I read the following article in Farm Industry News magazine.....this should be interesting. I can't wait to drive a new F150 with this engine.

"Ford's EcoBoost engine technology increases torque, improves fuel economy and lowers emissions

All it took was an impromptu drag race at Ford's Dearborn, MI, Development Center to convince me of the merits of the company's new EcoBoost engine technology. Journalists spent a day there learning about the new 2009 vehicles, and two of us ended up last in line on a straight test strip where we could compare pairs of F-150 pickups and Lincoln MKS sedans with both standard engines and the new EcoBoost V6s.

All Ford officials had left the area, and only two engineers remained to ride along with us on our acceleration tests. My last run was in the MKS EcoBoost, so I waved the other journalist to pull alongside in his F-150 with the 5.4 V8 and suggested we try a drag race on the wide, straight, mile-long strip. The engineers said they weren't sure we were allowed to do that, but I assured them — with no authority whatsoever — that it would be okay. Quickly, I told the other journalist to count down, "3-2-1-GO!" He did, we both hit the gas, and I was astounded both at how swiftly my EcoBoost-powered vehicle took off and how rapidly his V8 F-150 grew smaller in my outside mirror.


Ford first introduced EcoBoost in cars like the Taurus and Lincoln MKS and crossover SUVs like the Flex. Ford's standard 3.5 V6 engine turns out a solid 263 hp and 249 ft.-lbs. of torque. The EcoBoost V6 in car form jumps to 355 or 365 hp, and to 350 ft.-lbs. of torque, computer-controlled to maintain that peak from 1,500 to 5,250 rpm. In its auto and crossover applications, the EcoBoost required all-wheel drive rather than front-wheel drive to handle the increased torque.

“The F-150 will be the first application of the EcoBoost to a rear-wheel-drive vehicle,” says Alan Hall, EcoBoost marketing manager. “Because of that, we'll be able to get even more torque out of it. We'll have a similarly flat torque curve, and we're going to have a special transmission to handle what I would guess will be somewhere over 400 ft.-lbs. of torque.”

Technically, Ford created its first EcoBoost by taking the high-tech, two-year-old, 3.5-liter V6 and reinforcing it throughout. A stronger but lighter die-cast aluminum engine block was fitted with a crankshaft and connecting rods, both made of a higher-grade alloy for greater durability. Oil-cooled pistons, to withstand greater heat, have cylinder heads machined for direct injection. The dual-overhead camshafts are set for variable timing of the valve train to assure optimal performance, lower emissions and better fuel economy.

Turbocharging compensates for the fewer cylinders and smaller displacement, and Ford worked with Honeywell-Garrett to develop dual water-cooled turbochargers. Typically, turbochargers operate by directing a stream of exhaust flow to spin a turbine wheel, which powers a compressor that force-feeds an increased volume and velocity of airflow, sucking gasoline along with it to the engine. In the EcoBoost system, smaller turbines provide quicker spooling time, and, combined with the direct-injection system and computer control, the usual lag in power application is eliminated.

Instead of squirting the same air-fuel mixture into all cylinders at once, the Bosch-designed direct injection is calibrated to meter cool and more combustible air at extremely high pressure to insert a precise dosage of fuel individually into each cylinder's combustion chamber. Other direct-injection systems increase power, but Ford succeeded in coordinating the more efficient fuel-burning to aid power and fuel economy and to lower emissions.

“We promised a 20% increase in fuel economy, and we delivered a 25% improvement,” says Brett Hinds, advanced engineering design and development manager of the EcoBoost. “And we also achieved a 15% reduction in emissions.”

“Fuel economy is one of [farmers'] top needs,” says F-150 marketing manager Mark Grueber. “In our tests, farmers have praised the EcoBoost's low-end torque but also have been pleased to get 17 or 18 mpg and over 20 on the highway.”

By 2012, Ford expects to produce 750,000 EcoBoost engines in the U.S. and 1.3 million of them globally. The F-150 EcoBoost will reach showrooms late in 2010. Ford thinks farmers will appreciate the EcoBoost's durability and reliability. And once the crops are in, that EcoBoost engine might come in handy for drag racing."

 

I think the Ecoboost will be great in the f-150, but the drag race between 2 different vehicles with different weights and gearing is not convincing. The 5.0L is supposed to make it into the f-150 as well, and the Ecoboost MSK drag raced with the Mustang with the 5.0L would have had different results.

 

Thats old read. Back how many months ago? Been discussed.

 

Yeah, it's gonna be even more fun when one or both of those turbos goes out. Not cheap, and a good chance you won't be able to change them in the truck without removal of a lot of other stuff. The engine is fine, but Turbos have a limited life expectancy, from the ones I've seen around 100K miles; even less if people start adding boost jets and upping the boost for more power.

 

Turbos need good clean oil 100% of the time. If not they will expire much sooner. Ford says life is min 150,000 miles.

Nice thing about the EB will be ability to bump boost a point or two rather inexpensivly. Or go larger...

 

I'm aware of what the turbos need, I'm an owner of a 95 300ZX and the twin-turbos always seem to have issues, regarless of perfect oil change records, etc. Turbos are just subject to a lot of stresses, and boost leaks/injector failures/vacuum leaks can all lead to some major damage if not caught early enough. I'm not saying the EB engine isn't good, I just think I'd opt for the 6.2L if I were going to purchase a new F150 (when the 6.2L is avail)

 

Do you think anyone said the same thing when diesels were first turbocharged? Now look at them. 200k miles is barely broken in.

 

Diesels are a completely different animal, and most use single turbos; although there are a few sequential turbo versions out there. The issue on diesels is that they are not putting much out in terms of psi, so there is less load/stress on the turbo. The EcoBoost engine is a true twin-turbo, not a sequential style.

I hope the EB becomes a great engine for Ford, but given the history of most high-HP v6 turbos in the past, they don't tend to hold up to the abuse most people put them through. Turbo engines just have a lot less leeway in terms of A/F ratios and fuel grades. Detonation or preignition can occur much more easily in an FI engine than an NA.

 

I think you'll be proven wrong. Audi and MB have had similar designs on the market for a few years. BMW's 3.0L twin turbo inline 6 is remarkable. History is re-writing itself with forced induction. People are learning how to use them better than 20 years ago.

One or two turbos does not matter much on a V engine. It's just a matter of plumbing. Do you have a single turbo after the exhaust manifolds/collector two smaller one, one for each bank's exhaust manifold. The F-150 engine bay is much larger than the 300ZX.

 

Oh it's not really a problem of fitting them in there. Like I said, time will tell whether the turbos hold up. Any one know if they are ball-bearing turbos or normal garret non-BB versions?

 

Perhaps we'll hear something new at the auto show this month? And then later this year, we'll either be excited by the new engines hitting soon, or spy shots of the 2012 F-150 if that's still in the pipeline. Should be an interesting year, both for the F-150 and the economy/stock market. Good times. Or not. Who knows.

 

I'll still aways opt for a V8 powered truck.....Thanks but no thanks......

 

Anything wrong with the Cummins I6? I6 engines are balanced better than V8 engines, not that the Ecoboost is an inline design, but you should limit your use of absolute terms like always/never.

Besides, the Ecoboost will have more torque across a wider engine speed (peak from what, 1500-5200rpm?) than a naturally aspirated V8.

Good info on the engine.

I hate the name, but love the engine.

 

OK you just justified Ford changing the name (which most hate) It was called Twin Force, but got changed to Eco Boost so the greenies wouldn't notice Ford was actually adding more power.

 

Not to mention Twin Force sounds like a bad 80's children's cartoon/toy line