Register free!

The Green Industry's Resource Center



Reply
 
Thread Tools   Display Modes
  #31  
Old 02-09-2011, 12:34 PM
DavidNJ DavidNJ is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 514
I just found a reason not to get the Ecoboost...it is up to a $4650 option! Diesel performance with a diesel price.

In the end, it seems the Dodge with the Hemi may be $3-5k less expensive than the equivalent Ford.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 02-09-2011, 01:58 PM
dishboy dishboy is offline
LawnSite Gold Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: zone 6
Posts: 3,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidNJ View Post
I just found a reason not to get the Ecoboost...it is up to a $4650 option! Diesel performance with a diesel price.

In the end, it seems the Dodge with the Hemi may be $3-5k less expensive than the equivalent Ford.

Actually you are wrong, the cheapest 2 wheel drive Hemi is 29,000, the cheapest Ford ecoboost is 28,000 which included the 3.73 limited slip RE.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 02-09-2011, 07:05 PM
doubleedge's Avatar
doubleedge doubleedge is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: ND
Posts: 912
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidNJ View Post
Supercharged engines aren't common because they are bad. Traditionally, they are more expensive to build and blowby past the rings causes increased maintenance and more frequent oil changes.

However, this is 2011.

The Ecoboost engines are the only direct injection engines in this group. Coupled with twin superchargers and double ohc variable camshaft timing, it produces the flat torque curve of direct injected Audis while the NVH levels are low enough to make it the optional engine in Ford's top of the line Lincoln. (Note: the only way I'd end up with the Lincoln is of someone gave it to me; even then I doubt I'd drive it much.)

What about durability? Again, this is 2011. First, driven by emission laws with 100k mile durability requirements, improvements in metallurgy and manufacturing have much tighter tolerances and reduced wear. Additionally coatings applied to nearly everything contain heat, keep oil flowing, and reduce friction. Piston ring technology coupled with the tighter clearances allow less blowby. Synthetic lubricants holds up under the higher pressures and temperatures. Additionally, Ford apparently water cooled the turbochargers.

Net, the performance of the turbo V6 will be more diesel like than any of its competitors. In real life fuel economy has to be higher; reduced friction surfaces plus much more efficient combustion (a 4v ohc head is light-years better than virtually any 2-valve ohv design, then add the direct injection).

Net, the engine probably gives the Ford the edge here. Although the Dodge has to ride better.

Now if I was getting the Ford I'd like to forget the Ecoboost and get a Raptor, even if the rear suspension is not quite right (it should have been 3-link IMHO).

http://media.ford.com/images/10031/EcoBoost.pdf
The words supercharger and turbocharger aren't interchangeable. A supercharger is driven by a belt from the engine; a turbocharger is driven by exhaust gas from the engine. The supercharger has quicker response and the turbocharger is more efficient.
__________________


Cummins isn't spelled with a g!!!!!
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 02-09-2011, 07:56 PM
South Florida Lawns's Avatar
South Florida Lawns South Florida Lawns is offline
LawnSite Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: usa
Posts: 4,781
Easy one there Chevrolet makes some of the best gas motors. I have owned a few GM's and nothing but satisfactory.

Give that Eco Boost a year or two till they work any bugs out, first year is always like the guinea pig there could always be issues that arise.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 02-09-2011, 08:31 PM
DavidNJ DavidNJ is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 514
Supercharger and turbocharger are both forced induction. One is exhaust driven and virtually always coupled with a centrifugal compressor; the other is usually belt driven off the crankshaft and is used with a variety of compressors although a rotary is popular.

Once upon a time turbos were plagued with significant lag; These days, computer controlled valve timing and direct injection pretty much eliminates that at street boost levels.

There isn't a car guy anywhere near the GM leadership. If you thing that shell of a company will still be healthy through the lifetime of your purchase, more power to you.

I priced the Dodge and Ford online. I used 4WD regular cab long bed models. After working it to the minimums the Ford XL was $32,410, the Dodge Longhorn was $29,410.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 02-09-2011, 09:28 PM
DavidNJ DavidNJ is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 514
This shows the torque curves of the different F-150 engines. Note, from any sort of practical standpoint, the Ecoboost 3.8 is more powerful than the 6.2 V-8. Note that HP is always torque in lb-ft * 5252/rpm. The 6.2 does make more power above 4000rpm; but how often are you at WOT (wide open throttle, the only time these maximum power levels mean anything)?

