Triton V8 or Ecoboost V6?

[5x10]

Most people that post in this forum, love the power of the ecoboost. That is All they care about. They turn a blind eye, to reliability and anything negative said and attack people, who do. Time will tell and people leery, will not buy one. I personally feel, Ford will quietly and slowly phase them out.

As a new owner of the ecoboost, and prior to buying one, my main concern was longevity of the engine
Turbos scare me, I've always been a gm guy and never had engine issues with the normal aspiration
Neighbor has a 2012 ecoboost with 150k miles and says it runs great
I figured after 5 years of being in the market, we would hear of mass early failures with these engines but I couldn't find that in my research
So I'm rolling the dice and riding a EB
And I do love the low rpm power, especially in this 6k pound expedition el

 

[rjdelp7]

Again....WRONG! Factory tunes vehicles for a balance of Power, Longevity, and Smoothness. A "Programmer"(LMS, Unleashed, SCT) or "Inline Module"(JMS BoostMax), will add power, and it is a LARGE gain. The advantage of a Turbo, is in most cases the Max Boost(PSI) can be tuned higher. That additional air combined with additional fuel means more HP and Lb/ft. If you were talking a NA motor, there is very little to be had by a change in programming, but on these EB motors, plenty is there! Also, as you can see in the post that YOU quoted, he already has the 3.73.

Info for BoostMax:
Stock 2014 F150 - 3.5L Ecoboost DynoJet Test on 91 Octane, Knob @ 100% Stock = Blue Line: 309rwhp / 374 ft-lbs BoostMAX = Red Line: 398rwhp / 455 ft-lbs Peak gains of: +89rwhp and +81 ft-lbs Boost Increase = +5psi(2014 F-150 is actually the closest to the 15-17 Expy in engine calibration and output)

Info for LMS MyCalibrator:
As seen on the F150, this engine has an impressive amount of room left in the calibration, our Performance tuning unlocks that hidden potential with peak vs. peak gains of over 77hp and 82 ft/lbs of torque, with maximum gains of over a staggering 95hp and 95 ft/lbs of torque on our 93 octane performance tuning. In addition to these powerful performance tunes, we also have towing specific tunes available for performance, without sacrificing the utility these vehicles are designed for.

I have both. Had the BoostMax on the 2015 Expedition for a short period, but Never turned it up to Full cause the wife ran 87 most of the time. Now we have the 17, and waiting on the 10K mark, have about 1500 to go.

I run an LMS tuner on my Edge Sport with the 2.7EB. I typically have the 93 Aggressive tune loaded, and IT IS FUN!

I was thinking of getting an LMS MyCalibrator for the Expy, but I will probably stick with the BoostMax. Just cause of the Easy adjust ability on the fly for different Octane. Disadvantage is no Trans Tuning.

So this is accomplished how? Removing the rev limiter, max spark advance and over riding knock sensor, max fuel/air ratio and exceeding the redline, cold air induction and removing catalytic converters and stock exhaust? Sounds like a recipe for disaster.

 

[JExpedition07]

Here I thought this thread had died but then I see something that I just HAVE to respond to....regardless of what is printed by anyone anywhere, I having owned THREE Expeditions can attest that my gas mileage is VASTLY more than a 1 mpg improvement over the 5.4.

I owned two of them(the 5.4) and having driven them well over 300,000 miles I can unequivocally tell you that both got me 12-13 mpg for the IDENTICAL driving route that now nets me at minimum 17.8mpg. I say "at minimum" because while my meter tells me approx 19.5mpg for the same route I drove with both of my old Expys, I'm using the "mileage since new" figure since it cannot possibly be any lower. Comparing 13 to nearly 18 is a huge 28% increase in mileage. I am quick to admit that I don't pay for gas so mileage doesn't matter a bit to me so if anything, I tend to drive faster then I would if I were concerned about mileage.

THEE only reason that Ford invested a billion or so dollars in the ecoboost is to ultimately, reduce manufacturing costs. Obviously, if a family of engines can be engineered & produced using same components from the same vendors for the supporting accessories for an engine, then costs will be reduced. If Ford can reduce the number of different engines it makes to 6 or 8, then the cost to build each will drop with it. Now, you can slip in one of those prepackaged engines from the EB series and you're good to go....sure beats trying to maintain, develop and stock parts for 24 different engines.....just my view.

FWIW, I've got over 19,000 miles on my '17 since buying it in november and I've yet to rev it to redline....and yes, of course I've "raced" a few other trucks and was beaten by one....don't know the make or the engine but that pickup with a bed cap frickin FLEW! The point of this is if I can get by even with occasionally aggressive driving and never having to rev it up, I suspect the 3.5 will last for a long, long time!

