I'm with you! Though I don't have an EcoBoost, I've heard the proponents just like you talk about how it tows like a diesel without all the diesel drawbacks. That's what I'm looking for in my next truck. The main negative I have heard is fuel economy while towing. I'm not too concerned since my 6.4L gets 8.5-10.5 towing our fiver depending on how fast I drive and how hilly it is. I wouldn't see an EB being much worse on a cost/mile basis since diesel is running higher than gasoline.

 

Very interesting.

6R80 failures seem downright rare, and some of us have pushed them pretty hard. Gear ratios will tell the tale though, if based on the 6R80 there's a high chance they will be a match.

 

The small EB from the F150 could go in it, or the diesel from the Transit. Shoot put the 2.0 Duratec in it, it's about the same lawn mower motor the Ranger had with the 2.3L I4.

I'm less worried about diesel-vs-gas than straight up no entry in the entire market segment.

 

My EcoBoost gets about the same towing mileage as my 5.4 Tritons did and my non-towing gas mileage is better. I am a much bigger fan of the 3.5 EcoBoost than the 6.2L V8.

 

I heard rumors they were going to at least look into a diesel option if they bring it here state side. Maybe that 3.2 Duratorq might prove useful, since it has more power than the 2.8L DuraMax in the Colorado/Canyon trucks and is in the same mid-sized truck class. Or the 2.7L EcoBoost would be a peppy engine for it. Might be on the high end for power but, you can never have too much power. As for the 2.3L Duratec that was in the last Rangers, it can be made to handle a lot more power. Other than a few parts, its still the same engine the Focus had and there is a pretty large following of people that turbo those engines with reliability and high amounts of power (400+hp) A few have turbo'ed the Duratec in the Ranger with good success. It can be done with a bit of cash but you don't need much more than what I've seen $3k depending on if you keep the stock internals (doable up to about 5-10psi) or build the whole thing up.

I'm still kinda surprised Ford is sticking with the 6R100/6R140-G for the Super Duty trucks rather than going for the all new 10 speed auto. Probably to keep with what they have proven to be reliable in the last 4-5 years rather than something new and unproven. Or maybe they did it because it can't handle the power of the PowerStroke or take the amount of work required by these trucks. Unless they have something in the pipe-line for 2020 or so.

 

I think that part makes sense, Ford and other manufacturers seem to have done the same for the last decade with the exception of the 5R110.

The Expedition got the 6R80 in 2007, and it's cousin the F150 continued on with the old 4R75E until 2009. Chrysler is moving towards the 8-speed transmission in their rear-wheel drive platforms, but that first started with the V6 models in 2013. A year later the V8 models got it, but as of now the brand-new HD models still have 6-speed boxes.

GM has a new 8L90 going in their half-ton trucks, but their HD models are still using the relatively ancient 6.0/6-speed combo.

In recent years powertrain failures seem to be downright rare. When's the last time anyone has heard of a truck being worked so hard that it blew up when all of the accessory systems were functioning as designed? I think manufacturers tend to be cautious when introducing new designs to platforms that have a higher duty cycle. Consider the 6.2 for example. Not a bad engine by any stretch, but stone-age simple compared to the lighter duty powertrains in the F150.

I think heavy duty pickups will move forward, but at a slower pace.

 

Um... Ford 6.0 & 6.4 comes to mind . . .

 

Emissions ARE accessories unless you live in Kalifornistan or New Yawk. Just sayin', ya ain't cheating ya ain't tryin'.

 

May come a day when you cannot rip those things off and re-tune for adjustments. They might try to bring back a mandatory smog test in every state soon. Plus with Ford and several other companies trying to get DMCA rewritten to make it impossible and illegal to work on your own vehicle or even do a re-tune with an aftermarket tuner. Has to do with proprietary software in vehicles nowadays.

I know this is 6 months old, but hardly anyone talks about this or blew it off. Automakers to gearheads: Stop repairing cars

 

The idea of removing emissions equipment is very enticing, but not a reality for many folks on this boat. As a guy in the military, I'd be a downright idiot to remove the emissions gear on a truck under warranty because my future living location is not up to me. Just because I live in NV today, doesn't mean I won't be living in Washington DC next month or Kommiefornia the next year.

That's not a gamble many of us can take.

 

so no facts yet on the "G" tranny ?

 

Probably won't know anything until the trucks are out or they tell us something. All we can do is just speculate until then.

 

I think you can hardly call the 6.2L "stone age simple " compared to F150 powertrains. The EcoBoost is more complex, sure, but not the others. The 6.2 uses roller rockers, micro lifters, and two spark plugs per cylinder. It still has basic VVT despite SOHC. The half ton naturally aspirated engines may be DOHC and twin VVT, but they are not DI like the EcoBoost nor twin plugs like the 6.2. It's the GM and RAM V8 engines that are simple.

 

The 6R140 was never clunky behind my gas V8, but did pause a bit between shifts and was slow to downshift. Tow / Haul mode fixed the slow to downshift problem. I thought it up shifted too quickly into top gear. I always had the impression the engine was turning very heavy machinery inside the transmission...which I liked. My ratio was 3.73. The 6.2 pulls hard at higher revs.

 

The 6.2 so far has not gotten a fair shake. It is a very stout and durable motor. However, Ford hobbled the output very early on to protect the diesel, and then never corrected that as the diesel gained power. They even crippled accelerator response by not allowing WOT until 3,000+ rpm. This engine could produce much more power if Ford wanted. It will probably never produce a ton of low end torque due to being quite oversquare but is a very good motor for the SD. Even at 385/405 rating it feels strong and sounds great.