Engine Reliability
Thread Starter
|
New User
Joined: Feb 2016
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Engine Reliability
Hi all,
I'm about to replace my 2004 Ranger with an F150. I've have great reliability for 380,000 miles so my expectations are high. I want to hear from the 3.5 ecoboost, vs 5.0 folks with a lot of miles. How are they holding up? On the new truck forums the discussion just compares specs and ability. Either engine will do the job that I need. But whatever I choose it has to stay in service for 250,000 plus.
Please help. I'm a big fan of tried and true like the 5.0 but I also like the idea of the 3.5 eco. Thanks in advance for your feedback.
Mike in CO
I'm about to replace my 2004 Ranger with an F150. I've have great reliability for 380,000 miles so my expectations are high. I want to hear from the 3.5 ecoboost, vs 5.0 folks with a lot of miles. How are they holding up? On the new truck forums the discussion just compares specs and ability. Either engine will do the job that I need. But whatever I choose it has to stay in service for 250,000 plus.
Please help. I'm a big fan of tried and true like the 5.0 but I also like the idea of the 3.5 eco. Thanks in advance for your feedback.
Mike in CO
Fleet Owner
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 24,724
Likes: 74
From: Blue Hill Township
Hi all,
I'm about to replace my 2004 Ranger with an F150. I've have great reliability for 380,000 miles so my expectations are high. I want to hear from the 3.5 ecoboost, vs 5.0 folks with a lot of miles. How are they holding up? On the new truck forums the discussion just compares specs and ability. Either engine will do the job that I need. But whatever I choose it has to stay in service for 250,000 plus.
Please help. I'm a big fan of tried and true like the 5.0 but I also like the idea of the 3.5 eco. Thanks in advance for your feedback.
Mike in CO
I'm about to replace my 2004 Ranger with an F150. I've have great reliability for 380,000 miles so my expectations are high. I want to hear from the 3.5 ecoboost, vs 5.0 folks with a lot of miles. How are they holding up? On the new truck forums the discussion just compares specs and ability. Either engine will do the job that I need. But whatever I choose it has to stay in service for 250,000 plus.
Please help. I'm a big fan of tried and true like the 5.0 but I also like the idea of the 3.5 eco. Thanks in advance for your feedback.
Mike in CO
Senior User
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Well Ford has been doing OHC V8s for a lot longer than GDI and twin turbos. That being said, I think the ecoboost is a pretty well put together motor. From what I've read, I would just pick the motor you like better.
Posting Guru
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 2,043
Likes: 4
I wouldn't buy turbo charged gas engine looking for 380k miles......actually I wouldn't expect it out of either engine but I'd gamble on the 5.0 to go farther.....but this not a poke at EcoBoost motors I'd drive one almost bought one actually two but I'd be happy with 200k miles as I know I'd want something newer by then
Super Moderator
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 25,479
Likes: 738
From: Isanti, MN
Check out this thread in another forum:
http://www.f150ecoboost.net/forum/13...mileage-8.html
Look for posts by Bumpside67. Over 300,000 miles on his '11 EcoBoost truck with nothing but regular oil changes. Lots of other high mileage folks in that thread as well.
http://www.f150ecoboost.net/forum/13...mileage-8.html
Look for posts by Bumpside67. Over 300,000 miles on his '11 EcoBoost truck with nothing but regular oil changes. Lots of other high mileage folks in that thread as well.
Super Moderator
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 40,006
Likes: 1,517
From: Maine, Virginia
Anyone who owns a 5.0L or an EB truck can easily verify that they are fast and fun. Either will run hard and set you back in your seat with a wide grin on your face. I know, I do it regularly and maybe that's whats helped to keep mine healthy.
Additionally, Ford has a suggested oil change cycle of 10K miles or when the oil life monitor says to dump. Considering the size of the filter and the capacity of the sump, I can't agree with this practice.
For the reasons I've stated and there may be more reasons, I wouldn't touch either of the trucks used if they had over 20K miles on them. 20K is MY line in the sand for anything used, nothing scientific about my opinion.
I have my flame retardant, fire away boys.
Additionally, Ford has a suggested oil change cycle of 10K miles or when the oil life monitor says to dump. Considering the size of the filter and the capacity of the sump, I can't agree with this practice.
For the reasons I've stated and there may be more reasons, I wouldn't touch either of the trucks used if they had over 20K miles on them. 20K is MY line in the sand for anything used, nothing scientific about my opinion.
I have my flame retardant, fire away boys.
