boost for me will be more $$ in gas because of payload. Still not sure on longevety of turbo 5 years down the road with 200k km turbo replacement 3to 4 k$$ for me time will tell
Junior User
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
10 Things Every Truck Owner NEEDS (2026 Edition)
Michael S. Palmer
Rezvani's Latest Post-Apocalyptic Monster Is a Ford F-150 Raptor Underneath
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Most Expensive Ford Trucks Ever Sold on Bring a Trailer
Joe Kucinski
2027 Ford Super Duty Buyer's Guide (Every Model, Engine, & Package)
Brett Foote
Top 10 Ford Truck Tragedies
Joe Kucinski
AEV FXL Super Duty - the Super Duty Raptor Ford Doesn't Make
Brett Foote
Lobo Vs Lobo: Proof the F-150 Lobo Should Be Even Lower!
Michael S. Palmer
Ford's 2001 Explorer Sportsman Concept Looks For a New Home
Verdad Gallardo
10 Best Ford Truck Engines We Miss the Most!
Joe Kucinski
Super Moderator
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 25,479
Likes: 742
From: Isanti, MN
yeah well up here dealers advise me against the eco boost for my needs . If you are a weekend warrior meening you go to work with a lunch box or a breifcase and use your truck for week end pulling or hauling then eco is the way to go. But if your truck has 1000lbs in the box 24/7 then 5.0 is the way to go.
Originally Posted by 819jack
Eco Boost for me will be more $$ in gas because of payload. Still not sure on longevety of turbo 5 years down the road with 200k km turbo replacement 3to 4 k$$ for me time will tell
2011 FORD F-150 Parts - AutoNation Ford White Bear Lake Parts (previously Tousley Ford Parts)
That's very true, but lots of turbocharged engines have proven reliable over the years. Time will tell how these hold up.
Senior User
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 172
Likes: 0
Well does that $600 for the turbo cover any other issues you may have if a turbo fails or blows up? I can imagine if a turbo fails it can damage other parts of the engine. So at a minimum its $600 plus labor plus anything else that got damaged or broken.
Super Moderator
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 25,479
Likes: 742
From: Isanti, MN
I'm very curious to see how things play out over the next ten or fifteen years, but just because it's turbocharged doesn't make it unreliable. If so I'll be dumping this one before the warranty expires.
Super Moderator
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 40,024
Likes: 1,519
From: Maine, Virginia
I'd have to say that if Ford did the direct injection treatment on the 5.0L and changed the torque curve to better match those of the 3.5L and 6.2L engines, then it would be the best choice.
When I bought my truck, the EB was only $750 over the 5.0L. It's gone up since 2011. Like the diesel, the EB is way overkill for my needs and I'll never pay the premium that Ford wants for it again unless my needs change from a daily driver to a real working truck.
If I were to purchase a current gen truck, I'd spec out the 3.7L. No upcharge and no real documented issues.
When I bought my truck, the EB was only $750 over the 5.0L. It's gone up since 2011. Like the diesel, the EB is way overkill for my needs and I'll never pay the premium that Ford wants for it again unless my needs change from a daily driver to a real working truck.
If I were to purchase a current gen truck, I'd spec out the 3.7L. No upcharge and no real documented issues.
Junior User
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
OK Tom, buy it or not the problem is not the capability of engine but rather the weight of that perticular load in the box.What tends to happen with the Eco boost gradual accelaration is not very smooth truck want to launch went turbo kicks in with this load. All I am saying the 5.0 is alot smoother at low speeds.With this combination weight and engine, the turbo kicks in and out when turbo kicks in well fuel eco is out the window. When I will see the Eco Boost with no issues after 6 or 7 years of running 250 000 km I will become a beleiver.
If guy's owne a truck for 1 or 2 years then exchange for a new one they are not the best reference for me they are more like test pilots. They could owne any other makes of trucks and still come out with positive results. For me I just hope these Eco Boost do not become the F-150s douwn fall in the long run.
Up here in Quebec where temps rang from 110 f to -40f and city's here spray liquid calcium on the roads in the winter that crap gets into everything. I dont know of any make of vehicles with turbo's that had any grate success so far Ford would be the first.
If guy's owne a truck for 1 or 2 years then exchange for a new one they are not the best reference for me they are more like test pilots. They could owne any other makes of trucks and still come out with positive results. For me I just hope these Eco Boost do not become the F-150s douwn fall in the long run.
Up here in Quebec where temps rang from 110 f to -40f and city's here spray liquid calcium on the roads in the winter that crap gets into everything. I dont know of any make of vehicles with turbo's that had any grate success so far Ford would be the first.
Lead Driver
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 8,466
Likes: 726
From: Calgary Canada
You know, I'm replacing my current 2005 5.4L truck soon with a 2011-2012. I had my heart set on the Egoboost, but after thinking more about it, the 5.0 will probably be great for me. Getting two extra gears in the trans will probably make enough of a difference that the 5.0L engine will haul my little trailer just fine. My current 5.4L never felt short of power, just short of gears.
I guess that means I should consider a 2010 with the new trans and old engine, but somehow I think I'll end up a year or two newer than that.
Anywhoo . . . .
I guess that means I should consider a 2010 with the new trans and old engine, but somehow I think I'll end up a year or two newer than that.
Anywhoo . . . .