At least according to this video

 

The longer I have my 6.2 the more I do like it....and I miss my EB a little less each day. I still would love one but maybe the 2018 year....I will also say I really think this new tranny designed for the 6.2 will improve the way the truck preforms and that alone may be the best gas motor change they can do. This 6.2 is Rock Solid.

 

Not a surprise, the current Ecoboost engines are not well suited for heavy pickups and chassis/cabs. You Ecoboost fans need to understand there is more to making a good heavy duty engine than just horsepower and torque figures.

 

Nothing new here. They've had the motor options listed for a few months now. Just not specs yet that I've seen. I think it will come eventually, the notion that they are inherently not right for the SD is as silly as the folks who didn't think they would be successful in the 1/2 ton line-up.

 

Aluminum block. No manufacturer has yet to use an aluminum block in any large pickup. Commercial duty cycle will eventually kill it. Also, in a heavier truck the Ecoboost's turbo's would likely be spooled up all the time, and fuel economy would go out the window. At that point, what's the point? Also note I said 'current' Ecoboost. I am not saying that the Ecoboost concept couldn't be applied to an engine designed for larger pickups and commercial trucks, it is just I don't think the current versions have any place in a larger truck. Bottom line- I wouldn't buy one.

 

I think power and reliability could be very easily adapted to the HD market. The flip side is convincing the fleet buyers of that. I would love to see a version of the EB offered along with the 6.2

 

I think Ford is 1) thinking about fleets with romp-and-stomp concerns, and 2) not wanting to cut in on the 6.7L sales yet on the towing side.

They need to keep recouping R&D costs. Ford was seriously hurting coming out of the 6.0 and 6.4, the 6.7 has shut up a lot of critics but the internal development of the engine plus continuing to put out one of the best transmissions on the market isn't cheap.

It's never ideal to pass on something that could be very popular, but with only X dollars to spend on R&D, staying on top of the diesel is ultimately a better bet than sinking a ton money into a 2nd tier or worse a niche engine in the 250-550 series line up.

Big gas engine for fleets, big diesel engine for medium duties...... then the EB would be a specialty engine. It's reality for a least a few more years, in a way proved by how the 6.0 lingered in the E-Series until 2010 and the 6.8 is still around in the C&C platforms. Wait for the incremental improvements in the smaller EcoBoosts to flow up into the fleet world.

 

I truly appreciate the simplicity and un-surpassed reliability of the 6.2. Now, offer me the 3.5EB with a max tow of 12k, with the new 6R100, in an F250; the truck itself weighing 300 less and maybe another 100 compared to my 6.2 motor, which I'm scaled at 6800lbs. MY XL truck would weigh pretty close to many pre '15 F150's. I would buy one, and once I heard there were no motor lineup changes for 2017 I picked up my 2016. I understand what I want is not for everyone, but it is what would work great for a whole lot of buyers. There's no doubt I would get better mpg's and have better power than my current 6.2. Ford doesn't need to offer it across the SD lineup, just make it available. IMO, the biggest reason for not offering it is $, with the EB cutting into the profits of the $8000 up-charge for the 6.7. We know there is a lot more they can to do the the 3.5 for a SD powerplant...hence the new gen coming in the Raptor or the GT500. I have been fortunate enough for the last 3 years to drive the 6.7, followed by the 3.5 and now since Nov., the 6.2. So I know it will work in my application.

 

In the future there will be 2 types of truck owners, those who have an EcoBoost and those who wish they had an EcoBoost. I will go back to a EcoBoost Max Tow F150 if there is no EcoBoost F250 when the time comes to get a new truck.

 

Almost sounds like Ford needs to revisit when they had the f250 that looked like the f150 a few years ago (F250 lite or F150 HD). That would be a plausible platform to the test a super duty designed eco boost. Love the 2.0 in my fusion. Three years ago reporters were saying the public would never pay more for a smaller engine. Once Ford pulls the trigger on a new engine, I am confident they will have a good one. I would still preferred a V10 offering for the F350's.

 

Unfortunately the v10 has become obsolete. A turbo 6 can make more hp and tq, with a flatter tq curve, all while getting double the mpg empty and slightly better loaded. I don't believe a turbo 6 will last as long or be as cheap to maintain if out under the same stresses as a v10 can handle but I don't think the technology is far off at all.

 

Nah, I'll stick with the classic.... Rudolph Diesel sytle.

 

That's exactly what I want in an F250! Except, I want a Lariat and not an XL.

They already have that as the HD payload package on the F150. It has been that way since 2000 I think.

 

The first two sentences are facts, pretty indisputable. That last one is conjecture, but it does seem to be pretty commonly held opinion.

My opinion is that IF the ecoboost is somehow less durable, it must be well past 200k miles, or we'd know a lot more about it now. AND, if that's the trade off, I'll STILL choose it.

That being said, I don't think it's true that the ecoboost is less durable than V8 and V10 options it's replaced and replacing. Hell, talk about complexity, fewer cylinders means a lot fewer moving parts to wear out.

 

To make a turbo motor "as reliable" all you have to do is make the turbos better than the motor. Sure there are more stresses on the internals, but we've long gotten past the point of motors breaking internally on a regular basis. The concern for turbos is the turbo itself. I agree that if it was a problem, we'd be hearing about it already. Not sure why there is a unwillingness for some folks to believe a single moving part device can't be made ultra reliable.