View Poll Results: Which premium 2015 Ford F150 engine would you pick?
The 3.5L EcoBoost with 365hp, 420tq
41
55.41%
The 5.0L V8 with 385hp and 387tq
29
39.19%
Neither, I would pick one of the smaller engines.
4
5.41%
Voters: 74. You may not vote on this poll
Question of the Week: 5.0L V8 or 3.5L EcoBoost?
#16
10-21-2014, 11:42 PM
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: colorado
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#17
10-23-2014, 11:54 PM
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Holt, MO
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I love my eco boost. It is the best all around engine I have ever had in a pickup. It pulls a trailer fantastic. I have had two of them and have had no issues with the engines at all, and I have driven through some very deep water. The A/C is crap, but that is not the engines fault.
I think the 3.5 is short lived however. The writing is on the wall, the 2.7 is going to take over. I certainly hope not, but the govt types are trying to kill our larger vehicles that all of us love.
I think the 3.5 is short lived however. The writing is on the wall, the 2.7 is going to take over. I certainly hope not, but the govt types are trying to kill our larger vehicles that all of us love.
#20
10-25-2014, 11:35 AM
Sure it does. It's one of those things you either get or you don't and no amount of explanation will educate those that don't. One of those many mysteries of life.
__________________
Jim
Jim
Last edited by Bluejay; 10-25-2014 at 11:41 AM.
#21
10-25-2014, 11:39 AM
#22
10-25-2014, 12:43 PM
Sounds even worse than a V6.
#24
10-25-2014, 01:23 PM
#25
10-25-2014, 03:04 PM
Senior Member
Up north we also use snowblowers.
You guys use snow blowers to clear large parking lots?
Fuel economy is unknown. But the other forum has the Ford contracted drivers getting 29 mpg at 65 mph on the hwy with the 4x4 2.7L, and 23 mpg with the 4x4 3.5 EB and 3.73s. I don't know of any 5.0s that have ever done that well so that's hardly a wash. We'll see if the 5.0 gets better mpg than the 2.7/3.5 EB, but I highly doubt it.
It is a wash and it will definitely depend on the configuration.
5.0 better mpg towing? Never been proven in a test.
No direct proof, but enough evidence. The 3.5tt drank more fuel than any 6.2 going up the Ike gauntlet. Also, click on any thread where an ecoboost pulls a 5000+ lb. boxy trailer. That is the best proof.
If we go by the EPA ratings of the current truck, the rating is 1 mpg better on the 3.5L EB. That's still 5%.
Haha ok, now compare a 5.0 to a 3.5tt loaded 4x4 screw.
So I would vote for the 2.7L EB.
Next, between the 3.5 EB and the 5.0, 3.5 EB gets my vote. Better mpg, uses less oil, 90% of peak torque available early, and the payload is within 10-30 lbs of the max for only $400 more.
You guys use snow blowers to clear large parking lots?
Fuel economy is unknown. But the other forum has the Ford contracted drivers getting 29 mpg at 65 mph on the hwy with the 4x4 2.7L, and 23 mpg with the 4x4 3.5 EB and 3.73s. I don't know of any 5.0s that have ever done that well so that's hardly a wash. We'll see if the 5.0 gets better mpg than the 2.7/3.5 EB, but I highly doubt it.
It is a wash and it will definitely depend on the configuration.
5.0 better mpg towing? Never been proven in a test.
No direct proof, but enough evidence. The 3.5tt drank more fuel than any 6.2 going up the Ike gauntlet. Also, click on any thread where an ecoboost pulls a 5000+ lb. boxy trailer. That is the best proof.
If we go by the EPA ratings of the current truck, the rating is 1 mpg better on the 3.5L EB. That's still 5%.
Haha ok, now compare a 5.0 to a 3.5tt loaded 4x4 screw.
So I would vote for the 2.7L EB.
Next, between the 3.5 EB and the 5.0, 3.5 EB gets my vote. Better mpg, uses less oil, 90% of peak torque available early, and the payload is within 10-30 lbs of the max for only $400 more.
#26
10-25-2014, 03:33 PM
I'm satisfied with the 22.0 mpg my 5.0 gets at 70 mph on my drive to East Texas. Also satisfied with the 19.2 I get in mixed driving. Too soon to tell if it uses oil as I only have 1300 on it. My previous 5.0 used a qt every 4000. That is not a problem. If it was direct injection, getting gas in the oil, it probably would not have shown any usage.
__________________
Jim
Jim
#27
10-25-2014, 03:48 PM
I'm satisfied with the 22.0 mpg my 5.0 gets at 70 mph on my drive to East Texas. Also satisfied with the 19.2 I get in mixed driving. Too soon to tell if it uses oil as I only have 1300 on it. My previous 5.0 used a qt every 4000. That is not a problem. If it was direct injection, getting gas in the oil, it probably would not have shown any usage.
#28
10-25-2014, 04:44 PM
#29
10-27-2014, 12:33 PM
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: colorado
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The owner of my work used to drive a 2011 crew cab short bed 4x4 platinum with a 5.0 the entire time he drove it it never averaged less than 19 mpg many times i drove it and the average was 20 with the highest average being 20.2
He passed it down to our vp and got the identicle truck with an eb which now has 40,000 and ive never seen the average above 17.8
He is an old man and drives like an old man he has a long comute from the mountains mostly highway same exact driving style same trucks different motor
The vp drives the 5.0 truck now a lot more city driving and some towing he is averaging high 17 usually around 17.8 truck is over 100,000 miles now....
He passed it down to our vp and got the identicle truck with an eb which now has 40,000 and ive never seen the average above 17.8
He is an old man and drives like an old man he has a long comute from the mountains mostly highway same exact driving style same trucks different motor
The vp drives the 5.0 truck now a lot more city driving and some towing he is averaging high 17 usually around 17.8 truck is over 100,000 miles now....
Last edited by dranger962000; 10-27-2014 at 05:49 PM. Reason: left out info
#30
10-28-2014, 06:55 PM
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 1,101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would have to drive both the 5.0 and 3.5EB again, probably back to back before I signed the papers.
To me, on paper and when I have driven both I preferred the power delivery and feel of the 3.5 EB. That being said, with the numbers being bumped on the 5.0, plus the drop in weight, I think it may bring change the feel of the 5.0.
I do understand that the same drop in weight applies to the 3.5 EB, just stating that different motors and power/torque curves may provide a different SOTP feel when there is a drop in weight. Just as an example, I just put brand new tires on my Super Duty. I went from 325/65 R18's to 325/60 R18's and from a Dynapro MT to a Open Country AT2. I dropped 1.7" in diameter and lost 30lbs a tire in weight! Acceleration improvement was noticed, but due to the amount of torque the truck has, the change was more evident under braking.
To me, on paper and when I have driven both I preferred the power delivery and feel of the 3.5 EB. That being said, with the numbers being bumped on the 5.0, plus the drop in weight, I think it may bring change the feel of the 5.0.
I do understand that the same drop in weight applies to the 3.5 EB, just stating that different motors and power/torque curves may provide a different SOTP feel when there is a drop in weight. Just as an example, I just put brand new tires on my Super Duty. I went from 325/65 R18's to 325/60 R18's and from a Dynapro MT to a Open Country AT2. I dropped 1.7" in diameter and lost 30lbs a tire in weight! Acceleration improvement was noticed, but due to the amount of torque the truck has, the change was more evident under braking.