I've been out of town for about a week, but just now caught up on this thread. Something that I'm not understanding....do people really go out and buy a brand new truck, then do all the aftermarket mods that have been mentioned??? For me, it's unimaginable to do that and totally void out the warranty??

The other thing that comes to my mind is that IF someone where to take a 6.2L and "mod" it out to create crazy HP....with how closely everything on these trucks are speced, would it even be able to handle the power without tearing itself apart?

I'm not trying to diss anybody's ideas.....but not having ever purchase a brand new truck, it's hard for me to wrap my head around taking a brand new rig and destroying whatever warranty it has by modding it out.

 

Well you destroy your warranty ONLY if they can PROVE the modification did cause de failure.

 

You know there are people out there that wish that were the case. I'm thinking more along the lines that the consumer would have to prove that the mod DIDN'T cause the failure.

It all boils down to your dealer... if they want to play hard ball, you've got a mighty big opponent on your hands.

Personally, my current plan is to buy the EB and leave it (relatively) stock until the warranty runs out. At that time, if all is good in EB-land, I'll probably get it tuned and whatever other minor bolt-ons will net a decent increase for the investment. Nothing crazy planned - that's why I have mustangs....

 

Im hoping the EB is going to be a good motor and I believe it will be for the average daily driven truck in suburbia. I dont on the other hand have confidence in it as a work motor. I personally would like to see a 6.2 xlt. There are so many factors that make the EB less reliable when really worked hard. I farm part time and worked in logging before and I dont think the EB will stand up to the torture people who buy trucks to really use them as trucks go through.

For example, the logging company i worked for had a 2000 F-150 4.6 4x4 that had over 300,000 miles on it. The rear end howled awful, you had to let off the gas for the transmission to shift, it was beat to hell, probably only had the oil changed when they had time to get around to it, but it was still dependable. Thats what i think of when i think of a tough truck and these new 6 cylinders with all this complicated technology are not going to stand up to that kind of abuse.

Another thing i thought of, I have seen a 04 5.4 that was almost stuck throw muddy water up from wheel spin and some sucked in the intake. The truck sputtered and cut off but started right back up and cleared up and ran fine after a min or so. That truck is still running with 175,000 miles on it. Whats going to happen to that turbo in the EB in the same situation?

That being said, i think Ford is doing a great job of offering the 4 different motor options for different consumers. I think they did it completly backwards though with the EB and the 6.2. The 6.2 should be in the XL, XLT, FX4, Lariat and have the EB in the higher end models which will probably never be worked hard and can benefit from the better MPG.

 

Again - CAFE. They have to keep the 6.2 relatively limited or Ford can't comply with the standards.

If you want a work truck, why not look at the 3.7 or 5.0?

 

Chris echos what I was thinking.....run a rig until the warranty expires, then start "playing" with it. Learning what I can about chips/tuners, it seems like they trail at least a year or two behind model years, so I would think that an tuner for the EB would not be available for a couple of years after it's release. Most of you folks are light years ahead of me with these newer model year trucks....heck, I drive a 1987 with no electronics or computer! It appears to me that the newer rigs are essentially a computer with 4 wheels....so it seems that the "tuners" would be the way to "mod" them.

 

This engine was designed with diesel-like internals to stand up to the boost. Not sure why this wouldn't be an engine that would stand up to alot of use.

 

I didnt think about that. Just seems like they could make a XL/XLT max tow with the 6.2 and promote the EB more in the Platinum, King Ranch, Limited models (I would say Harley but it wouldnt seem right without a big V8). Even if they could Ford would probably rather keep the 6.2 max tow out of the lower end models to promote those buyers to spend the extra money and get a super duty.

If I was buying a new truck I probably would get a XLT or Lariat 5.0. I predict it to be the best selling out of all the motors. Chevy has been offering a big V8 (VortecMax) in their half-tons for a few years now but their sales are still mostly 5.3s.

 

This thread is amazingly flawed by user Haggis. And engine BUILT and DESIGNED for boost is under no unusual stress by being in boost. Comparing the new eco boost to the turbo failures of the 80s is laughable at best. Turbos have came a long way from just oil cooled and standard bearings. Water cooling alone more than triples the life of a turbo. Engine management has also come light years since the mid 80s, new engines are much cleaner and more efficient. Cleaner, cooler oil and closely controlled EGTs make a major difference along with upgraded bearings. The eco boost even has a special ring land to with stand full boost for years and years on end. Haggis, you said you have built many cars, so have I. Have you noticed the amount of boost you are able to run on a standard (naturally aspriated) engine when you slap a turbo or supercharger on them? It has almost doubled in the last have decade. If you can now run a safe 9lb on a high compression non forged engine then I know the eco boost will last forever at 12 or more. I run 16 psi all day on my gt500, and it will never have a problem because it is built for it. And who ever said they couldnt believe they put oil squirters to make the engine last need to re-read Corkey Bells "maximum boost" Oil squirters have been around for decades and have proven to lower combustion temps and add to reliablility. Not a band aid but a great piece to have, thank you ford. The new 5.0 has oil squirters too.

