The torque and horsepower curves for the two motors tell a much different story, the bigger engine has to be reved a lot higher to make the same power. Just how exactly is that not working harder than that little ole V6?

 

I am curious why they have only allowed a varying percentage of throttle to be opened when ran flat out on the 6.2 throughout the rpm range. Is it emission related, fuel economy, drivetrain stress therefore reducing reliability, or is to reduce the overall potential of this engine so that the ecoboost will be the one to shine and to make it appeal to the masses?

 

Ford has handicapped all of it's vehicles equipped with the drive by wire crap by adding torque management. I'm sure all three of the motor options have a good deal of it integrated into the tunes. Thats why everyone recommends a programmer as a first mod for our F150's. It's sad that you can feel the throttle body closing as the rpms get close too redline. It's too help decrease stress on the drivetrain.

 

Very simple, it does not have to be forced fed by twin turbos spooled up constantly all of the time just to get a 6000Lb Screw to move! Never mind a 10,000 Lb trailer behind it......

 

This might be a hard answer to get. Some of us never test drove the "other" motor, whatever it may be, 6.2, or 3.5. And none of us certainly have had any significant time behind the wheel of both........

I am not willing to pay the extra cash for the 6.2, or buying the premium trim package it comes with either. I'm not also willing to pay the extra gas costs, it seemed to me that the 3.5 was my best choice.

This argument will go on forever........

If money was no object, up front or in fuel, I'd be in a Raptor.

 

Turbo technology is nothing new though. They are used in heavy trucks, heavy equipment and many cars for decades now. I've seen Audi's with over 300,000km on them and run great. I think the kinks are pretty much worked out of turbo technology.

I felt comfortable putting my money down on the Ecoboost. Time will tell I guess.

 

so does that mean your 6.2 is going to outlive diesels because they too need turbo? Hate on what you don't understand, its fine.
As for the comment about the article, other than the eb being 2wd they were the same. And my 4wd ecoboost has run faster than the 2wd they tested....

 

My old 1991 Ford Probe Gt (2.2 liter intercooled turbocharged engine) was up to 196,000 miles when I sold it, not a single issue with the turbo, or the engine for that matter.

I sure hate to see people bashing turbos when they don't know hill about what they're talking about.

 

My buddies supercharged lighting has 205,000....

 

Have you guys noticed yet...are there tuners and other aftermarket goodies and such hitting the streets yet?? Intercooler comes to mind also!


I also wonder why Ford shows such drastically different peak numbers between the two engines on the Ford site?

 

A couple notes about our test procedures: Unfortunately, we couldn't get all four trucks with exactly the same equipment. There are two different axle ratios, 3.55:1 and 3.73:1; two trucks are rear drive; and one has a shorter wheelbase.

The online article doesn't give the full write-up like the Truck Trend magazine does. Each truck was filled to 3/4 of a tank with 87 octane. The 5.0 had 4wd, a 3.73 diff. and a 36.0 gallon tank. The EB had 2 wd, a 3.73 diff. and a 26.0 gallan tank. The 6.2 had AWD, a 3.55 diff. and a 36.0 gallon tank. Gas weighs 6.25 lbs. per gallon at 72* F.

A 36.0 gallon tank at 3/4 full weighs about 168.75 lbs.
A 26.0 gallon tank at 3/4 full weighs about 121.875 ilbs.

The 5.0 and 6.2 both had a higher curb weight than the EB. An even test would be the following:

Same size tank, same diff. gear ratio, same body configuration, similar interior, same tire diameter if possible, gas from the same gas pump, the same dyno, the same track lane and not tweaking the EB on the Dyno.

Each truck has it's advantages. Each truck fits different wants and needs.

Sorry, I'm not trying to pick a fight.

Read more: http://m.motortrend.com/roadtests/tr...#ixzz1Te2qz6RM

 

You can't get the larger tank on the ecoboost...
And 40lbs at the strip is .04. The only tweaking was.to bypass the traction control by removing wheel speed sensors.

 

How many 10,000Lb trailers did you tow with your Probe?.......The twin turbo in the 3.5 F-150 platform is engineered to work, ie. tow, & haul heavy loads, only time will tell how reliable it will be in the real world applications.... Until then I will stick with good ole V8 power if I'm gonna plop down 40K large on a new truck!......

 

For your information comparing a diesel motor with the gas eco-boost motor is like comparing apples & oranges! I don't see your point! The diesel longevity is already proven fact! The Eco-Boost longevity is only marketed legend so far & is not proven in the real world! Talk to me when you have over 200K miles on your trailer towing & hauling Eco!............

 

You must have missed all the testing this engine had been through. You should do research before you type that nonsense!