Register free!

The Green Industry's Resource Center



Reply
 
Thread Tools   Display Modes
  #41  
Old 02-11-2011, 11:06 PM
unkownfl's Avatar
unkownfl unkownfl is offline
LawnSite Gold Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Orlando/Windermere
Posts: 3,796
Quote:
Originally Posted by 360ci View Post
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!
No 4v 4.6 engines in a f150. Ecoboost isn't made to compete against a hemi that's what the 6.2 is for. The 6.2 comes in the xl model line too.

Coming soon IRS for a Dodge...
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 02-11-2011, 11:35 PM
360ci 360ci is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Kitchener, ON
Posts: 986
Quote:
Originally Posted by unkownfl View Post
No 4v 4.6 engines in a f150. Ecoboost isn't made to compete against a hemi that's what the 6.2 is for. The 6.2 comes in the xl model line too.

Coming soon IRS for a Dodge...
3V, close enough.

Canada spec here: the 6.2L is only available in higher model ranges or the SVT off-road variant.

Edit:

You Yanks get all the decent options in the lower trim levels as well as better workhorse engines. Must be nice.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 02-12-2011, 12:16 AM
unkownfl's Avatar
unkownfl unkownfl is offline
LawnSite Gold Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Orlando/Windermere
Posts: 3,796
Quote:
Originally Posted by 360ci View Post
3V, close enough.

Canada spec here: the 6.2L is only available in higher model ranges or the SVT off-road variant.

Edit:

You Yanks get all the decent options in the lower trim levels as well as better workhorse engines. Must be nice.
The 6.2 isn't on the website for the base model f150 but they're out there on the lots. There isn't even an eco boost on the lot yet here and we have like 10 dealerships within 10 miles when I look two weeks ago.

I have the 3v wish I would have waited one more year to get the v6 non eco boost. I only tow a 3500lbs trailer about 20% of the time the rest is empty driving. city with the trailer I get like 12-13mpg highway around 16-17 depending how fast I go over the speed limit all with the a/c on full blast here. I raced my friends wifes 1500 dodge with the 4.7 and beat him by three tenths with the same 60ft pretty much. His Hemi Wore my ass out though. I like the 3v its gets like 21mpg on the highway empty and has 300hp which is plenty for a 1/2 ton IMHO.
__________________

Last edited by unkownfl; 02-12-2011 at 12:20 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 02-12-2011, 12:25 AM
unkownfl's Avatar
unkownfl unkownfl is offline
LawnSite Gold Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Orlando/Windermere
Posts: 3,796
Quote:
Originally Posted by dishboy View Post
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.
Lets not add inflation now. It's $27,065 in an xl or $24,650 in a XLT with the rebates which is the better option.

http://bp2.ford.com/2011-Ford-F-150#page=/Models/
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 02-12-2011, 07:22 AM
DavidNJ DavidNJ is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 514
The Ford 3.5 L EcoBoost significantly bests all of its competitors below 4000 RPM including Ford's own 6.2 L. About 3000 or 4000 feet altitude, it would even have higher power above 4000 RPM. It is a new generation of technology with direct injection and double overhead camshafts that provide variable intake and exhaust valve timing. The turbochargers provide additional control over the intake air volume while the smaller displacement V-6 configuration reduces internal friction. The only significant feature missing is variable valve lift featured on some BMW and Nissan models.

The question is: how often are you what flat to the floor above 4000 RPM? It is frequently with a trailer out back maybe a 1500 isn't the right size truck for you. Otherwise, the 3.5 L EcoBoost would be the best engine in this class by a comfortable margin.

However engine isn't everything. The recent test, Edmonds rated at 3500 GMC narrowly above Ford F350. Although the Ford had more power and a nicer cab, the GMC had a new chassis under old sheet metal for 2011 which gave it lighter weight and better steering. The Ford was also tall enough to make parking a bit of a problem. In a similar manner, the Dodge's coil spring rear suspension could be considered a bigger advantage.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 02-12-2011, 01:15 PM
Adirondack L&L Adirondack L&L is offline
LawnSite Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Charlotte NC
Posts: 17
For anyone that hasn't driven a DI/Turbo engine, they're nothing short of amazing. If the name of the game is real world, usable torque it will own all but the largest V8s and diesels. Reliability and longevity is another story, that will take time to sort out.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 02-12-2011, 04:53 PM
doubleedge's Avatar
doubleedge doubleedge is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: ND
Posts: 912
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adirondack L&L View Post
For anyone that hasn't driven a DI/Turbo engine, they're nothing short of amazing. If the name of the game is real world, usable torque it will own all but the largest V8s and diesels. Reliability and longevity is another story, that will take time to sort out.
Technically, new diesels are DI and turbocharged too .
__________________