Yes this is my first post but iam very active on teamshelby, svtperformance and f150forum.

 

Keep in mind that the turbo engine was driven not by market forces or engineering choices, but by the EPA holding a gun to Ford's head. The ecoboost is there to satisfy CAFE ratings, not because it's necessarily the best choice for a working truck. Now if it turns out to be a great engine with great durability and reliability, good for Ford. But I have some reservations. No pre-production testing can predict the real world performance of this engine in the long haul, it's the initial buyers that will be the beta test for Ford. I bought a 2010 with the 5.4 because I'd rather not be part of that beta test. If it proves solid I'll happily trade my 5.4 in on one in a few years.

 

How is a fuel efficient truck not market driven? Do you not remember just two years ago when gas prices spiked and a truck could not be given away? The market was screaming for a truck that got better gas mileage. Ford had developed a drive train that delivers better mileage and more capacity. This combination allows the consumer to have their cake and eat it too. The technology in the Ecoboost is not ground breaking in the least bit. Turbos, direct injection and variable cams have been used for years in other applications and have been very reliable. Look at the motors used in Europe where the gas prices are 3 to 4 times what they are here. These concepts were proved there over the last decade. The bugs have been worked out and we are getting the rewards of this effort.

 

I wondered when someone was going to call me out. With all due respect, you're going to call my opinion "flawed", why don't you explain in detail why you think this is so.

Please explain to the forum members why a 5500Lb. truck is the place for a small displacement turbocharged gasoline engine. Regardless of the technological advances, small complicated pressurized gasoline engines will produce a ton of heat and get less milage under boost than advertized. Let's see some "milage under boost numbers" from Ford....or perhaps you could help out with that? Turbocharging "fools" the drivetrain into believing the engine is of higher displacement than it really is by forcing more fuel and air into the cylinders.....more air, more fuel. More moving parts, higher stress levels........... not good, and never will be....period. Complexity and cost has to be offset with milage gains........this engine is far too complicated for it's milage promise.........and is $1000 more expensive than a 5.0 to buy on top of it all. Extensive use of exotic alloys like inconel, titanium, etc..... would be required to withstand constant "daily" abuse in an engine this size. They are too expensive for RPO engines. Please take the time to prove me wrong and I will gladly, and graciously retract any statement I have made. Cheers.

 

To clairify my point, I am not saying these engines won't last......they may. But as the first "small displacement turbocharged gas enginge" in a heavy truck "teething problems" will likely arise. Five model years down the road this may turn out to be a good idea. First year runs for major changes rarely go without a hitch. Ford is not publishing "milage under boost" fuel burn figures, until they do. Beware.

All I am advocating is "Buyer Beware".........this is a drivetrain "revolution" that may, or may not turn out to be a good idea. I am honestly looking forward to good "end user" reviews.

 

First of all, if the 300 hp 3.7 Ford engine can propel the heavy truck as well as tow up to 5000 lbs, then the 3.5 ecoboost can too (without boost). Second. yes, the higher the boost the higher the fuel consumption. That's nothing that we all don't already know. If I can get my 6.0 cruising at highway speed at no or little boost she does good on mileage. Step on the throttle and as boost rises, the fuel gauge drops.
Ford's idea is that the ecoboost can do a lot of work without using boost- such as highway cruising, etc- thus the better fuel economy. It depends on several things. One, how much hp and torque does the ecoboost produce without boost? If the 3.7 can produce 300 hp and 278 ft lbs of torque then the only slightly smaller 3.5 should be able to do the same (without boost). Depending on how you drive, you could stay out of boost most of the time. It also depends on how Ford has programmed the ECM.

I guess the real question is: will an ecoboost at full boost pulling 10k lbs get better or worse fuel mileage than a V-8?

As far as the engine construction goes- it's built more like a race engine. Google ecoboost construction and you will find some good descriptions of how the engine is built. Ford has already done several demo's (including towing 11,300 lbs at over 80 mph around a race track for 24 hours) and yes the turbos got hot, but everything performed fine. As soon as Ford tears the truck down we can see what kind of wear she has.

Good Day

 

Forcing people to buy smaller displacement engines because gas prices are kept artificially high based on huge taxes and over-regulation is not a free market, therefore this engine is not a response to the free market. If we were actually paying for free market gas it would be half the cost it is now or less. Either way, go ahead and buy the EB, I hope you're right...I'm just saying you have no evidence that you are, as this engine has never seen use in this application and the long term results are unknown. Europe has not gone the way of turbocharging by and large, they use small efficient diesels, something that would be much better suited for a truck than a turbo gas engine actually.