F-150 3.5 EcoBoost? - Page 3 - Fiberglass RV


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 03-09-2019, 03:50 PM   #41
Junior Member
 
Name: Glen
Trailer: Trillium
Manitoba
Posts: 24
Registry
The question of tv is an important decision. I faced the same question when replacing my Triton 5.4 (which was a dog compared to the new one). If you read the forums on Ford the bottom line suggests that in your case there are no good reasons to get a 3.5 ecoboost. 1. the extra towing capacity is not needed in your case. 2. fuel economy compared to a 5 liter is almost the same. 3 The ecoboost is substantially more expensive to buy. 4 When the turbo's go bad much more expensive to fix. I chose the 2017 5L and I will be keeping it for a very long time. One last thing best fuel consumption I have got is 11.4 L per 100km .
__________________

Glen_ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2019, 04:50 PM   #42
CPW
Senior Member
 
CPW's Avatar
 
Name: Carl
Trailer: 2015 Escape 5.0TA
Florida
Posts: 1,231
Registry
Quote:
Originally Posted by Len S View Post
The F150 ecoboost is a good engine and great tower from what my friends have but the repair service higher . Also the gas mileage is not what is advertised in real life usage and more than likely from flat and level no wind and no towing. I bought a brand new 2016 5.0 litre 6 speed FWD in very early 2017 at a pretty good price. Added the ford electric brake controller at the advice of the salesman as it controls the shift better in tow mode, minimizing the brake wear as I towe a 21 ft Bigfoot. Mileage is comparable to my 2000 Ranger 4L V6 towing a smaller trailer and much better than my 2004 5.4l towing the same Bigfoot. On the highway with no trailer I get better than advertised. go with the 5L V8 as that has been on the road for a long time in the Mustang. Also regular induction is lower maintenance than the Ecoboost engine. Just my nickel from experience.

From what you have stated, I must ask what you mean by ďfrom experience.Ē I did not read that you have any personal experience with the EcoBoost. Obviously, buy and drive what pleases you but I have owned 2 Fordís with the V8 and do not find the maintenance on the 2 EcoBoosts I have owned any different from the 2 V8s. Maybe I have been lucky.

Quote:
Originally Posted by xocy View Post
The gas mileage will decrease substantially with an Eco Boost 6 cyl. This is my experience. It doesn't matter if it is an empty utility trailer...the mile per gallon is bad.
Please elaborate on your experience. I have gotten better mileage when towing and when not towing with both of my EcoBoosts than with either of the V8s.
__________________

CPW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2019, 05:09 PM   #43
Junior Member
 
Trailer: Coleman
Posts: 1
Ecoboost

We have the 4-cylinder Ecoboost in our Escape. If you didn't know better, you would think you are driving a small V8, and our mileage is quite good. So, I can easily imagine that the 6 cylinder Ecoboost in the F150 should be more than sufficient for your needs. Have you driven one?
Leslie J. Caudill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2019, 05:38 PM   #44
Senior Member
 
Name: bill
Trailer: 2013 Escape 19; 1977 Trillium 1300
The Mountains of North Carolina
Posts: 2,600
Registry
"I'm a very basic consumer. I want fewer bells and whistles so I have less to break down."

Then I would go for the XLT F150 with the 5.0L V8. But if I was buying a new truck, I'd probably go with a little more complicated and get the EB.
thrifty bill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2019, 06:45 PM   #45
Senior Member
 
Glenn Baglo's Avatar
 
Name: Glenn ( second 'n' is silent )
Trailer: 2009 Escape 17B '08 RAV4 SPORT V6
British Columbia
Posts: 6,613
Quote:
Originally Posted by thrifty bill View Post
"I'm a very basic consumer. I want fewer bells and whistles so I have less to break down."
.

That was my theory when I bought a 1994 Ford Explorer. I had a friend from Ford Leasing keep an eye out for me ( he visited all the dealers doing training ). After four months he came up with a clean Eddie Bauer model with leather seats and all the bells and whistles.

Drove the vehicle for 10 years and nothing broke except the air. Gave it to my daughter and three days later, it blew a head gasket. It was easy to sell 'as is' because it was loaded.


