2.7L EcoBoost gets up and goes!!!


credit: http://www.tfltruck.com

 

But, but, but there's no replacement for displacement...

That shows what I've said for a long time, horsepower numbers win bragging rights, torque wins races.

 

Man, 5.4 seconds from the 3.5L Eco? That's nuts for a factory truck.

I remember when I had my 99 WS6 Trans Am and the factory rated it at like 4.8 seconds 0-60

 

Throw a tune on one and see what happens. Mine with 3.55LS on the 87 program will turn over 33s easily going into second. On the 93 program the TC will kick in on the 1-2 upshift.

 

This has to be one of the dumbest vids on the internet. They "attempt" a drag strip in the Fiesta Texas parking lot when there are two 1/4 mile drag strips in the area. Just what the hell did they think they were going to show with a "drag strip" of only 282 feet? The only thing I saw was there was a major moron in the crowd that decided this was a good thing to do. This vid does more harm to Ford than any good. This almost defies logic. Too bad they didn't ask around about other trucks. I know some guys that have 4 cylinder Samurais that would blow the doors off of any of these trucks in 282 feet. My cuzin has a 49 GMC with a modded 235 straight six that would also clean these clowns clock in 282 feet. The Samurais and the GMC wouldn't stand a chance in a 1/4 mile though. This is going on our MOM {Moron Of the Month} Board at work. I bet I win with this.

 

Its just a test. Who cares what length it is. No harm was done to any brand.

 

Ummm, did you see the other video with the 'race' between the 2.7L EB and the 3.0 EcoDiesel. No contest...the Ram was eating dust!

It's not all about torque or HP...it's a healthy combination of both. But, HP does sell more vehicles than torque.

 

There really is no replacement for displacement though. If you were to add a forced induction system on the bigger motor, it would not be good for our Ecoboost.

The Ecoboost, is just a very efficient motor in my opinion. When I say that, I do not mean anything regarding mileage/fuel consumption, I mean it utilizes every cube it has for power output.

I know this is the second time I have contrasted on someone's comments, not trolling, just giving a second opinion.

 

Forced induction IS the replacement for displacement. The overall numbers of the 2.7L > than that of the 5.4L. You can't say that there is no replacement for displacement when an engine with half the cubes is making more HP and nearly the same torque.

Now, sure, bolt a super/turbo charger on the 5.4L and it makes better numbers, but you can replace the displacement of the 5.4L with FI on the 2.7L.

 

Well, yes, that is essentially what I said.

Also the Ecodiesel did not do very well partially because the Ecoboost is a forced inducted engine which is very forgiving in any altitude. Ecodiesel is N/A.

 

Umm, no, the EcoDiesel is not N/A. It is turbocharged, like every other diesel out there today.

 

Well you are correct, my mistake, I thought it wasn't.

I have no further comments lol

 

 

It's blowing my mind on how good the 2.7L baby EB is. Heard nothing but great things so far.