And yes, you can always tell when an auto manufacturer is planning on phasing a family of engines out....when they come out with the Gen II version of it! Yup, combine that with a noticeable lack of other engine development projects and you can be sure they're about to shut them down<LOL>!

jeff

I do not believe Ford will discontinue ecoboost, nor do I hate them, today I do though obviously because I'm arguing with knuckleheads that are so closed minded it's unhealthy. People need to be able to discuss pros and cons and not be so biased. I can do that regarding both engines. I feel like I'm arguing with a bunch of Clinton supporters. It gets me pretty baffled when people can't give a little and take a little from a conversation. I'm averaging 15.8 MPG now on my 5.4 with fresh oil and filter and new air filter. Was referring to GM V8 fuel management vs ecoboost on the MPG battle of eco vs V8. Also the 6R75 and 80 play a big role with MPG when comparing to 4 speed.

 

[5x10]

I do not believe Ford will discontinue ecoboost, nor do I hate them, today I do though obviously because I'm arguing with knuckleheads that are so closed minded it's unhealthy. People need to be able to discuss pros and cons and not be so biased. I can do that regarding both engines. I feel like I'm arguing with a bunch of Clinton supporters. It gets me pretty baffled when people can't give a little and take a little from a conversation. I'm averaging 15.8 MPG now on my 5.4 with fresh oil and filter and new air filter. Was referring to GM V8 fuel management vs ecoboost on the MPG battle of eco vs V8. Also the 6R75 and 80 play a big role with MPG when comparing to 4 speed.

Wouldn't the gm 6.2l engine recomendation of premium negate any mpg advantage due to the cost of premium vs regular?

 

[LokiWolf]

So this is accomplished how? Removing the rev limiter, max spark advance and over riding knock sensor, max fuel/air ratio and exceeding the redline, cold air induction and removing catalytic converters and stock exhaust? Sounds like a recipe for disaster.

Nope, just a tune, or the module, NO OTHER CHANGES! My 0-60 has gone down almost a second, with ONLY tuning(In the Edge, because that is my fun vehicle). Welcome to modern engines...YOU REALLY need to get outside of your buddies and this Forum and go do some reading. Look at modern Diesel tuning, same concept. Tune, and go!

 

[LokiWolf]

Wouldn't the gm 6.2l engine recomendation of premium negate any mpg advantage due to the cost of premium vs regular?

In defense, our Motor runs better with Premium also, even in Stock form.

 

[bobmbx]

Coke is better than Pepsi, and anyone who disagrees is an idiot. Its darker, comes in a red can, and can be used to make pennies really shiny.

 

[John Christopher]

John, I'm from PA, but I've lived in Oklahoma for 9 years and drove to and in Texas a lot. It's a big state and speed doesn't seem to matter, OK was pretty much the same. Highways were 75 MPH and once you got south of Norman (where I lived) if you weren't doing 90 in the right lane you were tying up traffic.

Thanks Andy, I didn't know that was the norm. I wouldn't mind giving it a try but that's a long way to drive, I live in CT. I'm originally from Throop, PA and moved to CT in 1978. Small World.

 

[rjdelp7]

Here I thought this thread had died but then I see something that I just HAVE to respond to....regardless of what is printed by anyone anywhere, I having owned THREE Expeditions can attest that my gas mileage is VASTLY more than a 1 mpg improvement over the 5.4.

I owned two of them(the 5.4) and having driven them well over 300,000 miles I can unequivocally tell you that both got me 12-13 mpg for the IDENTICAL driving route that now nets me at minimum 17.8mpg. I say "at minimum" because while my meter tells me approx 19.5mpg for the same route I drove with both of my old Expys, I'm using the "mileage since new" figure since it cannot possibly be any lower. Comparing 13 to nearly 18 is a huge 28% increase in mileage. I am quick to admit that I don't pay for gas so mileage doesn't matter a bit to me so if anything, I tend to drive faster then I would if I were concerned about mileage.

THEE only reason that Ford invested a billion or so dollars in the ecoboost is to ultimately, reduce manufacturing costs. Obviously, if a family of engines can be engineered & produced using same components from the same vendors for the supporting accessories for an engine, then costs will be reduced. If Ford can reduce the number of different engines it makes to 6 or 8, then the cost to build each will drop with it. Now, you can slip in one of those prepackaged engines from the EB series and you're good to go....sure beats trying to maintain, develop and stock parts for 24 different engines.....just my view.

FWIW, I've got over 19,000 miles on my '17 since buying it in november and I've yet to rev it to redline....and yes, of course I've "raced" a few other trucks and was beaten by one....don't know the make or the engine but that pickup with a bed cap frickin FLEW! The point of this is if I can get by even with occasionally aggressive driving and never having to rev it up, I suspect the 3.5 will last for a long, long time!

