Originally Posted by JKBrad

The OL asked about the 2.7, so that's all I addressed.

I guess I could be like some others and go into every thread and tell them that they should buy what I have.

Originally Posted by Bullitt390

I like everyone claiming the 5.0 must be a slouch at altitude.

I am in Colorado, and I am towing something nearly every weekend and I'll take my 5.0 over nearly everything. I have had a 99 7.3 Powerstroke and would still take the 5.0 over that.

Now my old 6.0 would be a tough call... I kinda miss my 2006.

Josh

Originally Posted by Bullitt390

Nah, I would get the 2.7 over the 3.5, at least the Gen 1 3.5.

But the snide comments about altitude and the NA Coyote are beyond useless.

Josh

Originally Posted by Delta Echo

Nobody said it's a "slouch", so you are reading things that aren't there. But it's a fact that a naturally aspirated engine loses about 3% of it's horsepower with every thousand feet of altitude, as the air gets "thinner" and atmospheric pressure drops. A turbo doesn't lose power with altitude, because it's forcing in as much air as it needs. In other words, your 5L has dropped from 385 horse to around 330 in Denver. A 3.5EB is still making the same 375ish horse (depending on year) that it did at sea level.

And I own a 5L.

Originally Posted by Bullitt390

That's partially true. A turbo engine will make slightly less max boost at altitude compared to sea level and also take longer to spool up to get there.

Josh

Originally Posted by Delta Echo

No, it's 100% true. Stock is only around 14PSI, but even if you bump up the boost to 20PSI, it will still produce that 20PSI at 10,000 feet, which means it doesn't lose any power. A little more lag is possible, but it will make the same amount of power.

Originally Posted by Bullitt390

Only way for a turbo to equal the same output at sea level is to increase boost. Simple to understand given less air and less oxygen equals less power.

Those 10,000 HP supercharged top fuel dragsters make less power and run slower at Bandimere than at Gatornationals.

Same as the diesel guys running slower and needing longer to spool up at the line when doing Truck Fest.

Josh

Originally Posted by Delta Echo

We are not talking about supercharged top fuel dragsters (pushing massive amounts of air), we are talking about turbocharged F150s. 14 PSI of boost at sea level is the same as 14 PSI of boost at 10,000 feet. No offense, but it's clear that you don't understand how a turbocharger works.

Originally Posted by Bullitt390

The original name for a turbo was "altitude compensator" and what the item is referred to when looking it up many John Deere heavy equipment applications, which I was a trained tech for 13 years.

As for real life: Ike Gauntlet towing 9000 pound trailer

2016 F150 5.0 8:12 and 3.8 mpg
2017 F150 3.5 8:02 and 3.5 mpg

Yes, altitude has an effect on turbos and it is ridiculous to think otherwise.

Josh

Originally Posted by soundwave

Hi, everyone. Sorry if a similar topic has been posted, as Ive flipped though a few pages of threads and didn't see anything. I used to be addicted to this site and have toned down my activity in recent years so it's possible Ive over looked it.

I'm trading in my 2010 FX4 with the 5.4 V8 and going with a 2017 supercrew sport w/ the FX4 package and the 2.7l V6 ecoboost. I test drove one and the test drive wasn't long enough for me to determine how big a difference in engines will be noticeable to me. Specifically, how noticeable will it be on hills and steep grades? I was wondering if anyone has made this move and what your opinions are? I don't tow anything and do only average hauling in the bed.

Thanks!