On another topic, thrifty bill, because you didn't use Quote, the quote is now attributed to you.
__________________
What happens to the hole when the cheese is gone?
- Bertolt Brecht
Glenn Baglo is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2019, 07:19 PM   #46
Member
 
Name: George
Trailer: 83 Burro
Illinois
Posts: 59
I looked at the Fords before buying my Dodge. The ecoboost had similar torque and horsepower to the V8, and only about 1 mpg higher mileage. The ecoboost is more complex than the V8. This means there are more things that can fail. Ecoboost earned a nickname of "ecobust" because it was such a failure. I'd avoid it.

It's been a few years since I looked. But I remember that the standard V6 had better mileage than the ecoboost too. Any any engine offerred in a full size pickup could pull a small fiberglass camper.
GWMattson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2019, 08:38 PM   #47
Senior Member
 
floyd's Avatar
 
Name: Floyd
Trailer: 2004 13 ft Scamp Custom Deluxe
IllAnnoy
Posts: 7,442
Registry
Quote:
Originally Posted by GWMattson View Post
I looked at the Fords before buying my Dodge. The ecoboost had similar torque and horsepower to the V8, and only about 1 mpg higher mileage. The ecoboost is more complex than the V8. This means there are more things that can fail. Ecoboost earned a nickname of "ecobust" because it was such a failure. I'd avoid it.

It's been a few years since I looked. But I remember that the standard V6 had better mileage than the ecoboost too. Any any engine offerred in a full size pickup could pull a small fiberglass camper.
I have heard every acronym or abuse you can imagine for every nameplate ever produced and believe me none of them are "earned".
They are simply epithets devised by some who are just a bit too clever.

Your RAM (Fiat) has more moving parts than the EB along with most of the fuel management technology, emission controls and electronics. The mechanicals are modern as well... VVT and Active intake manifolds just scratch the surface.
It is not your Grampa's 318.

Turbochargers are neither complex nor new, and while it may be that the EB is somewhat more technologically advanced, it is no less reliable.
floyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2019, 09:05 PM   #48
Senior Member
 
Name: Cliff
Trailer: 2017 Escape 5.0 TA
Connecticut
Posts: 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by GWMattson View Post
I looked at the Fords before buying my Dodge. The ecoboost had similar torque and horsepower to the V8, and only about 1 mpg higher mileage. The ecoboost is more complex than the V8. This means there are more things that can fail. Ecoboost earned a nickname of "ecobust" because it was such a failure. I'd avoid it.

It's been a few years since I looked. But I remember that the standard V6 had better mileage than the ecoboost too. Any any engine offerred in a full size pickup could pull a small fiberglass camper.
🤔I'm sorry but you know absolutely nothing about what you are talking about .
The F150 has been the class leader for towing in the 1/2 ton class for several years. The motor they are doing this with is the 3.5 EcoBoost not the V8. Their high performance truck, the Raptor, 450 hp and 510 ft. Lbs of torque is the 3.5 EcoBoost not the V8. And for complexity, other than the turbos they are just about equal. And if turbos are unreliable how do explain the fact that just about every tractor trailer out there is turbocharged. As to milage I can get better than 23 mpg not towing and as good as 16.5 mpg towing my Escape 50TA. This is fact not speculation.
Attached Thumbnails
20190308_070140.jpg  
Cliff Hotchkiss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2019, 11:27 PM   #49
Senior Member
 
Raspy's Avatar
 
Name: John
Trailer: Black Series HQ19 on order
Smith Valley, Nevada
Posts: 1,822
Quote:
Originally Posted by floyd View Post

Your RAM (Fiat) has more moving parts than the EB along with most of the fuel management technology, emission controls and electronics. The mechanicals are modern as well... VVT and Active intake manifolds just scratch the surface.
It is not your Grampa's 318.

Turbochargers are neither complex nor new, and while it may be that the EB is somewhat more technologically advanced, it is no less reliable.
Brand loyalty plays a big part in the buying decision. I'm not sure of the actual parts count difference between a 3.5 Ecoboost and a 5.7 Hemi, but the 5.7 is a much simpler and inherently better balanced engine. That doesn't mean it's more reliable, or will last longer, but my money would bet it is, and will. And the Hemi is certainly easier to work on. The water pump, for instance, is much easier to get to and it only has one short timing chain.

Overhead cam V6s have very complicated cam drive mechanisms. One long chain goes up and down to both heads and two smaller chains tie the cams together. Lots of guides and tensioners keep it all working. They also have two turbo chargers and all of the related plumbing and charge air cooler required that add a lot to the under hood complexity. The Eco also has twelve fuel injectors while the Hemi has eight. It's pretty hard to argue that the Eco has fewer parts and is therefore better because of it.

