Go Back   F150online Forums > Powertrain & Mechanical > V8 Engines
Sign in using an external account
Register Forgot Password?
Register Photos Vin Decoder FAQ Members Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Vendor DirectoryGarage

Welcome to F150Online Forums!
Welcome to F150Online.com.

You are currently viewing our forums as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the F150Online Forums community today!





Reply
 
 
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 11-11-2010, 12:47 PM
Member
Garage is empty, add now
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 77
5.0 or ecoboost?

as far as what would be better for towing a bass boat?

also, what's the longevity of the ecoboost supposed to be? i would assume the turbo would shorten its lifespan?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 11-11-2010, 01:00 PM
glc glc is offline
Senior Member
Garage is empty, add now
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Joplin MO
Vehicle: 2003 Ford F150
Posts: 28,286
I don't think a bass boat is heavy enough to make much of a difference, but the EB should get better gas mileage and allegedly will have more power.

As far as longevity is concerned, there are a LOT of threads going here speculating on that.
__________________
2003 F-150 XL RCSB 2wd 4.2 M5OD 3.55 LS
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 11-11-2010, 02:46 PM
Technical Article Contributor
Garage is empty, add now
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Michigan
Vehicle: 1997 Ford F150 4.6
Posts: 1,626
If it was me I'd go with the 5.0. JMO
In regards to longevity with turbos. Turbos have been used for decades in Europe with excellent results. I personally don't think durability is going to be a concern. Anything new is always suspect thats just our nature but in reality turbos are only a relatively new item here in the states. With the new and improved oils and engine technology they should run as long as a naturally aspirated engine.

Last edited by DYNOTECH; 11-11-2010 at 02:55 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 11-12-2010, 09:12 AM
Senior Member
Garage is empty, add now
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Wilmington DE
Vehicle: 2003 Fast Screw
Posts: 3,579
I talked to a guy that test drove both and he said the EB had way more power!

Phil
__________________

594/620 Without the nitrous!
Built Lightning block.
Stage 3 Ported heads. high performance Cams
2.3 Kenne Bell L upgrade blower 16 PSI
Kooks long tube headers
BTS race built 4R100 tranny
100 shot of nitrous
best 1/4 to date.
60' 1.68
11.76 @ 116.17
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 11-12-2010, 09:16 AM
Senior Member
Garage is empty, add now
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Vehicle: 2002 Ford F-150 5.4L
Posts: 4,187
On paper the EB looks like the way to go for towing. I'd love to do some real world driving with both to see what I liked better. What ever happened to the old saying "There's no substitute for cubic inches!"??

Why not a 6.2?
__________________
'02 F150 XLT 4X4 SCrew. 5.4L

K&N FIPK/Amsoil Filter
Flowmaster 40 si/do Exhaust
305/70 16 GY MTR Kevlar
16X10 MB Motorsport wheels
4.10 Gears
Rancho 4" lift
Rancho 9000XL Pro Series Resi Shocks
FireStone Air Bags
Autometer Carbon Fiber Oil/Trans Temp Gauges
Carbon Fiber Interior (www.dash-kit.com)
Peterson Fluid Sys. Remote Oil Filter
FTVB
Troyer Performance Electric Fans
Underdrive Pulleys
Amsoil Fluids Throughout
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 11-12-2010, 10:00 AM
Senior Member
2005 Ford F-150
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Newnan, GA
Vehicle: 2005 Ford F150
Posts: 102
I actually had the chance to drive both the EB and the 5.0 trucks at a recent Ford event. Either would be a fine choice for towing a bass boat. The 3.5 V6 EB really puts out the power for a smaller displacement engine and the 6 sp auto trans in each of them seem to be geared well to the power bands. I towed 6250 lbs some only with the EB engined truck and it did fine. Turbos have been around now a good while and a lot of the early issues with them seem to be gone. Engine oils are improved these days for lubrication and the EB turbos are even water cooled to help longevity I suppose.

