Originally Posted by Tom

I think the 2.7L EB would be a great choice for your application.

Turbo engines don't lose power at high altitudes nearly as much as N/A models, so it'll perform significantly better than a non-turbo engine with the same rated output. The 2.7L would be my first choice if I were you.

Originally Posted by ATX SD

I don't know about these Ecoboosts, but my Cummins turbo diesel would put out 100% of rated power up to 10,000' MSL altitude. Above that they had to limit the boost to avoid overspeed condition on the turbo. I imagine the ecoboosts likewise put out full rated power to close to the same altitude.

Originally Posted by www.pickuptrucks.com

Ford Truck Communications Manager Mike Levine said that while yes, "turbocharged EcoBoost engines have the capability to deliver a similar boost level at higher altitudes when the atmospheric pressure is decreasing," this same drop in atmospheric pressure is typically the reason why both power and torque decrease in naturally aspirated engines. While maintaining the same boost level at lower altitudes, Levine noted, other limits can be encountered, like turbo speeds at higher rpms that could also result in a power reduction (at higher elevations), but still have a smaller amount or no reduction of peak torque.

Because EcoBoost engines can lose some performance, Levine said, a reduction in the GCWR is recommended if customers want to maintain the same performance level they had when driving the same truck and trailer at sea level. We would also note that, although not as significantly impacted, the bigger, torque-biased diesel engines encounter the same type of performance challenges.