I haven't hear much about this lately. The NTSB did look into the issue and was happy with the CAC fix. The lawsuit was really blown out of proportion. I did read once it was settled but the article didn't give any particulars.

 

,
we know, that's the root of the problem.

but let's start with your claim, by way of reference, about your claims that a high boost gasoline engine is inherently a bad design, as opposed to a low boost diesel engine that is a good design.

as i said before. name one diesel engine in the car, light truck, medium truck, or heavy truck market that only runs 4-5 psi of boost

your sources stink. that's why you are all bent out of shape. garbage in garbage out.

the history of turbos is to run them through either a draw-through or blow through carburetor system, then as technology became available, to run them through a rudimentary speed density fuel injection system, then a slightly more advanced mass air system.

how can you draw conclusions on how a turbo system will work with direct injection from that? you can't. we know how those worked out (some much better than others), but the only history that matters is how it is currently working direct inject and today's highly sophisticated PCM's and draw conclusions from that.

how do you use a turbo's failure rate with a draw through carburetor and use that to draw conclusions to today's engines ... you can't.

on thing is a constant, though.... they keep getting better and more reliable. that simply can't be denied, even by you.

only if it isn't built for it. the same argument can be made for any engine, including -- wait for it -- a diesel. how do you expect to get 100's of thousands of miles out of a 6.7 liter engine while constantly cramming it with 15psi boost? simple .. you build the engine for it, the rest takes care of itself. Can you imagine what the diesel industry though 20 years ago about trying to get 800 lbs-ft of torque out of a 6.7 liter engine ... they'd laugh and say "sure, if you don't want it to last" ...

a decade ago, no one would believe you could buy a 5.0 liter engine and produce over 400 NA horsepower and have it be worth a poop for driveability ... technology is making it happen.

i get the feeling that you are under the impression that they simply took the regular 3.5 NA motor and haphazardly slapped a couple turbo's on it. that simply isn't the case.

 

LMAO... when and where have you ever done that?
If you weren't so obnoxiously offensive, people wouldn't get offended by your posts..

 

troll
One who posts a deliberately provocative message to a newsgroup or message board with the intention of causing maximum disruption and argument

Sir, you fit this definition to the letter. The trolling will end now.

There is no ecoboost club, no paid posters, no paid Ford posters here and certainly none of the ecoboost owners are unaware of the issues that have happened WRT this engine.

You will stop the constant bashing now sir.

 

Finally someone addressed what makes these engines viable, The advanced electronics of the ECM are light years ahead of the where they were even ten yeas ago. 99% of the time you only find people complaining about a product on the internet. Searching this forum there just isn't a lot of people having problems with the ecoboost F150's. I remember when Ford first started selling the 6.7L Ford diesel after it severed ties with international just about every over thread had to do with failed cooling systems. I am not seeing that kind of failure with the ecoboost engines. If I were in the market for a newer truck and were not too cheap to spend the extra money I would consider an ecoboost.

just my $.02

Matt

 

A very open minded and reasonable approach. My truck is a 2011 and has been issue free. However, it seems that the issues that the ecoboost trucks did have were mainly focused in the 2011/2012 model years. If I were in the market for a used ecoboost, I'd refine my search to a 2013/2014 truck.

 

I have an ecoboost yes...am I happy with it...yes. Have I had any engine related problems with my truck as of yet...NO. Have I had any issues with my turbos as of yet...NO. Am I worried about having a turbo failure NO. These are not the turbos of late...they are water AND oil cooled. They are light years ahead of the turbo's that used to be in the grand nationals and buick regals. Those turbos got extremely hot and usually didn't last all that long.

Here's the thing RRRSkinner you really don't have to like the ecoboost engine, nor understand why people like them so much. Just because people on the forum have had great experiences with their truck that have an ecoboost motor in them doesn't make them in any "club" they are just people that have the same motor in their truck.

Just as I remember you always ranting about the glories of the SSI tunes to everyone...which was something you strongly felt about, others did not feel the same enthusiasm about them. I think you get so much response from your posts due to the way you post. It seems as if you come off argumentative even pointing out the smallest things. Other forums thrive off of constant bickering and name calling etc. but this forum is not one of them. No one is trying to stifle your opinions of things...but they also have the right to refute your claims to your posts...IN A CIVIL WAY.

Regardless...this whole debate has basically ruined the thread for the OP and in my mind has not helped them one bit on what decision to make regarding the engine choice.

 

The system won't let me rep you. It wants me to like more people and not be a rep snob.

 

I respect the fact the ecoboost is one heck of an engine. even though my truck doesn't have the ecoboost, Ford did take the time to engineer it. and there are many happy owners. Im happy with my ecoboostless 2013.....

 

I think seeing this thread run its course is good. It shows how bazaar bias about this engine exists, and how the vast majority of what is said about it is blatantly false.

I put 160,000 miles on my diesel turbo, and this was after pushing 1600+ degrees F though it so many times, I couldn't even give a number. I can't say how many times it made 35+ psi when in the stock truck it was maxed around 18-20. It was spooling at 100,000+ RPM to make those boost numbers (I can't recall what the map looked like anymore, and I don't have it handy). The engine itself was making just about double the power it was from the factory. I get that this isn't the same engine, but after studying it for years, and seeing how it's built, I have no doubt that it will be just as happy taking the similar "abuse" I put my 7.3L through.

Hopefully, the OP can take something positive from all this, if he's still following. So far, I've seen ~17psi out of the turbos on this truck, which is about 6psi more than they were making stock. And no, they haven't flown apart. My goal is 400 hp & 500 ft-lbs at the wheels, and from my estimates, I'm about 40 hp short. I would guess I'm about 70ish ft-lbs short on torque. I may dyno it sometime soon just to see where it is today. I have a few more mods in mind that will hopefully get me there -- without major mods like the turbo & fuel system upgrades.

 

I just saw that Full Race is selling drop-in turbos with the new Ford GT wheels. Have you seen any info or numbers for that?

 

Not yet -- but I'll be watching...

 

I recently had the pleasure of interviewing the guy that owns this truck, your numbers are definitely do-able!

 

 

I believe everyone has a right to their opinion as long as they don't disguise it as fact. Whether a forum member works for Ford in some form has little bearing on the Pro-Ford atmosphere in every thread. It's a Ford truck enthusiast's forum. You are going to get backlash. It is the same thing if you went on a Chevy truck forum and said,"The 5.3 LS motor is garbage."
You will get the same response.

Now that this thread has spiraled into a bandwidth hogging turd that really has no benefit to anyone, even the OP, it should be destroyed.