Meanwhile, if you are in Denver or other high altitude location, the forced induction engine will have a huge advantage, easily besting the 6.2 V8.

Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 02-11-2011, 09:55 PM
joed joed is offline
LawnSite Bronze Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 1,108
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deori View Post
I'm probably going to be looking for a new truck in the next year and was planning on looking at a GM. I've seen several people on this site say how they're so outdated though. Care to expand on that? The 5.3 is over 300HP and has held the best in class fuel economy the last 4-5 years. I'm driving a 2001 F150 now, but am looking to probably switch teams. I'm just curious as to how they're so outdated?
Like you, I've been looking for a new truck over the last month. When I took out the Sierra, what I thought was outdated was:
Rear drum brakes
The dash
The small interior space (on the ext. cab)
A 6 speed tranny that constantly shifted and never seemed to find the right gear.
Thin sheet metal for the body
Only acceptable crash safety ratings from the insurance institute for highway safety.

I've always loved my GMC trucks. My current truck is a 2000 GMC 2500 Sierra. It's been very good. GMC has really dropped the ball on their 1/2 ton offerings.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 02-11-2011, 10:00 PM
360ci 360ci is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Kitchener, ON
Posts: 986
Quote:
Originally Posted by dishboy View Post
Hey, they raced up a hill with loaded trailer and the Ford got their first. If that made the Dodge and Chevy look bad I'm sorry.
The Ford trailer wasn't loaded up ready for the road with dishes, gear, fluids and the like.

As mentioned, don't believe what you see.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 02-11-2011, 10:20 PM
DavidNJ DavidNJ is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 514
This shows that the Dodge matches the peak of the Ford EcoBoost, and would beat it on a racetrack (probably), but would seem weaker in real life. At high altitudes it would be a lot weaker.
Attached Images
 
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 02-11-2011, 10:55 PM
360ci 360ci is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Kitchener, ON
Posts: 986
Don't forget here, the 3.5L V6 is boosted. You boost that HEMI to match (similar boost pressure), and it'll run all over that puny 35EB.

Obviously this would increase the cost substantially in aftermarket parts for the Ram, but any decently sized V8 boosted to similar PSI as the Ecoboost will spank it. Displacement still rules. People who buy TRUCKS for fuel economy purposes should get their heads checked. Everyone wants power without having to pay at the pump. You want the power, it'll eat the fuel. The old phrase I used to use when I raced "If speed costs money, how fast do you want to go?". For some, excessive money = ego funding. Back to the engine, people have to compare boosted to boosted. That's like comparing a Mitsu EVO to a Fusion AWD. HEMI is a $1150 option here in Canada, and can be had on the lowest trim level. To get that EB engine in the F150 you have to get no less than an XLT trim and even then it costs $2000 over the 5.0L V8. Price is another determining factor to consider. Ford will compare their EB engine with the top trim levels from both Ford and GM so the EB looks like a better deal. For a 'work truck', the EB engine again comes in XLT or higher trim.

On the platinum and Harley models, the 6.2L is the standard engine, NOT the EB! Buyers who are paying over $60K for a loaded half ton want the larger displacement engine for bragging rights (which is why it's the only engine available), and for all we know the 6.2L can probably get similar real world mileage as the EB35 as it doesn't have to rev as high to get moving, to pass, or to keep speed when towing or not, as power is always on tap generally without needing a downshift.

Stay tuned for the upcoming front wheel drive F series soon to arrive at a dealer near you! - Ha, had to say it.

Not to mention that in nearly all similar configurations, the Ford variants weigh more than both Dodge, and GM.

I thought the 4V 4.6L 6 speed was a good configuration in the F150. My engine of choice is still the 5.0L V8!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
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

Forum Jump





Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1998 - 2012, LawnSite.comô - Moose River Media
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:21 AM.

Page generated in 0.10900 seconds with 8 queries