Cummins isn't spelled with a g!!!!!
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 02-12-2011, 05:32 PM
360ci 360ci is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Kitchener, ON
Posts: 986
David, I agree. If I wanted a truck for sheer size to drive around in without using it for anything else, I'd spend the bucks and get the most fuel efficient engine, not necessarily for the fuel economy itself, but the range you can get. However, I checked online, and the 35EB only comes with the 98L tank (26 US gals), wtf???

Again, I buy trucks for what they can do for me, and in this case the EB isn't the right engine to have in the F150 when you tow every day. V8's do similar work, at lower engine speeds which increases durability. I can see the EB transmission consistently hunting for gears when towing, and as it's a smaller displacement it'll be regularly in or above the 3000rpm range. The higher the boost, the more fuel you use....

If Ford wants to win the performance game, they should blow the 6.2L. If anything, it'll make the 'Harley' guys happy when they tote around their show bikes. ha
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 02-12-2011, 08:29 PM
doubleedge's Avatar
doubleedge doubleedge is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: ND
Posts: 912
Quote:
Originally Posted by 360ci View Post
David, I agree. If I wanted a truck for sheer size to drive around in without using it for anything else, I'd spend the bucks and get the most fuel efficient engine, not necessarily for the fuel economy itself, but the range you can get. However, I checked online, and the 35EB only comes with the 98L tank (26 US gals), wtf???

Again, I buy trucks for what they can do for me, and in this case the EB isn't the right engine to have in the F150 when you tow every day. V8's do similar work, at lower engine speeds which increases durability. I can see the EB transmission consistently hunting for gears when towing, and as it's a smaller displacement it'll be regularly in or above the 3000rpm range. The higher the boost, the more fuel you use....

If Ford wants to win the performance game, they should blow the 6.2L. If anything, it'll make the 'Harley' guys happy when they tote around their show bikes. ha
The idea that the Ford Ecoboost will have to rev higher because it has lower displacement is baseless; just look at the numbers, it has more torque in the low rpm range than v8 engines. I don't see why you keep arguing against the numbers, saying that displacement is better than anything.

And yes, it will have v8 like fuel consumption when it is being boosted, but when it is at a steady speed with low boost, it will have far less pumping and friction losses, which will increase fuel economy.
__________________


Cummins isn't spelled with a g!!!!!
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 02-12-2011, 09:47 PM
DavidNJ DavidNJ is offline
LawnSite Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 514
The EB is a LOWER engine speed than the current V8s. In 2011 the way it was is history. In order to meet emissions and fuel economy regulations while still meeting safety regulations and consumer feature desires which add weight, the manufacturers have all gone fairly exotic to achieve performance with longetivity and reliablity.

Note, F1, where qualifying is usually everything, limits the teams to 8 engines per season, and they can't change engine or gearbox after qualifying. One lap of fuel can add 1 or 2 tenths of second to lap times. Reliability, fuel efficency, and performance are not separate; reliability and fuel efficiency are parts of performance.

The new engines use better metals, tighter quality control, and different coatings to achieve levels of performance, efficency, and reliablity unheard of just a few years ago. Knock sensors let them run at peak performance without ever damaging the engine from exceeding it. The diesels in 3/4 and 1-ton models are pushing 800 ft-lb peak torque.

The EcoBoost is far and away the best performing 1/2-ton truck engine, ESPECIALLY for towing. The Dodge probably has the better the chassis. The GMC/Chevy 1/2 ton is less than compelling.

Note: the diesel are most definitely direct injection turbos. Not only that, their VERY expensive injection systems run at 25,000psi, 10x higher than the gasoline DI.

Note 2: a CDI turbo diesel of maybe 4L or slightly smaller would be a great 1/2 ton engine. Now is someone made one...
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 08:32 AM.

Page generated in 0.11571 seconds with 8 queries