2009 - 2014 F-150

Ecoboost or 5.0 which would you choose?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Aug 23, 2013 | 08:42 PM
  #151  
jntibs's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 388
Likes: 1
From: Fox Lake, WI
Originally Posted by Mike Up

This has been debated at rv.net and it turns out that most don't want a puny 3.0L that only has 240 hp and 420 lbs of torque. What most people wanted was a 4.0L diesel that would provide adequate 300 hp and excellent 600 lbs of torque.

The 3.0L is anemic just like the Ram payload. Guess they're trying to compete with the VW, BMW, and Merc cars with their little 3.0L diesels. Afterall the truck does have a coil spring car suspension with the payload of a car.
People love big numbers, but in reality the powertrains have far surpassed the chassis capabilities in regards to towing and hauling. Want big diesel numbers? Than step up to a platform capable of acually using that power, F250 or bigger.
 
Reply
Old Aug 23, 2013 | 09:03 PM
  #152  
Mike Up's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 432
Likes: 1
From: Chicago Area
Originally Posted by jntibs
People love big numbers, but in reality the powertrains have far surpassed the chassis capabilities in regards to towing and hauling. Want big diesel numbers? Than step up to a platform capable of acually using that power, F250 or bigger.
I agree, but even 480 lbs and up torque would be great. You just want to have enough horsepower to keep your speed up. Been there and done that with a truck that had great diesel torque and little horsepower.
 
Reply
Old Aug 24, 2013 | 09:52 AM
  #153  
Kevin O.'s Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 334
Likes: 0
From: Meriden, Ct.
Originally Posted by Mike Up
I agree, but even 480 lbs and up torque would be great. You just want to have enough horsepower to keep your speed up. Been there and done that with a truck that had great diesel torque and little horsepower.
Mike all you need is to trade in the 5.slow and get the Eco. Plug in a tune and POW! Instant 500+ lb/ft of torque when you want it and great mpg when you don't!!!!
 
Reply
Old Aug 24, 2013 | 10:11 AM
  #154  
Mike Up's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 432
Likes: 1
From: Chicago Area
Originally Posted by Kevin O.
Mike all you need is to trade in the 5.slow and get the Eco. Plug in a tune and POW! Instant 500+ lb/ft of torque when you want it and great mpg when you don't!!!!
Na, I don't want the Ecolimp, I like getting to my destination without stalling out. Besides a tune will only make that little engine self destruct even faster.
 
Reply
Old Aug 24, 2013 | 01:27 PM
  #155  
blueovelboy's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,006
Likes: 0
From: willow glenn
Originally Posted by Kevin O.
Mike all you need is to trade in the 5.slow and get the Eco. Plug in a tune and POW! Instant 500+ lb/ft of torque when you want it and great mpg when you don't!!!!
the 5.slow gets about the same MPG as the ego booster (maybe even better)when not towing, and better when towing so ill keep my 5.slow over the ego booster!

I never wanted to race up a hill with 7000 LBS hanging on to the @$$ of my truck, plus the 3.5 seem to lack motor braking like the v8's seem to have. granted its not a diesel with tons of motor brake but its still better than the v6's
 
Reply
Old Aug 24, 2013 | 03:53 PM
  #156  
Kevin O.'s Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 334
Likes: 0
From: Meriden, Ct.
Originally Posted by blueovelboy
the 5.slow gets about the same MPG as the ego booster (maybe even better)when not towing, and better when towing so ill keep my 5.slow over the ego booster!

I never wanted to race up a hill with 7000 LBS hanging on to the @$$ of my truck, plus the 3.5 seem to lack motor braking like the v8's seem to have. granted its not a diesel with tons of motor brake but its still better than the v6's
I'd be willing to bet that the 5.0's engine braking isn't that much more significant than the Eco's. At least to where you would notice that much of a difference and the mpg is a toss up between the two so you can't really argue that.

No one is talking about racing up any hills.Coming from towing with older diesels I'm use to climbing hills at low rpm's with very little downshifting to maintain speed. The Eco is as close as you can get to know what it's like towing with a diesel. I also towed with a 07 5.4L and i still remember picking up speed before a hill just so i could try and make it to the top without going under the speed limit and having it downshift and rev to the moon. Now I'm sure the 5.0 with the 6 spd is much better than the 5.4L w/ 4spd trans but it still isn't an Eco.

That's not even mentioning towing at high elevations where the 5.0 would fall on it's face gasping for air while the Eco doesn't skip a beat!
 
