Ford's highly touted Eco-Boost lol

[DNeinstadt]

I compared you to Quadrofux becuase just like he does, you got uber upset and flew off the handle when I simply questioned your "facts".

Dan

[Z28SSMAN]

I own a 2011 Crew Cab 5.5' box 4x4 with 365hp & 420ft/lbs of torque that can tow 11,000 lbs (getting 12-14mpg while doing it) and I get 22+ MPG on a REGULAR basis. All from a BONE STOCK V6. I am pretty impressed with it. Have you ever driven one? Would you like to? I'm more than happy to let you take a test drive and beat on it.

Dan

What gear ratio does your truck have? 3.73s or 4.10s? Be honest because the next time I see you, I want to see the spec label. The majority of Eco-Boost trucks have the 3.55 axle which changes the trailer capacity to 9600.

Don't let Ford's advertising/marketing to sell trucks cloud your logic. Think about these facts:


Your gross hp rating is 365 but with drivetrain loss you're probably less than 300 rwhp. Your truck has a curb weight of about 5600. When you attach that mythical 11,200 trailer to it, you're at 16,800 gross combined weight rating (GCWR) and that's without fuel and passengers. Add 2 passengers at 180 lbs plus a tank of fuel and you're up to 17,410 lbs combined. You're gonna take a truck with less than 300 rwhp and maybe 340 torque and pull this amount of weight and get 14 mpg?

Your truck has 365 peak crankshaft hp @ 5,000 rpm...obviously considerably less at a lower rpm. Your peak torque is 420 @ 2500 rpm. Are you saying you can pull this 17000lbs at 2500 rpm? Or will you stretch it out to 5000 constant towing rpm?

Spewing mpg numbers like those are similar to a typical Cobra owner saying they can run 10s when they've never done it. You use dyno numbers/rwhp to try and justify your 10 sec theory about your Cobra to your advantage, so I'm going to use your F150 specs to dispute your statement(s) about your Eco-Boost.

Quadoflux? C'mon Dan, that's pretty sad to call me that. lol

[DNeinstadt]

I have a 2011 Lariat SuperCrew 5 &1/2' box 4x4 with the Off-road package with 3.73's.

I'll backpedal a bit and admit that I have only towed using a full loaded enclosed trailer however I have passed cars like they were standing still and still averaged 12-14 mpg but no, I have never personally towed at 11,300 lbs. I was trying to make a point with the #'s Ford uses. So in that respect, yes, I was "bench towing".

Here are some reviews of the towing of the Ecoboost:

http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2011/04...-6-part-1.html

http://www.autoblog.com/2011/08/04/c...not/#continued

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...t/viewall.html

Another point in your column, they aren't getting the 12-14mpg I experienced (no doubt with a lighter trailer) but they are getting closer to 9-10mpg.

Real world Mileage seems to be hit and miss and regardless, my offer to drive the truck still stands. When are we doing another BW3's night?

I'll retract my Quadrofux statement. :)

Dan

[Z28SSMAN]

http://www.fordf150.net/forums/viewt...00136&start=20

Yeah, the Eco-Boost is quite the amazing engine...get 17-18 mpg without towing and as you said Dan...get 14 mpg towing 11,200. lol.

Obviously I'm giving you a hard time and actually...you deserve it on this subject.

I know trucks because like I said earlier, I've sold hundreds of them. When a customer would come in to buy a truck from me, I would ask a number of questions before I'd agree to do business with them. I would often refuse to sell a 1/2 ton to a customer that was going to haul extreme loads. The commission check wasn't worth it because I knew they'd wear the axles/trans out and badmouth the truck and beat our mechanics up in the shop.

One other point I'd like to make. Go ahead and tow the 11,300 trailer with your 1/2 ton truck. The rear differential and axles and bearings are not designed to withstand that type of abuse. That's why towing those excessive weights require a HD truck.

[DNeinstadt]

I think we can both agree that anyone looking to tow 11,000lbs or more on a regular basis probably shouldn't be shopping for a 1/2 ton truck. :)

[HAULNSS]

[Quadroflux]

i dont know what i did wrong. i get beat up by two guys here and i didnt even say anything in this stupid thread

[Z28SSMAN]

i dont know what i did wrong. i get beat up by two guys here and i didnt even say anything in this stupid thread

You're right, but you've said plenty- sometimes irritating stuff in other threads.

[Z28SSMAN]

When are we doing another BW3's night?
Dan

I'll talk to Bob and see when he's available then post it to see who else will show up.

[Z28SSMAN]

What a mess. But...but...what about the 24 hour 500 mile durability test?