The Eco is a marvelous development that is a very high performance engine that acts like a larger engine. It's advantage is that it is lighter and has forced induction. It has lower internal friction, and lower average intake manifold vacuum (closer to atmospheric), so it can be more efficient, but it doesn't burn the fuel in some better way. The advent of direct injection gasoline engines allowed the Eco to become all that it could be by allowing higher pressure in the compression stroke without pre-ignition and therefore more power per cubic inch. Before that, turbo boosting a gas engine was very limited.

I haven't seen any actual test numbers, but I'm not sure the Eco would get better, or much better, mileage when towing along at highway speeds where 100 or more HP might be needed on a steady basis. It's value is its high output from a very light engine. I'd like to see a tank after tank towing mileage comparison between the two with 6 or 7 thousand pound trailers. But even if it gets a bit better mileage than the Hemi while towing, I'll take the Hemi any day. In my mind, an iron block pushrod V8 is a far better design than an overhead cam aluminum V6, for towing.

The current Hemi is also vastly better than the old 318 Dodge engine as far as combustion efficiency is concerned. Those engine were extremely durable, but never got decent mileage, even when they made the same engine into a V6 with two less cylinders than the V8. They vibrated more, but still got terrible mileage.
__________________
I only exaggerate enough to compensate for being taken with a grain of salt.
Raspy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2019, 08:19 AM   #50
Member
 
Name: George
Trailer: 83 Burro
Illinois
Posts: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by floyd View Post
I have heard every acronym or abuse you can imagine for every nameplate ever produced and believe me none of them are "earned".
They are simply epithets devised by some who are just a bit too clever.

Your RAM (Fiat) has more moving parts than the EB along with most of the fuel management technology, emission controls and electronics. The mechanicals are modern as well... VVT and Active intake manifolds just scratch the surface.
It is not your Grampa's 318.

Turbochargers are neither complex nor new, and while it may be that the EB is somewhat more technologically advanced, it is no less reliable.
I see that I found a Ford guy. I've always been a Ford guy too. I only bought the Ram because it came with a 3 liter diesel. I've been waiting years for somebody to put a sanely sized diesel in a pickup. I like the engine, but not the rest of the truck. Too many problems. I'll be a Ford guy again when I'm ready to replace this.

My point on the ecoboost is that it didn't get much better mileage than the other Ford engines. About 5 years ago, when I was looking, the ecoboost only got about 1 mpg better than the big V8. And it got worse mpg than the standard V6. Ford was working on a small diesel, but abandoned that program in favor of the ecoboost. I think they should have stayed with the diesel instead.
GWMattson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2019, 08:40 AM   #51
Member
 
CPrice's Avatar
 
Name: Cheryl
Trailer: Looking While I Continue to Work
North Carolina
Posts: 39
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cliff Hotchkiss View Post
🤔I'm sorry but you know absolutely nothing about what you are talking about .
The F150 has been the class leader for towing in the 1/2 ton class for several years. The motor they are doing this with is the 3.5 EcoBoost not the V8. Their high performance truck, the Raptor, 450 hp and 510 ft. Lbs of torque is the 3.5 EcoBoost not the V8. And for complexity, other than the turbos they are just about equal. And if turbos are unreliable how do explain the fact that just about every tractor trailer out there is turbocharged. As to milage I can get better than 23 mpg not towing and as good as 16.5 mpg towing my Escape 50TA. This is fact not speculation.
Very smart debate. Thank you for the input
CPrice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2019, 09:15 AM   #52
Senior Member
 
Name: Patrick
Trailer: Shopping for new RV
North Carolina
Posts: 688
Nothing like the internet for OPINION !!!.....want facts try the library !

Everyone posting on internet sites are self-proclaimed experts....

Expert: A former drip under pressure.

If you are not totally confused after reading these 51 posts you will never be !
Uplander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2019, 11:16 AM   #53
Senior Member
 
Name: Cliff
Trailer: 2017 Escape 5.0 TA
Connecticut
Posts: 149
Quote:
Originally Posted by GWMattson View Post
I see that I found a Ford guy. I've always been a Ford guy too. I only bought the Ram because it came with a 3 liter diesel. I've been waiting years for somebody to put a sanely sized diesel in a pickup. I like the engine, but not the rest of the truck. Too many problems. I'll be a Ford guy again when I'm ready to replace this.

