2009 - 2014 F-150

EcoBoost vs 5.0L

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
  #1  
Old 05-30-2011 | 08:25 PM
RMS05's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 167
Likes: 0
From: Chester, Va
EcoBoost vs 5.0L

I am looking at getting a FX4 Supercab. I am not certain which engine to get. I really like what I here about the 5.0 on the Mustang, but don't hear much for the F150. I like the better gas mileage of the EB if it really gets the advertised numbers. The extra $750 for the EB is not an issue. I really want a truck that will run like my Mustang GT. The 5.0 and the EB did not impress me in acceleration from 45 to 60. Both had initial lag and then both took off. Everyday driving is what I can't duplicate in the test drive. Normal starts from a traffic light and minor acceleration in traffic. What is y'all opinion of these two engines?
 
  #2  
Old 05-30-2011 | 09:04 PM
TheKR's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
From: Jacksonville, Fl
Originally Posted by RMS05
I really want a truck that will run like my Mustang GT.
I think that statement will lead you to not be happy with any truck. They simply won't have the speed and agility of a GT. Only thing that may come close to that 'feeling' would be the Raptor.

As far as the rest of your question. I like the EB for what I've seen so far. I've test drove it twice. I'll probably drive it 1 or 2 more times before deciding for sure if I will keep my 09 5.4 or step up to the EB.

Good luck!
 
  #3  
Old 05-30-2011 | 10:25 PM
Super FX4's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 711
Likes: 0
From: Memphis
If you are looking for performance with instant response, get the 6.2L.

The ecoboost will beat the 5.0L by a pretty decent margin in a straight line.
 
  #4  
Old 05-30-2011 | 11:29 PM
Blue07STX's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,185
Likes: 0
From: Cabot, AR
I've driven both, 5.0 for me.
 
  #5  
Old 05-30-2011 | 11:30 PM
06yz250f's Avatar
Suspended
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 6,657
Likes: 0
if you want to beat a mustang gt or keep up with it get a newer diesel. i could pull a few lengths out of GT's with mine. looks on their faces was priceless

i chose the 5.0, didn't want to deal with turbo lag and knowing me i'll put exhaust on it at some point and you can't put exhaust on a v6 and expect it sound good.

so far i am getting 16 city and mixed was getting around 16.8-17.2

don't have really any complaints right now about my truck so far at 2800 miles.
 
  #6  
Old 05-31-2011 | 08:38 AM
RMS05's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 167
Likes: 0
From: Chester, Va
I guess I phased 'like my Mustang GT' wrong. I want the truck to acclerate when I get on the interstate or pass someone on the backroads. I drove the 3.7 V6 and I couldn't live with it: too short accelrating from a traffic light and it had to downshift 3 gears for me to get on the interstate. I am leaning towards the EB because of its torque curve and accelration onto the interstate. I drive time around town with the EB makes me feel like it might be ladgging compared to the 5.0 on traffic light accelration and normal traffic keep-up speed. Also I my tend to be in the boost range of the EB too much and have less mpg with it than the 5.0.
 
  #7  
Old 05-31-2011 | 08:50 AM
MonteCarlo31's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 403
Likes: 0
I'd say 6.2 if it were me. I made the mistake of buying one truck with a middle of the road engine and it sucks. When you have a stable of 400+ hp cars in the garage and drive a 300 hp truck it sucks. I'd look hard at the 6.2 for sure. I'm not sure if the 6.2 is offered in the SuperCab flavor.

My next choice is the 5.0. At least there is some background history on the engine even if the heads and cam set up is different from the car. I'm just not sure about the ecoboost.
 
  #8  
Old 05-31-2011 | 08:53 AM
MDS83's Avatar
Junior Member
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Ive always been a diesel truck guy, but i moved to city and truck wouldnt fit in parking garage so traded for 5.0 mustang with 6spd manual, was not really impressed, didnt like having to rev high to get power out of it, had ZERO low end. I drove the F-150 5.0 and it was the same way, that is why i chose the ecoboost. What i like about ecoboost is that when you start mashing gas on interstate the converter stays locked and truck builds boost and goes, no downshifting to get high RPM to get power. Its kinda torquie like a diesel. I dont really drive hard, so it is nice just to be able to barely push pedal and have good response
 
  #9  
Old 05-31-2011 | 10:43 AM
1depd's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 682
Likes: 0
From: Gulf Coast
I drove both the 5.0 and the 3.5. The 5.0 reminded me of a truck engine. It was a bit slow off the line then got on it once the RPMs got up. The 3.5 seemed to go off the line and reminds me of my Charger. I have had the lag issue once at a stop. The only thing I can figure is if you mash the pedal quickly the lag is noticeable. It kind of feels like everything gets dumped and it takes a half second for the engine to catch up. If you push it down a bit slower, like you would if you don't want to spin the tires, there is no lag and it flat goes.
 
  #10  
Old 05-31-2011 | 12:16 PM
hori's Avatar
Junior Member
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
I love V8 power however after driving both the 5.0 and the eco I bought the ecoboost. A test drive is all it will take.
 
  #11  
Old 05-31-2011 | 12:37 PM
BAMABLUEOVAL's Avatar
Member
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
From: Athens, AL
OP, what rear end gear ratios were you test driving?
 
  #12  
Old 05-31-2011 | 03:03 PM
RMS05's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 167
Likes: 0
From: Chester, Va
The FX4's all have the 3.73 ratio.

The EB did pause at the traffic light w/ wot but it did take off once it decided to go. The 5.0 had a better start from the traffic light but it didn't continue with the acceleration like the EB after it got started. This makes me think the 5.0 might be better for daily driving.

I did drive a EB in a XLT with the 3.55 LS also. Not as quick as the 3.73 to get started but it still took off better than I expected.

I have a feeling either engine is superior tot he other for everyday 'spirited' driving. I don't tow anything, I just like to get going. The 6.2 fuel mileage makes it a non option. I think the tuners with have more to work with on the 5.0 rather than the EB.
 
  #13  
Old 05-31-2011 | 03:30 PM
BAMABLUEOVAL's Avatar
Member
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
From: Athens, AL
Oh ok...I didn't know that was the only available rear end for them...fwiw I have almost 6000 on my 5.0 and it sure does seem pretty strong to me.
 
  #14  
Old 05-31-2011 | 08:44 PM
dejong1's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by BAMABLUEOVAL
Oh ok...I didn't know that was the only available rear end for them...fwiw I have almost 6000 on my 5.0 and it sure does seem pretty strong to me.
he is wrong. you can get a 4.10 in the 2011 fx4
 
  #15  
Old 05-31-2011 | 08:48 PM
BAMABLUEOVAL's Avatar
Member
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
From: Athens, AL
Originally Posted by dejong1
he is wrong. you can get a 4.10 in the 2011 fx4
well maybe he just meant the ones that he test drove in particular. either way the 3.73 coupled with either motor is very sufficient.
 



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:39 PM.