I remember when the Grand Nationals came out. They where impressive to look at, very high tech at the time. But I wasn't very impressed with how fast they where, test drove a few. All the high tech racers wanted one, they could be made to go pretty quick. I don't know one person racer or not that didn't blow his Grand National engine. When you start talking turbos and V-6s, I see very high repair bills down the road. I'll pass.

 

Again, that's 25 year old technology versus today's technology.

 

It's the same type of stigma that diesels have as well. People have this perception of them that is based on 20-30 yrs ago that really doesn't apply to diesels today. That includes how you manage the upkeep on them as well.

 

Even though the EcoBoost is a new engine design, there are still issues like head gasket problems which exist in modern engines and which can be exacerbated by increased pressures. In addition, turbos still spin at 200k rpm or something and heat up to 1740 degrees or whatever; they are highly stressed pieces and are still subject to failure especially if they are inadequately cooled or lubricated.

(For my personal ancient history story, I had an '86 turbo Dodge Lancer that needed a new head gasket and turbo at 69k miles--I used to joke that the $$$ Chrysler had to invest in my Lancer caused them to kill their 7/70 warranty.)

Like I said a while back in this thread, none of us know how likely it is for EcoBoost engines to be running in 15 years with 250k miles on them and poor maintenance.

It has been a good discussion, but you guys who are so sure the EcoBoost is the new Messiah are just a bit premature in my opinion. I have faith in new technology as well, but nothing has ever made me doubt the basics of Murphy's Law

George

 

I don't believe that it's the new Messiah, but what I don't like is the fact that people are premature in "damning" it as well. Or are damning it due to the mere fact that it's a v6. That's what gets me. It might still be bad or less then up to snuff, but the mere fact that it's a v6 shouldn't be the only reason why someone says that it's bad. Not when, like you say, it's still too soon to tell.

 

From what I recall reading the $700 is what it would cost Ford to manufacture the EB over the 5.4L. Their cost.

Ford as working on how the EB would sound in the cab more so then behind it.

 

I'm not going to damn it and I agree that time will tell. But if anyone asked for my personal opinion as to what "they" should do, I would recommend waiting a year or two, or at least getting a good extended warranty if not both. I have yet to see the perfect car and I doubt that day will ever come. Do I think it's cool? Sure.

 

This is from a post by Mike at Ford regarding the 6.2 and octane requirements for the Super Duty. This is the first time that I have read from an engineer at Ford that the engine will respond to higher octane and provide more horsepower.

I wonder if the newer calibrations for the F150 will have the same results.

Sure would be nice to be able to add a few more ponies just by filling the tank with 91 octane when you are pulling that heavy load.

 

First of all the engine should have the 5 year power train warranty so why worry? And why buy an extended warranty up front? Wait a few years and see how she works and yeah it might cost more to buy it later but why buy it if you don't need it. Second, if it does have problems Ford will make it right. Third, how many people keep a car over 5 years anyway? Most pay it off and get another. Fourth if your advice is too wait, then how long? Let's see, this year it's all new engines so you better not buy. Next year it might be new frame, suspension, etc. It's always gonna be something.

Do you really think that Ford is going to put the ecoboost in the F-150 if it isn't going to be a great engine? Think about it, the F-150 is Ford's bread and butter and they aren't gonna screw that up.

 

I'm not trying to knock Ford it's actually my preferred brand. But I do know of a dealer that had to buy back a couple Explorers with trans problems. They all make mistakes. A guy just posted about Ford trucks burning down when parked, what's up with that? https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/9...ned-fires.html

 

I keep trucks well over 5 years, generally well past 100k miles. Even if you sell after 3 or 5 years, a truck with a bad reliability reputation will not bring the kind of resale value that a reliable truck will bring. (Look at the market--Honda and Toyota cars cost a LOT of money used compared to Chevy/Ford because they will go 200k+ miles.)

Ford will typically NOT make things right past the warranty period. My 2002 E150 has a 4.6, early PI Romeo engine. They screwed up the cylinder heads on this engine (not enough cooling to rear cylinders) and I got $4000 worth of new cylinder heads for free under my extended warranty and a Ford TSB. If I was beyond warranty, I would have been SOL. This was a 10 year old engine design with redesigned cylinder heads. Ford screwed it up.