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/...probe/2367197/

What a joke! All the hype about durability. What's the purpose of buying an unproven powertrain? You pay an additional markup for a v-6 and it's a joke. Great marketing, but a joke.

If the powertrain was so great, why only this warranty?

“EcoBoost is undergoing the durability and reliability tests that we put all Ford engines through, and the performance we are seeing shows that the 3.5L EcoBoost engine is a high-quality, top-performing engine that meets or exceeds all our reliability targets and is deserving of Ford’s five-year/60,000-mile powertrain warranty,” said Ford’s Advanced Engine Design and Development manager Brett Hinds.

People are so gullible...or maybe stupid is a better word.

[MR.hp]

:laughing smile::lol:


As for a BW3 night, we could do that again sometime here soon.

[Fast One]

Real-world mileage is not all that complicated. It takes x amount of energy to do x amount of work - Ecoboost, or not. Mileage with turbocharged engines is not a mystery. I figured it out after just a few weeks of driving my first turbocharged car. The only time a turbocharged engine has a major advantage in mileage over a larger, n/a engine of similar output is during low-load/light-throttle conditions. Once the turbo is spooled-up & the 'variable-displacement engine' is operating at maximum displacement (max HP), it will guzzle fuel at a rate similar to that of its larger-displacement n/a counterpart (assuming similar base-engine efficiency). For instance, my GN gets around 24-26 MPG on the highway & about 16-18 MPG in town if I drive it conservatively. If I keep my foot in it all the time around town - spooling the turbo at every opportunity, launching hard at every stop-light, the car guzzles 100 octane at around 7 MPG or so, which is similar to what a typical big-block musclecar with 400+ RWHP would get when driven in a similar manner.

The same thing is obviously true with Ecoboost. It's not some magical system. It's just a turbo with a trendy marketing name. If you've got your foot into the turbo all day long, you're going to use approximately the same amount of gas as a larger, n/a engine of similar output. But your smaller engine may be operating at a higher stress level than the larger n/a engine, due to the smaller turbocharged engine's higher specific output. For instance, running 15 lbs of boost at sea level on an 8:1 engine results in an effective compression ratio of just over 16:1. Doing that to an engine for hours on end without a break on a daily basis will certainly have a negative effect on longevity - unless the engine is seriously overbuilt in the first place. Of course, everything between the heads & cat will also take a beating from the extreme heat, given that the headers often glow white, and the exhaust side of the turbo & the downpipe usually glow bright yellow when the engine is operating near peak power.

In my opinion, anyone who plans to tow 11,000 pounds over long distances or across hilly terrain on a regular basis should be looking at a diesel, anyway.

Joel

[Z28SSMAN]

It all makes sense, Joel.

[Quadroflux]

from a f150 forum

I read exhaustively before buying my truck. Ford claimed more power and better gas mileage. While the physics of using a smaller engine to crank out more horsepower can yield better horsepower because fewer pistons and less rotating mass is involved, I questioned the wisdom of jumping on the Ecoboost hype. I have experience with turbos. I love aircraft with turbos because as the air gets thinner the turbos maintain the manifold pressure. So the performance is the same while the air is thinner and the plane is way faster.

Back to the ecoboost, why is the ecoboost 3.5 l more horsepower than the 5.0? Why does Ford claim the ecoboost is getting better gas mileage when most experts don't? How many of the ecoboost buyers really appreciate the extra torque for towing? I promise you that when you kick in the turbos the extra compression creates inefficiency that is going to lower gas mileage.

Here's the truth: Ecoboost is a marketing gimmick. Don't get me wrong, the idea of turbocharging has been around for decades and the implementation for cars has been around for a long time too. It just never lives up to the hype.

After all the problems I read about with the ecoboost and considering that the gas mileage improvement didn't seem to be panning out, I bought the 5.0. On the freeway I am getting over 23 mpg. My city driving mpg's are terrible, but that is purely a function of sitting at lights. One could argue that the ecoboost is getting better gas mileage sitting at lights and that makes sense. idling an engine with 6 cylinders will usually burn less that 8 cylinders with similar cu of displacement. Think about this though: When you are sitting at a light, every vehicle in the world gets zero mgp. You are not moving! Just kidding. Bottom line is hp and torque are created by energy and while ecoboost is a great idea, the implementation of any engineering with increased complexity has problems. Ecoboost is likely to work against Ford in the long run.

I suggest that Ford hire me as CEO. I will roll out a new ecoboost on a new marketing strategy that goes like this. "Ford is committed to conserving our resources. We have a new experimental engine that is turbo charged. While this new technology has yet to be perfected and condensation builds up in the intake and that water can be sucked into the engine when you need power the most, we are working with you..." It all seems like freekish-folly and ecoboost buyers must be very gullible.