Reply
Old Aug 24, 2013 | 04:49 PM
  #157  
glc's Avatar
glc
Senior Member
15 Year Member
Veteran: Navy
Veteran: Reserves
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 43,535
Likes: 817
From: Joplin MO
Good grief.

Let's leave the EB out of the equation for just a minute.

The 5.0 is a better GAS tow motor than anything else Ford has ever built for 1 ton and lighter trucks except for the 6.2 and V-10, and MAYBE a tweaked 460. All this arguing is giving me a headache and has probably chased the original poster away.
 
Reply
Old Aug 24, 2013 | 05:47 PM
  #158  
jdeacon's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 896
Likes: 0
From: WA
Nope, he's still here. He replies when I comment on how productive and informative this thread is.
 
Reply
Old Aug 24, 2013 | 05:52 PM
  #159  
Patman's Avatar
Global Moderator &
Senior Member
20 Year Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 21,337
Likes: 159
From: DFW
Originally Posted by Mike Up
This has been debated at rv.net and it turns out that most don't want a puny 3.0L that only has 240 hp and 420 lbs of torque. What most people wanted was a 4.0L diesel that would provide adequate 300 hp and excellent 600 lbs of torque.

The 3.0L is anemic just like the Ram payload. Guess they're trying to compete with the VW, BMW, and Merc cars with their little 3.0L diesels. Afterall the truck does have a coil spring car suspension with the payload of a car.
Dodge now offers rear air assist for their trucks. Should help raise payload numbers
 
Reply
Old Aug 24, 2013 | 08:32 PM
  #160  
Rambo's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,763
Likes: 0
From: USA
The airbag suspension on the new Ram half tons does not increase payload or the tow rating.
 
Reply
Old Aug 24, 2013 | 10:37 PM
  #161  
Mike Up's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 432
Likes: 1
From: Chicago Area
Originally Posted by Rambo
The airbag suspension on the new Ram half tons does not increase payload or the tow rating.
Exactly, while I'll never own a GM POS, I did consider the Ram until I seen their car like capacities. So disappointing with a new platform. Guess their 3/4 and 1 tons are excellent but their 1/2 tons have the capacities of a midsize unibody car.
 
Reply
Old Aug 25, 2013 | 12:09 AM
  #162  
KingRanchCoy's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,480
Likes: 6
From: San Angelo, TX
Originally Posted by Mike Up;5013911

I wanted an Ecoboost as well when I seen them come out but quickly read of their problems in their first model year, 2011. Now it's 2013 and that [URL="http://www.truckinginfo.com/channel/products/news/story/2013/05/ford-moisture-in-cooler-causing-loss-of-power-in-f-150-ecoboost-engines.aspx?prestitial=1"
problems still exists[/URL]. No way would I consider it.
Think you need to check your info again, the 2013 have the updated parts and that problem is not a concern.

Originally Posted by Mike Up
5' X 10' trailer ??? That's not a trailer, it's a cart.
.

Why no faster than 65 mph?? Because that's all a trailer tire is rated for. I can't believe you were going 90 mph with a trailer. If your tires would had blown, you would had caused a pretty bad crash that would likely had cost you your life and maybe someone else around you.

Tires are rated at 65 mph and they will blow. I've been witness to this several time by ignorant people knowing no better.

So now that you know, please stay with in the speed capacity of the tires.
Thanks.
Thanks internet police officer , i do not have the st tires on the trailer, i have p series tires on the trailer with a 500lb atv on it.. Running it up to 90 mph and back down to 75 would not have caused a tire blowout.. I know how to keep a eye on my tires.
 
Reply
Old Aug 25, 2013 | 01:52 AM
  #163  
Mike Up's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 432
Likes: 1
From: Chicago Area
Originally Posted by KingRanchCoy
Think you need to check your info again, the 2013 have the updated parts and that problem is not a concern.
Not true, there are people with 2013 Ecoboosts with the new IC and still having the same issues. It's not fixed.
 

Last edited by Mike Up; Aug 25, 2013 at 01:55 AM.
Reply
Old Aug 25, 2013 | 12:40 PM
  #164  
Power Kid's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,828
Likes: 0
From: Home of Crown Royal
All I know is mine is fixed. I think they may have other issues. coil etc.
 
Reply
Old Aug 25, 2013 | 03:26 PM
  #165  
Silverfish's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 341
Likes: 0
Sorry. Below is a forum dedicated to the problems of a Eco and even on the 2013. Drill a hole in the intercooler on ecoboost (that will fix it)


http://www.f150ecoboost.net/forum/31...boost-problems
 

Last edited by Silverfish; Aug 25, 2013 at 05:56 PM.
Reply



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:18 AM.