My point on the ecoboost is that it didn't get much better mileage than the other Ford engines. About 5 years ago, when I was looking, the ecoboost only got about 1 mpg better than the big V8. And it got worse mpg than the standard V6. Ford was working on a small diesel, but abandoned that program in favor of the ecoboost. I think they should have stayed with the diesel instead.
🤔 Think you should revisit Ford. My personal experience is with the 2.7 EcoBoost, 2016. I tow a 50TA Escape and imho they are a perfect match. 375 ft lbs torque at 3k rpm easily handles my 5.5k trailer. The truck has a 7k lbs tow rating and there's no doubt in my mind it could easily handle it. The new trucks are even better, more torque and 10 speeds. Smaller, more efficient, boosted motors are what's happening until battery technology can take over. The hemispherical head design is already a dinosaur. Non of the high horse power small displacement (efficient) motors use it. I've been a gearhead for 1/2 a century and the V8 was my favorite motor, but like me their best days have come and gone.😎
Cliff Hotchkiss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2019, 11:30 AM   #54
Senior Member
 
Raspy's Avatar
 
Name: John
Trailer: Black Series HQ19 on order
Smith Valley, Nevada
Posts: 1,822
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cliff Hotchkiss View Post
And if turbos are unreliable how do explain the fact that just about every tractor trailer out there is turbocharged. As to milage I can get better than 23 mpg not towing and as good as 16.5 mpg towing my Escape 50TA. This is fact not speculation.
I'm sorry if you missed the point. Turbos are not complicated. They are very well proven, especially in your example of tractor trailer rigs. The difference is those are all cast iron, diesel, pushrod engines. Extremely simple and well proven.

The Cummins is the same design. An inline six diesel with a turbo. Diesels are a perfect match for turbos. No reliability problems related to them and outstanding performance. The Cummins is now producing 1,000 ft lbs of torque!

Turbocharging an aluminum, overhead cam, V6, gas engine is a completely different matter. But the differences don't exceed brand loyalty.
__________________
I only exaggerate enough to compensate for being taken with a grain of salt.
Raspy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2019, 05:51 PM   #55
Senior Member
 
Name: Gordon
Trailer: Trillium
British Columbia
Posts: 178
I have been towing my Trillium 13' with my 2013 F150 Ecoboost V6.

I travel with a fair bit of stuff. Extra batteries for my electric trolling motor and coolers, solar panels, gas outboard, bbq, propane firepit, propane tanks, Boat rack and 12' boat, and that is only a small part.

The truck doesn't even know it has a load on it.

OTOH, this is one of the heavier F150s. Tow package from the factory. Extended cab.
Trill136 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2019, 09:35 PM   #56
Senior Member
 
floyd's Avatar
 
Name: Floyd
Trailer: 2004 13 ft Scamp Custom Deluxe
IllAnnoy
Posts: 7,442
Registry
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uplander View Post
Nothing like the internet for OPINION !!!.....want facts try the library !

Everyone posting on internet sites are self-proclaimed experts....

Expert: A former drip under pressure.

If you are not totally confused after reading these 51 posts you will never be !
Well... that's one more OPINION!!
At least it comes with a warning not to believe it!!
floyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-10-2019, 10:01 PM   #57
Member
 
Name: Elvin
Trailer: 2002 Casita 17 ft Spirit Deluxe / 2012 Lincoln MKT
California
Posts: 60
6 cylinder Ecoboost

No expert here - just stating my experience.

I have a 2012 MKT Lincoln with the 6 cylinder Ecoboost. I tow a 17' Casita with it a lot. The MKT now has 130,000 or so on it with a lot of that with the trailer behind. Knock on wood, the only issue with the car has been the once power steering three days before the recall. I get about 24 miles per gallon on the open road and about 16 miles per gallon with the trailer.
Elvin Lowe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2019, 04:27 AM   #58
CPW
Senior Member
 
CPW's Avatar
 
Name: Carl
Trailer: 2015 Escape 5.0TA
Florida
Posts: 1,231
Registry
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elvin Lowe View Post
No expert here - just stating my experience.