And yes, you can always tell when an auto manufacturer is planning on phasing a family of engines out....when they come out with the Gen II version of it! Yup, combine that with a noticeable lack of other engine development projects and you can be sure they're about to shut them down<LOL>!

jeff

THEE REASON Ford invested a Billion(loan), in the EB engine was to meet Obama's, ridiculous 50 mpg corporate average requirement(C.A.F.E). Trump tossed it, in favor of adding more US jobs and factories. Ford was direct negotiator in the lowering of the standard. Competition in
auto industry can produce cheaper, non turbo engines, with no government fines. Why would Ford continue, making this expensive engine, if it does not have to? My guess it will be an "option" engine in the future. Fleet, lease and buyers looking for a deal will not opt for them.

 

[5x10]

In defense, our Motor runs better with Premium also, even in Stock form.

I thought 89 (mid grade) was recommended, not premium

I was going off of manufacturer recommendations

 

[LokiWolf]

THEE REASON Ford invested a Billion(loan), in the EB engine was to meet Obama's, ridiculous 50 mpg corporate average requirement(C.A.F.E).

Dammit! I have something to thank Obama for...

 

[LokiWolf]

I thought 89 (mid grade) was recommended, not premium

I was going off of manufacturer recommendations

It will run 87 just fine, but it definitely likes Premium and responds to it even Stock.

 

[JExpedition07]

Wouldn't the gm 6.2l engine recomendation of premium negate any mpg advantage due to the cost of premium vs regular?

It is recommended but will adjust spark and timing so pre detonation doesn't occur if 87 is used in the 6.2L. Hence it will run fine on regular.

 

[Clemson82]

I agree that it's mostly a matter of preference at this point. I prefer the 5.4 and am happy that we purchased a 2014. That said, people like to feel good about what they bought, and they look for data to support the choice they made, and they tend to ignore data that contradicts their choice. It's just human nature and I'm as guilty of it as anyone. Companies know that, and when they pay for advertising, they aren't just trying to sell a product, they're trying to make people that already made a purchase feel good about it.

One last note: I seldom drive our expedition. That said, we took it on a trip to the beach last week and when the cruise was set at 70 MPH, on hilly terrain it would fluctuate between 65-75 (or worse!). I'm in Georgia, we're not exactly talking about The Rockies here. In my opinion, that's ridiculous, and if the EB maintains a more constant speed, that would be a huge plus in my opinion.

 

[5x10]

Disregard

 

[ranger024x4]

I do not believe Ford will discontinue ecoboost, nor do I hate them, today I do though obviously because I'm arguing with knuckleheads that are so closed minded it's unhealthy. People need to be able to discuss pros and cons and not be so biased. I can do that regarding both engines. I feel like I'm arguing with a bunch of Clinton supporters. It gets me pretty baffled when people can't give a little and take a little from a conversation. I'm averaging 15.8 MPG now on my 5.4 with fresh oil and filter and new air filter. Was referring to GM V8 fuel management vs ecoboost on the MPG battle of eco vs V8. Also the 6R75 and 80 play a big role with MPG when comparing to 4 speed.

lol! says the close minded one.

like Ive said before, Ive personally owned 2 5.0 coyotes, a 5.4 3v, 5.4 2v, and now an ecoboost. In just two weeks of ownership, Ive already bested everything listed above in fuel economy. It even edged out my 17 GT I just got rid of. Not like I care about fuel economy in a large truck, but it is impressive to me.

 

[LokiWolf]

In my opinion, that's ridiculous, and if the EB maintains a more constant speed, that would be a huge plus in my opinion.

It does. Ours has gone up and down many "Mountains" in VA including Afton on 64. Maintains set Cruise Speed, Up and Down, unless somebody slow gets in my way.

 

[ExpeditionAndy]

Thanks Andy, I didn't know that was the norm. I wouldn't mind giving it a try but that's a long way to drive, I live in CT. I'm originally from Throop, PA and moved to CT in 1978. Small World.

I'm originally from Brooklyn NY. My dad's job moved us to Mechanicsburg in 1965. I stayed there until my job moved us to Norman OK in 1998, and we moved to Fort Wayne in 2007. Now we go back to PA a couple times a year to see my dad, my wife's parents, siblings, and friends.

 

[5x10]

It does. Ours has gone up and down many "Mountains" in VA including Afton on 64. Maintains set Cruise Speed, Up and Down, unless somebody slow gets in my way.

Agreed, little speed difference and little rpm change, where my other engines usually need to climb to 4-5k rpm

 

[ranger024x4]

So this is accomplished how? Removing the rev limiter, max spark advance and over riding knock sensor, max fuel/air ratio and exceeding the redline, cold air induction and removing catalytic converters and stock exhaust? Sounds like a recipe for disaster.

or you know, add more boost.