2018 Expy pic

[rdlangston13]

On the never V8 comment, I suspect that myself along with many others will see the Yukon as a new alternative.

I just don't understand the fear of the turbo charged v6. It's more power and torque than the V8 and better fuel economy. As long as the component are built to with stand the pressures then it will be fine. V8s of the past we're running cast iron cranks and rods and they were weak as crap. These new motors are all forged and the materials used have been greatly improved. As long as you don't go modding it you shouldn't ever run into a major failure. The most common ecoboost problem that I know of is moisture in the CAC which has been corrected since like 13 or 14 and timing chain tensioner rattle which can happen on any engine and again has been corrected since like 14.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[johnmc]

The normally aspirated V8s have great reliability numbers and history. That does not seem to be the case for these increasingly smaller v6s with multiple turbos. This is all about goofy CAFE standards, not about reliability and consumer value. We went through a learning curve in the 1980s regarding CAFE standards and produced some pretty bad products. That's what I am seeing again. I think it will take a number of years to "ring-out" these new approaches.
Ford is not talking about great reliability numbers associated with this new initiative. That
is a very important metric to me.

 

[dlcorbett]

reliability itself shouldnt be a problem but if it is, you can see for yourself by reading f150, explorer or taurus forums as those vehicles has the v6 for awhile and can give a good footprint. whats more telling to me is that on all rhe expedition forums, theres barely any complaints or problems on the revised third gen expys and even less complaining on the engine. the gmc utes seems to have way more problems, granted they seem to be electrical. and though its new the expy seems ro be a better vehicle is all aspects. the only real way to do better and get the v8 is go armada, i personally dont believe the sequoia is better than the expy and the armada even new is not that good looking

 

[rdlangston13]

The normally aspirated V8s have great reliability numbers and history. That does not seem to be the case for these increasingly smaller v6s with multiple turbos. This is all about goofy CAFE standards, not about reliability and consumer value. We went through a learning curve in the 1980s regarding CAFE standards and produced some pretty bad products. That's what I am seeing again. I think it will take a number of years to "ring-out" these new approaches.
Ford is not talking about great reliability numbers associated with this new initiative. That
is a very important metric to me.

Ford had an entire campaign about how reliable this engine is! They had like a 6 video series in YouTube where they "torture tested" one of these engines. Look it up. The only people I've seen have major mechanical failures are ones who have gone with super aggressive tunes trying to get 500+ hp.

I've got 27,000 miles on my ecoboost expedition and I'll be sure to keep the group updated on how it's doing. So far I've only had one warranty claim on it and that was for a rattle in the center console.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Habbibie]

According to all the expert reviews the expedition is the one to go with on everything except luxury, that's GM territory. And the armada is the one to avoid in all aspects.

 

[jeff kushner]

Agree with DL, I drove the '16 Armada and turned around within a half mile....hated that truck. Small and fugly!

As far as the turbo/NA discussion goes. Like many here, I grew up in the era of the 60's muscle cars. Real strong V8's with 850 dual feed carbs. Everything was "user adjustable" and we were comfortable with that because we knew that we could repair it if it required a repair. While most of my friends wrenched cars, I did bikes and we both watched as component reliability sky rocketed. Today, we just don't have to worry about failures like we used to. Most computerized systems really will outlast the 200K I expect to get out of a car. My SLk for instance has over 190K on it and thee only thing that has ever failed is the original battery, after 12 years! Electrics last today, as long as we can keep them dry!

I did my homework on this 3.5 twin turbo and since I have a turbo-bike, I already knew a bit of what it takes to keep them spinning. On my bike, the 38mm turbo spins at 230K rpm....yeah, two hundred and thirty THOUSAND rpm fast!

The compression and timing both have to be reduced/retarded under full boost to prevent detonation which the 3.5 does by keeping the CR at a reasonable 10:1 and adjusting the timing on the fly. The only thing I see needing service over the course of 200K miles is the turbos themselves. I have rebuilt my bikes turbo before I modified the setup to run at 18PSI. They spin in an oil bearing so dirty oil is going to be a very real no-no for my new truck unless I get longing for doing another turbo rebuild. Ford also sets the system up to produce a fairly low 11-13PSI boost pressure & keeps them spooled by using a small exh port size on each header section. This keeps them spinning fast enough to make boost (higher than ambient pressure) at very low engine rpm while eliminating turbo-lag. It's a pretty slick setup that give two big benefits in low total boost and an "always ready" condition. In the world of boosted engines, we see things like broken intake manifold bolts, bent con rods and piston melting from detonation and over boosting and NONE of these things has been seen with the 3.5's. The balance of the engine seems to be very strong as as others have already mentioned, it's worlds stronger & faster then my old 5.4's that I had in my 2 previous Expys.

I tend to be more comfortable with "old school" so I understand that position but I am sold on this engine, 100%.

jeff

 

[rdlangston13]

Just an interesting footnote on the ecoboost, the new 2017 Raptor F150 has the "high output" version of the 3.5 making 450 hp and 510 lb ft of torque. There is a "Baja" setting on the truck that keeps to turbos spooked to 20,000 rpm (max rpm is 70,000) even at idle to pretty much eliminate turbo lag all together.

The current expedition ecoboost makes 365 hp and 420 lb ft of torque at 2500 rpm. The new generation which is currently going into the 2017 f150 makes 375 hp and 470 lb ft of torque at 3500 rpm. That's more torque than the 6.2 liter GM puts in the Yukon Denali.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[dlcorbett]

ome thing that does bother me is the constant jitters these trucks have on bumps. if the new truck still shakes like the current model does, im not buyin it. thats my biggest complaint about mine and the expys. the 15+ models dont shake as much but its still evident. most all foreign companies eliminated this, why cant ford or gm...? and im not talkin about the unibody trucks because the armada/qx80 and land cruiser/lx570 are bof and no reviewer talks about them having a jittery ride quality