I have a 2012 MKT Lincoln with the 6 cylinder Ecoboost. I tow a 17' Casita with it a lot. The MKT now has 130,000 or so on it with a lot of that with the trailer behind. Knock on wood, the only issue with the car has been the once power steering three days before the recall. I get about 24 miles per gallon on the open road and about 16 miles per gallon with the trailer.
Yep. Just further proof that the EcoBoost is the worst, most unreliable piece of garbage ever produced by automotive engineering, and if it werenít for people whoís purchasing wasnít based on brand loyalty the world might be free of Fordís despicable mechanical contraption that this thread has demonstrated is the scourge of mankind. Get rid of it and the collective fuel mileage/efficiency stats of all the remaining vehicles will obviously skyrocket. How dare any corporation scam so many consumers?
CPW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2019, 06:55 AM   #59
Senior Member
 
Name: Steve
Trailer: Lite House
Minnesota
Posts: 373
Registry
Quote:
Originally Posted by CPW View Post
Just read Amazon product reviews.......I rated this gizmo only one star because it didnít fit in the space where I wanted to put it. Seriously, what does that have to do with the productís quality.
That's a pet peeve of mine... downrating a product because shipping was slow, for example. Save that review for the vendor, not the product.

Just yesterday I read a 3-star review of a hiking trail, so rated because the road to get to the trailhead was warned by signage to be windy and narrow, so they didn't even go.
Steve Carlson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-11-2019, 08:16 PM   #60
Senior Member
 
Perryb67's Avatar
 
Name: Perry
Trailer: 2018 Escape 5.0
Lanesboro, Minnesota, between Whalan and Fountain
Posts: 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cliff Hotchkiss View Post
��I'm sorry but you know absolutely nothing about what you are talking about .
The F150 has been the class leader for towing in the 1/2 ton class for several years. The motor they are doing this with is the 3.5 EcoBoost not the V8. Their high performance truck, the Raptor, 450 hp and 510 ft. Lbs of torque is the 3.5 EcoBoost not the V8. And for complexity, other than the turbos they are just about equal. And if turbos are unreliable how do explain the fact that just about every tractor trailer out there is turbocharged. As to mileage I can get better than 23 mpg not towing and as good as 16.5 mpg towing my Escape 50TA. This is fact not speculation.


I don't personally know of any owner of any EB to have a complaint, and I talked to 15-20 before we purchased. Our 2015 3.5 EB gets 22-25 mpg on the road and averages over 14 when pulling our Escape 5th wheel including the mountains. There seems to be an unrealistic fear of turbos, but these are highly refined turbos, not the turbos of the 60's.

Then there is the cost factor. In 2015 a diesel was another $4-7,000 and there wasn't much end of year discount on any diesel. I purchased our XLT F150 3.5EB, Max Tow Package with Integrated Towing Controller, Heated Seats/Mirrors, etc. for $32,000. Every diesel I looked at was $45,000 or more. Factoring in the extra 25-50 cent premium for diesel, plus additive, at what mileage is my brake-even cost? Looking at this from a business point of view (I was a Business instructor) I'll take my chances with the turbos on our F150 and keep at least $13,000 or more for the time being.

Enjoy,

Perry
__________________

__________________
2018 Escape 5.0 TA - 2019 Ford F-150, 3.5 V6 Ecoboost,

Previous Eggs - 2001 Scamp 16' Side Bath, 2007 Casita 17' Spirit basic, no bath, water or tanks, that we regret selling, 2003 Bigfoot 25B25RQ, that we also regret selling
Perryb67 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
eco


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
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
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
3.5 EcoBoost & Bigfoot 25RQ ??? Zardoz Towing, Hitching, Axles and Running Gear 37 07-18-2018 03:14 PM
What to buy F150 3.5 ecoboost or Colorado/Canyon Duramax the_fixer Towing, Hitching, Axles and Running Gear 76 11-17-2017 04:19 PM
Ford F150 3.5 Ecoboost vs. Jeep Grand Cherokee V8 for tow vehicle Bar01 Towing, Hitching, Axles and Running Gear 37 05-27-2017 09:24 AM
Ford F-150 Ecoboost 2.7L vs 3.5L - Real world? War Eagle Towing, Hitching, Axles and Running Gear 14 05-21-2016 02:06 PM
Any one towing with a Ford Ecoboost? Bruce H Towing, Hitching, Axles and Running Gear 8 03-11-2013 05:43 AM

» Upcoming Events
No events scheduled in
the next 465 days.
» Featured Campgrounds

Reviews provided by


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:32 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
×