Trending Topics
Post Fiend
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 14,541
Likes: 2
From: Dallas-Ft. Worth
Anyone afraid of turbos needs to check themselves. Big trucks have been running turbos for hundreds of thousands of miles with no problems. My previous truck had a modified stock turbo making over twice the boost in its stock configuration with over 160k on it. Turbochargers nowadays are extremely reliable, and as long as you keep your fluids clean, cool, and changed as required, they will last. These in particular have both oil and coolant cycling through them which should make them even more reliable. These aren't 80s turbos your mothers warned you about. LOL
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
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
2026 Shelby F-150 Off-Road: Better Than a Raptor R?
Brett Foote
2027 Super Duty Carhartt Package First Look: 12 Things You NEED to Know!
Michael S. Palmer
10 Most Surprising 2026 Ford Truck Features!
Joe Kucinski
Top 10 Ford Trucks Coming to Mecum Indy 2026
Brett Foote
5 Best / 5 Worst Ford Truck Wheels of All Time
Joe Kucinski
Mountain Pass
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 243
Likes: 1
To me, the 7.7 qt sump (on a 5.0) is H U G E. However, I think the filter is kinda small in comparison.
Are you saying the sump size and/or filter size would indicate 10K is too high or too low ?
For *ME*, I will always change oil/filter before reaching the recommended limit. Even with full synthetic oil, *I* will change it before 10K.
Tuned
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 369
Likes: 16
From: Pleasant Grove, Alabama
Anyone afraid of turbos needs to check themselves. Big trucks have been running turbos for hundreds of thousands of miles with no problems. My previous truck had a modified stock turbo making over twice the boost in its stock configuration with over 160k on it. Turbochargers nowadays are extremely reliable, and as long as you keep your fluids clean, cool, and changed as required, they will last. These in particular have both oil and coolant cycling through them which should make them even more reliable. These aren't 80s turbos your mothers warned you about. LOL
He recently bought a 2016 4wd super crew Lariat in a beautiful burgundy/gold tu-tone.
I noticed the truck didn't have an EcoBoost emblem on the door and I asked how he liked the 5.0. "loved it". I asked if he had considered one of the ecoboost engines. "No". I asked why. He didn't want a turbo engine in a daily driver.
Super Moderator
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 40,006
Likes: 1,517
From: Maine, Virginia
You can elaborate ?
To me, the 7.7 qt sump (on a 5.0) is H U G E. However, I think the filter is kinda small in comparison.
Are you saying the sump size and/or filter size would indicate 10K is too high or too low ?
For *ME*, I will always change oil/filter before reaching the recommended limit. Even with full synthetic oil, *I* will change it before 10K.
To me, the 7.7 qt sump (on a 5.0) is H U G E. However, I think the filter is kinda small in comparison.
Are you saying the sump size and/or filter size would indicate 10K is too high or too low ?
For *ME*, I will always change oil/filter before reaching the recommended limit. Even with full synthetic oil, *I* will change it before 10K.
Super Moderator
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 25,479
Likes: 738
From: Isanti, MN
Here's one of the posts by the guy with over 300,000 miles in the other forum:
He used the OLM and is currently over 300,000 miles. Just food for thought.
Originally Posted by bumpside67
I'm now at about 293k. Getting to 300k fast. I change my oil when the computer tells me to, which is about 6-7k miles. I've run conventional Valvoline since it was new, with the exception of a couple changes when my quick change shop was out of Valvoline so I had them put Castrol in. Since my last post, at about 290k, the range sensor went out in the transmission. The computer couldn't detect that it was in park so it wouldn't allow the engine to start. At the Ford dealer it cost me $125 for the part, $300 labor plus fluid. I went ahead and had them replace the original battery at $135. The total came in at $644. The first signifIcant money I've spent on the truck, but it wasn't on the engine.
Logistics Pro
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 4,410
Likes: 1,015
From: Central KY
Either engine can potentially last a long time. But I think the Coyote has a better chance of lasting a long time than the EcoBoost. The Coyote is an overhead cam V8. They've been doing those forever. The Ecoboost has an external intercooler, turbos, supplemental vacuum pump under the headlight, and all manner of parts and pieces under the hood to make it work. The odds of having expensive repairs before 200,000 miles is simply much higher with the EcoBoost.
Add to that the fact that the EcoBoost costs more, uses more fuel, and makes only marginally more power... and to me the Coyote engine is a no-brainer. I truly believe the EcoBoost was a marketing gimmick, just as the fully aluminum body has been a marketing gimmick. Both "break throughs" have proven to be expensive to maintain and own, and neither has proven to truly save fuel.
Add to that the fact that the EcoBoost costs more, uses more fuel, and makes only marginally more power... and to me the Coyote engine is a no-brainer. I truly believe the EcoBoost was a marketing gimmick, just as the fully aluminum body has been a marketing gimmick. Both "break throughs" have proven to be expensive to maintain and own, and neither has proven to truly save fuel.
Mountain Pass
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 243
Likes: 1
Up until recently, nothing I ever owned took more than 5 qts (which includes some V-8's over the years).
The 5.7 L in my Challenger takes 7 qts ......... and now my 2012 F-150's 5.0 needs 7.7 qts. Obviously I adhere to the mfger's specs. I was not aware of many every-day, general consumer rigs taking much more oil than that.
The 5.7 L in my Challenger takes 7 qts ......... and now my 2012 F-150's 5.0 needs 7.7 qts. Obviously I adhere to the mfger's specs. I was not aware of many every-day, general consumer rigs taking much more oil than that.