When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
In all fairness to that truck, it was my first new vehicle, I don't think that I had towing in mind when I bought it, however my dad had just bought a new chaparell 20 ft boat and this is what I tried to tow it with, I think this is the hard way of educating ones self about what is needed for gears, there is no doubt in my mind that if this truck had 3.73 gear set that it would have done just fine. It seems as though when we were in the sixties and seventies a camper seldom weighed more than 4 or 5000# and were often towed with a station wagon or large sedan with a big v8, when the air stream people would tow they would use something like a 300 cubic inch ford inline six or the chevy version with 292 cubes and have transmissions like a 4spd manual with a creeper first gear that you only used when you were pulling something, will this new 2.7 handle it? I think it will, but I also think that the R V industry needs to do some homework and start making rv's a little lighter, if a person wants to tent camp or buy an expensive trailmanor that folds down for aerodynamics, this truck would do just fine!
I think the 2.7 will handle what 75% of half ton buyers would use it for. My 02 5.4 has 260 HP 350 Torque , so if the 2.7 gets 25 lbs more torque, has a flatter torque curve and is in a lighter vehicle (not sure how the 15's will compare to my 02 weight wise) with more gears, it should be an amazing little machine if it proves itself durable. I pull a small 17' camper with a small aluminum fishing boat behind that, probably a combined 4500 -5000 lbs loaded down, and am happy with how it pulls. So I think I would be more than happy to upgrade to a 2.7 if I had the money. Having said that, I would still go with the 3.5 EB if I had the choice because eventually I will upgrade my camper and I know my 02 will struggle to pull what I want to get.
The 2.7L is laying down more than double the HP and more TQ than the old 300 4.9L I-6. It's going to be a perfect fit for most buyers.
It'll take many years before we know if it'll last as long as the 300. It's sure more complex (but so is everything). I remember the 1 barrel carb on my '78 300 inch six and the simple manifolds. I'm having a tough time envisioning 15 year old clapped out F150's driven by lawn crews with 2.7's in them. But we shall see.
I've been really impressed by the 2V 4.6 mod motor in my '02 van. Not as high tech as the 2.7 but using less oil at 120k miles than it did when it was new.
I do feel better about the iron block being used on the 2.7.
Tom, I have been looking at the ZF8 transmission that Chrysler has in the Ram trucks and Jeeps. Looking at their gear ratios, I can speculate that first gear in the new 9 and 10 speed Ford/GM will probably be around a 5:1, 6:1 or maybe a 7:1 with double OD.
The 2.7L can't be had with the max tow option so it's not Ford's pulling machine anyway.
Now I can see a salesperson talking someone into a 2.7L with references about being able to pull 8000 lbs, etc when we all know here on FTE that you still have the load the camper, add the passengers, etc.
People need to learn the limitations of their vehicles and adjust their expectation accordingly OR, buy a pulling machine and prepare for lower than advertised MPG's.
I don't know how many times we've argued this point on the 2009+ forum.
X2 Tim, as much as I loved my 2011 half ton, I traded to a 2014 SD, simply for the same reason you stated. The F150 never gave me any issues at all, I just worried I was bumping (sometimes exceeding) it's limits too much. Granted had I had a ecoboost max tow, I may not have gotten rid of it, but a Harley Edition wasn't set up as a towing beast either...Anyway, the point is folks I know will get half tons whether it's Ford, GM, RAM, etc.. push them to the limits continuously, and when the truck has issues, rant and rave about it being a POS. I think the 2.7 will be geared more towards folks that not necessarily need a truck, but would like to have one, and we'll see a lot more folks driving trucks thst otherwise wouldn't because of the fuel efficiency of the 2.7, the same way the EcoDiesel has folks driving a diesel now that otherwise wouldn't have because they didn't want or need a super duty truck.
The 2.7L is laying down more than double the HP and more TQ than the old 300 4.9L I-6. It's going to be a perfect fit for most buyers.
Originally Posted by YoGeorge
It'll take many years before we know if it'll last as long as the 300. It's sure more complex (but so is everything). I remember the 1 barrel carb on my '78 300 inch six and the simple manifolds. I'm having a tough time envisioning 15 year old clapped out F150's driven by lawn crews with 2.7's in them. But we shall see.
I've been really impressed by the 2V 4.6 mod motor in my '02 van. Not as high tech as the 2.7 but using less oil at 120k miles than it did when it was new.
I do feel better about the iron block being used on the 2.7.
George
If the 3.5 and 2.7 ecoboost are as long lived as the 302 v8 or the 300 six, we all win, I think with proper maintenance that they will do good, I am a v8 guy in the column of more cubic inches are better, but I adopted and have no regrets, are there going to be teething problems, yes, but with a little knowledge it will work out well.
I have a feeling one of the problems with the new 2.7L will be the new oil pump. Changing from needing more pressure to less nearly on the go, seems like it might be one of the new failing points in the engine.
I have a feeling one of the problems with the new 2.7L will be the new oil pump. Changing from needing more pressure to less nearly on the go, seems like it might be one of the new failing points in the engine.
I'm sure that's possible, but I find it unlikely they would put such a critical component into an engine without extensive durability testing. We'll see though, I don't know of any engine that's currently made with this technology.
I have a feeling one of the problems with the new 2.7L will be the new oil pump. Changing from needing more pressure to less nearly on the go, seems like it might be one of the new failing points in the engine.
Originally Posted by Tom
I'm sure that's possible, but I find it unlikely they would put such a critical component into an engine without extensive durability testing. We'll see though, I don't know of any engine that's currently made with this technology.
I have no problem with this technology as long as failure mode will default to higher pressure as opposed to low pressure, I imagine this for fuel economy, parasitic drag of higher oil pressure is probably not the only reason for variable oil pressure, I can see them modulating it for advancing cam timing, I don't think this would be for building fuel pressure as in a power stroke diesel where they need 25-30,000 psi for fuel injection.
I have no problem with this technology as long as failure mode will default to higher pressure as opposed to low pressure, I imagine this for fuel economy, parasitic drag of higher oil pressure is probably not the only reason for variable oil pressure, I can see them modulating it for advancing cam timing, I don't think this would be for building fuel pressure as in a power stroke diesel where they need 25-30,000 psi for fuel injection.
The Diesel engines used a completely separate high pressure fuel system, but not recently. The last Power Stroke to of use a HEUI fuel system was the 2007 6.0L engine. 2008+ trucks use a high pressure fuel pump that has nothing to do with the oiling system.
I'm sure that's possible, but I find it unlikely they would put such a critical component into an engine without extensive durability testing. We'll see though, I don't know of any engine that's currently made with this technology.
I don't know what to think about it. I know that this is just Ford advertising, just hope its just just another Detroit marketing gimmick to suck more people in:
I'm sure that's possible, but I find it unlikely they would put such a critical component into an engine without extensive durability testing. We'll see though, I don't know of any engine that's currently made with this technology.
It does not seem like it is that much more complex than, say, variable valve timing or something. I agree that high pressure mode should be the default if the system fails.
Durability testing, like they did with the 3.5 EcoBoost (which I saw torn apart at the Detroit Auto Show) is definitely a tough test, but it is a limited test that can't simulate 150k miles over 10 years in every possible climate that these trucks will live in.
Still, I would like to be optimistic, and think the 2.7 EB would be a great engine in a vehicle like the Edge or something like that.
Only time will tell what EcoBoosts will look like after 10 years. We know what the 302, 300 inch six, and mod motors look like after 10 years, and I'd say they did quite well although not totally without issues.
I'm rooting for Ford but would not be a first year buyer of a new engine with high tech features.