Last edited by MotoMike; 11-12-2010 at 10:52 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 11-12-2010, 10:12 AM
Senior Member
Garage is empty, add now
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Charleston, SC
Vehicle: 2008 Ford F150
Posts: 2,453
Quote:
Originally Posted by Galaxy View Post
On paper the EB looks like the way to go for towing. I'd love to do some real world driving with both to see what I liked better. What ever happened to the old saying "There's no substitute for cubic inches!"??

Why not a 6.2?
Thinking the same thing? I guess economic reasons may play a factor.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 11-12-2010, 10:55 AM
Technical Article Contributor
Garage is empty, add now
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: MI
Vehicle: 1998 Ford F150 5.4L 4X4
Posts: 25,571
The EB 6 5.0 puts my 5four to shame. That thing does it all @ 1700 Rpms. It will spin the tires from a roll with a load. Fords dominated the Market with that one.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 11-12-2010, 11:56 AM
glc glc is offline
Senior Member
Garage is empty, add now
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Joplin MO
Vehicle: 2003 Ford F150
Posts: 28,286
Why not a 6.2? It's only available in high end trucks and it gets lousy gas mileage. Ford has to limit availability to comply with CAFE standards.

Quote:
The EB 6 5.0 puts my 5four to shame.
Not trying to be picky, but those are 2 different engines. The EB 6 is 3.5 liters and the 5.0 is a NA V-8.
__________________
2003 F-150 XL RCSB 2wd 4.2 M5OD 3.55 LS
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 11-12-2010, 12:55 PM
Technical Article Contributor
Garage is empty, add now
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: MI
Vehicle: 1998 Ford F150 5.4L 4X4
Posts: 25,571
Ford engineers have a few videos out, I've seen one of them in GD on this site. They have a shoot-out between manufacturers brands. The Fords are way out front with power and torque for their petrol engines.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 11-12-2010, 01:44 PM
Technical Article Contributor
Garage is empty, add now
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Michigan
Vehicle: 1997 Ford F150 4.6
Posts: 1,626
I think the biggest determining factor for people may be the sticker shock on the EB option at least thats what I'm hearing. But if gas keeps going up they may be a better deal long term. I guess Canada can't make enough 5.0 aluminum engines for the Mustang and apparently the truck version will remain a cast iron block. Sounds like a 5.8 could be made as a niche engine for Mustang as well with limited production. The peak power numbers are very impressive. I like the numbers on the 5.0 and I think I could still work on it if I had to. It sure is nice to see the engine options Ford is offering though.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 11-12-2010, 01:52 PM
Senior Member
Garage is empty, add now
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: The Barbary Coast
Vehicle: 2007 Ford F150
Posts: 3,046
Just my opinion. No real verifiable facts. But I like them both.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 11-12-2010, 01:54 PM
Senior Member
2006 Ford F-150
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Douglasville GA
Vehicle: 2006 Ford F150 XLT
Posts: 4,773
I say 5.0 just because it's a V8. I'm willing to bet that it's going to respond quite well to bolt-ons.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 11-12-2010, 02:25 PM
Senior Member
Garage is empty, add now
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: So. Texas
Posts: 1,484
Quote:
Turbos have been used for decades in Europe with excellent results.
I'll agree that the Euros have turbos and haven't had any issues but the Euros are also running much faster engine speeds. Typically, the EB is going to be running at 1800 rpms at hiway speeds. the Euros will be running above 2500 rpms. That's a lot of cooling capacity from the incoming air charge that the EB is not going to see. Considering the standard axle is a 3.55 and the tries keep growing in diameter, this engine is going to be running a lot in boost. Ford has already stated that this engines combustion temps are over 1400F- that's a lot of heat. While I'm sure they've worked this engine over pretty good, in an F-150 is a totally different environment than a Fusion. So I'm reserving judgement until the real world gets to have their go at it. Personally, I'd avoid this one until it has some history behind it in a truck environment.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 11-12-2010, 02:35 PM
Technical Article Contributor
Garage is empty, add now
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: MI
Vehicle: 1998 Ford F150 5.4L 4X4
Posts: 25,571
I wish there would have been more development in the their diesels.
Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2010, 02:35 PM


 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:20 PM.


 
This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. FordŽ is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company
Contact Us Advertising Privacy Statement Terms of Service Jobs Forum Text Archives
Emails & Contact Details