Look at the spark plug problems on the 2V engines (blown out plugs) and the 3V engines (stuck plugs). How many years did they produce these problematic engines? Why did they not discover these problems in their "testing"? These were elementary design aspects of the engines but ended up costing customers hundreds or thousands of dollars to simply replace spark plugs. Ford's engineers did not know enough to put more than 3 sparkplug threads in an aluminum head. Then they messed up the Romeo PI 4.6 heads, still with the bad plug threads, and then they designed the 3V mod motor with the sticking spark plugs. ALL of these engines were in their bread and butter trucks and vans. They screwed them up. If they can't get spark plug threads right, tell me how they can get a whole new engine design, with highly stressed turbos, right on the first try? My first car was a 1965 Sunbeam Alpine, English POS with an aluminum head. The spark plug threads were fine...

An engine (or transmission) is way more complex than new suspension pieces and is way more expensive to repair or replace. The more complex and highly stressed the engine, the more possibility that *something* will go wrong. Nothing about cylinder count here. I would worry about a 3.5 liter EcoBoost if it was a V8, straight six, V6, V12....

How much do you think it would cost to replace a 3.5 EcoBoost engine at 61,000 miles, right out of warranty, if you were paying for it?

George

 

Go over to the SD forums and you'll see a lot of people that keep their vehicles over 5 yrs(in fact, I'm one of them my 6.0 is ~5.5 yrs old right now). Now I'm thinking that's more of type of customer base item then anything else. I do think you'r correct that more likely then not an F-150 owner isn't going to keep their vehicle much past 5 yrs, if it makes it past 3 really knowing some that I do.

 

Ditto on that post George. The sad part on the spark plug blowout issue is some of the old 4.6 heads had twice the amount of threads, they actually decided it was a bad idea and created the problem!

 

I had a 92 F150 and the front 4x4 hubs were replaced 3 times in warranty and two times past warranty for free. That is why I have been a Ford man for nearly 35 years.

What makes you think than the ecoboost engine will fail? And what makes you think that the engine would have to be replaced not repaired? Ford has already said that the water cooled turbos will be good for 150,000 miles. The ecoboost is a big part of Ford's future across the line. I bet they have done their homework.

What percentage of the 4.6 or 5.4 were troublesome? Hundreds of thousands own them and with today's internet you tend to only hear the bad things. If Ford screwed up so bad then why are they still the number one in truck sales?


I will be in Dallas a few days before the State Fair to see an ecoboost before the general public (thanks to Mike from pickuptrucks.com providing us with a free bbq dinner and a preview of the truck). The chief engineer and marketing manager will be there and I am making my list of questions about the ecoboost.
So far I have:

HP?
Torque?
MPG?
MPG while towing as compared to the 6.2?
Warranty?
Expected life?
Premium fuel required?
flex fuel compatible?
What durability testing has been done?

Got any more that you want me to ask? When I get all of these answers I will make my final decision about the engine.

 

You could have asked these same questions about the mod motors with the spark plug problems, about one of Ford's bad transmission designs, etc, and you would get the same answers--"fully tested, completely reliable, etc". They follow some very strict and tough testing procedures, no question, but somehow in the real world, stuff happens that testing will not find. Time and age is something they can't really simulate well. I wonder if they every blew a plug out of a mod motor in their testing? The extra heat of turbos will make hoses, wires, and other rubber parts under the hood crispy over time; that in itself could cause problems.

The only real evidence will take real world use or the ability to see into the future. The real question would be: "what fatal flaw(s) did the engineers miss in the design of the engine or its subsystems, or what fatal flaws will be introduced in the production process?...."

One more story. My wife needed a commuter car with huge mpg and low depreciation. She chose a 2007 Honda Civic. The car had been introduced in 2005 as a 2006 model, so I looked on the Internet and found no problems. Civics are bulletproof and her car has been *perfect* so far at 47k miles.

BUT, two weeks ago we got a mailing from Honda. The engine blocks in these Civics have some possible casting flaws which causes them to bust open and dump coolant and fry the engine. Honda has stepped up to the plate and is giving all owners an 8 year warranty, unlimited mileage, and will replace the entire short block for free during this time period. There have been owners who have paid $4 grand for a new shortblock and Honda will pay them back as well. (For the record, the engine is 100% built in the US, and the car has higher domestic content than a Focus.)

Now this is great warranty coverage, but I sure as hell would not take off in this car and drive to California without some concern involving Murphy's Law.... I am actually hoping that my wife's engine blows up at 7.5 years so we can get a fresh short block. Between this and the new cylinder heads on my 4.6, I frankly don't trust any engine totally. And the more stressed that engine is (like, say, a turbocharged engine), the more I would worry.

Go ahead and buy an EcoBoost if you want. I wish you total reliability and long engine life, so report back on it periodically. I want Ford to do well. I worry when they introduce something new that might give them a bad reputation.

George