I'm interested to see what Ford does with the Expedition, cosmetically and power train wise

 

wut? 6.2 is 420hp/460tq. Almost twice the displacement and more power by a good ways. It will out tow an Eco boost no problem with less effort.

Now that Ford is joining Toyota in how they rate their tow ratings I imagine they will drop quite a bit. I don't know if or when GM will join or any other company for that matter.

 

The new Dodge ecodiesel has 420 ft lbs. Since Ford is dumping the 6.2 I expect a small bump for the ecoboost to at least what the 6.2 had (434 ftlbs best I remember). Now when the Cummins hits the street with over 500 ftlbs Ford had better have a diesel ready to go.

 

Watch all of these and get back with us...

I'll give you a spoiler, the EB beats the GM 6.2 by a very healthy margin. The GM motor makes big numbers but only once you rev the **** outta it. It makes peak torque at 4100RPM whereas the EB makes its peak at 2500RPM. Which set of numbers would you rather have when you're hooked to a heavy trailer?

 

I would take a ford 6.2 or gm 6.2 over eco if im towing heavy loads. They put them in f250/2500 for a reason. More displacement helps over long steep grades. No matter the engine they all downshift to 4000+ rpm. At that point a bigger motor will out pull a smaller one. Look at fords own videos. The 5.7 ram was losing off the line (like everyone as the eco is the fastest of the bunch) but at midway and finish line the ram is hauling *** and reeling the eco in quick and barely looses.

Eco is a good motor but to say 420tq will out tow 460tq in the real world is wrong or youve never towed up hills where peak torque at 2500 or 4100 doesn't matter as a truck downshifts.

 

Wanna know how I know you didn't watch the videos?

If you would have you would have seen the GM truck either screaming near the redline and barely maintaining speed or as soon as it upshifted it bogged down and lost speed. It could not maintain the speed limit near the top of the hill. The EB on the other hand not only maintained the speed limit, they had to let off because they hit 10 over the posted limit. If you compared the times you would see the EB beat the GM 6.2 by nearly a minute over an 8 mile course up one of the steepest, nastiest hills in the continental US.

Soooo, what was that you were saying about pulling up long, steep grades?


EDIT: Cliff Notes

 

Im sticking to it. They are basically racing these trucks. Thats fine the eco wins. Tow across states and the big engines will tow heavier loads easier. Like I said there is a reason they put large displacement engines in tow vehicles like F250s. I get it you have an eco so its gods gift to trucks. Ive been in and driven many ecos and 6.2 F150s, yes even towing, and you can tell the larger motor doesn't work as hard. Sure the eco wins off the line.

 

The power plants are all pretty neat, I'll still take the V8 though. No replacement for displacement.

 

Oh I forgot to mention they even state "The eco boost should have the advantage due to the thin air density". Yes turbos help lack of air entering the motor. All NA motors choke. My truck did before the blower install. I've towed boats with my buddies 6.2 and different boat with 3.5 to the same lake on different occasions. 6.2 was just a better feel and i felt like I had to dig deeper with the eco. Anyway this is getting way off topic now

 

Except at high altitudes, where there is no replacement for forced induction. If I lived in the Rockies, I'd have a FI motor, either gas or diesel.

 

I watched the videos, fairly representative considering the testing was done at 10 - 12,000 feet, the altitude at which of course everyone else tows at... lol. An engine with 60 less hp and 40 less ft-lbs of torque than another will tow better?? Why not just tow with the 2.7 EB then, I'm sure it would be even better lol. 4000 rpms is revving the **** out of the 6.2?

If Ford doesn't increase EB outputs for 2015 my next truck is the Chev 6.2.

 

The Trans mapping is what really killed the 6.2. I feel that's its biggest down fault, that and it makes its max torque WAY to high in the rpm range.

But yes in that scenario the EB would tow better because it can breathe better than a n/a engine at that altitude.

 

^^^ This.

Max numbers really don't tell you anything at all. It's the area under the curve, and the RPM at which those peak numbers are made. The EB has peak torque really low and it maintains those numbers across a very wide RPM range, and that's why it makes a great towing engine.

Arm chair racers and 'my truck has more HP than yours' folks like the peak numbers. Those who really use their truck for work prefer the broad power band.

 

You don't start a thread like that without a link. With that smugness, I imagine yahoo is your ONLY friend.

I suggest you get one more friend -the SEARCH engine, since this has already been posted.

 

I know what you're saying. I just have never seen the dyno sheet that shows the torque curve of the 6.2. I'm just going by what was advertised. And the thing is tho, those max torque numbers will sell the truck because no one will do the digging to see which truck actually has the better torque (towing) curve that suits their style of driving.

I myself love a truck that makes most of its power down low. I like the low grunt for towing, I don't care if its fast. That's what cars are for.