Ford Eco Boost 2.7L

[BGKirkham]

I've never owned a Ford Ecoboost, but my brother did. At the time we had similar size and weight campers. We towed our campers to the same campground over the same route, he in his Ford and me in my Tundra 5.7. He got about 8 MPG (IIRC) and I got 12. It was a combination of 4 lane and winding mountain road (Huntsville, AL to DeSoto State Park, AL). I know there are other factors such as driving habits to consider. So, while these turbocharged V6's put up impressive power and torque numbers, it may come at a sacrifice in fuel efficiency.

I'm not saying this to start a war, but just sharing one data point.

My brother has since moved on to a larger camper and truck, as have I.

[Zak1]

Originally Posted by BGKirkham

I've never owned a Ford Ecoboost, but my brother did. At the time we had similar size and weight campers. We towed our campers to the same campground over the same route, he in his Ford and me in my Tundra 5.7. He got about 8 MPG (IIRC) and I got 12. It was a combination of 4 lane and winding mountain road (Huntsville, AL to DeSoto State Park, AL). I know there are other factors such as driving habits to consider. So, while these turbocharged V6's put up impressive power and torque numbers, it may come at a sacrifice in fuel efficiency.

I'm not saying this to start a war, but just sharing one data point.

My brother has since moved on to a larger camper and truck, as have I.

Those fuel numbers flip in normal, non towing driving (which I bet is at least 90% of the time). Tundra v8 averages at best non towing 15 mpg, Ecoboost (2.7) 21-23 mpg, (3.5) 20-22 mpg.....

[howie70]

Originally Posted by Stovebolt

If you keep your foot out of them ( and that's hard to do :-) ), You can get into the low 20's depending on gearing. My steel F150 was good for 22 MPG's at about 55 to 60MPH not towing. It would average roughly 16 city/highway average. The new one is slightly better because they dropped gearing numerically on the Maxtow option. The steel truck had 3:73's and the aluminum one has 3:55's. Now some will say that ain't much but remember you are getting this with regular fuel not premium fuel like you have to run in the 6.2 GM engines or the 6.4 Hemi's. There's a big difference in price between regular and premium. Now Fords manual says they recommend running premium when towing. I have tried it both ways running the same route in roughly 2,000 miles with both trucks towing a 7500 lb trailer. I noticed 1 MPG better towing with premium and no noticeable difference in seat of the pants acceleration. But when not towing I can use regular fuel all day long. I'm not putting down the GM or the Ram, they are both really great trucks, I just happen to like the Fords do to the fact they are so far ahead in towing equipment and the fact you have a step and handle that comes out of the tailgate to get in the bed. GM has slits in the bumper, which is OK. Ram you better bring a ladder or jump in. I'm too old to jump anymore.

Thanks for the info but I guess I didn't ask the question properly LOL. How many miles was on your previous EB's when you traded/sold them? I am curious about longevity. I hear people say they had no issues but then they trade sell them with low mileage.

[acadianbob]

Originally Posted by howie70

I have been researching the EB and really like what I read/hear. I'm curious, what mileage was on your previous EB's when you traded/sold them?

I've got 100,000 on mine 2012 and it is running perfectly.

[acadianbob]

Originally Posted by BGKirkham

I've never owned a Ford Ecoboost, but my brother did. At the time we had similar size and weight campers. We towed our campers to the same campground over the same route, he in his Ford and me in my Tundra 5.7. He got about 8 MPG (IIRC) and I got 12. It was a combination of 4 lane and winding mountain road (Huntsville, AL to DeSoto State Park, AL). I know there are other factors such as driving habits to consider. So, while these turbocharged V6's put up impressive power and torque numbers, it may come at a sacrifice in fuel efficiency.

I'm not saying this to start a war, but just sharing one data point.

My brother has since moved on to a larger camper and truck, as have I.

I just did a 4,000 mile trip pulling a 8,500 pound 5er with our 3.5 Ecoboost. For the towing portion, we averaged 10.5 mpg for the trip; including mountain passes.

[BGKirkham]

Originally Posted by Zak1

Those fuel numbers flip in normal, non towing driving (which I bet is at least 90% of the time). Tundra v8 averages at best non towing 15 mpg, Ecoboost (2.7) 21-23 mpg, (3.5) 20-22 mpg.....

It depends on if you're talking city or highway, on the highway I got 18-20 MPG. Still less than the Ecoboost, but this is a towing site.

[Dave Lyon]

Originally Posted by darrenbrown

A friend of mine a 2013 F150 3.5 ecoboost and pulls an 8500 lb camper back and forth to Ohio from Indiana 3-4 times per year. He said it pulls the camper pretty well, he did add air bags to his suspension to help out. He said the only difficulty he has is the trailer can wag the truck in higher winds or a passing semi truck. So I would think a 3.5 would work very well for you as long as your not going to buy a heavier trailer of course.

This is what I don't understand - people buy a 1/2 ton then immediately add air bags or other suspension modifications to the truck in order to manage their load. In my mind, if you need to do that - you need a bigger truck designed with heavier suspension, heavier brakes, frame ets..ect.

just my thoughts.

[Martsing]

I have 2011 F150 EB SCAB with 3.55 rear and tow package. I have a little over 165,000 with zero major issues.

Marty

[Shackrat]

Originally Posted by great white

The 5.0 Coyote is fine engine and tows just fine. The EB and 5.0 are very close in power, at least the 3.5 is. 2.7 is a little further behind on the numbers sheet. The Coyote and 3.5 EB are even rated within 1-2 MPG of each other. Statistically insignificant.

That being said, where the engines differ is in how they deliver their power. The absolute numbers are close, with the EB having more torque, but the Coyote having more HP.

But the 5.0 Coyote needs rpm to build those peak numbers. The EB, being forced induction, reaches peak numbers much lower int eh rpm range and the torque curve is much flatter. What that means in laymans terms it that the EB (or any turbo charged engine) build more power, lower and longer than any NA engine.

If you don't mind getting your foot harder into the throttle for the same amount of go, Then the coyote will do ya fine.

Now, get a NA and a forced induction engine into any kind of altitude and the Forced injection engine is going to just run away from the NA engine.

The concept that two turbo's is a problem as compared to a NA is unfounded. It's a public perception that there are more parts in a 3.5 EB. The Turbo's in the EB are Borg Warner turbos. BW makes some of the highest quality units out there and are cutting edge technology wise. That's performance, reliability, metallurgy, etc. truth is, the 5.0 Coyote and the 3.5EB are equally technologically complex.

In many ways, the EB is a tougher engine than the Coyote. Reason being the EB is built similar to a diesel engine. Compacted graphic iron blocks, 6 bolt cross bolted mains, deeply shirted blocks, direct injection, combustion chamber in piston construction, short piston skirt construction, piston squirter oil cooling jets, forged frank, and on and on. That's all diesel construction stuff and it makes for beef and strength.

In fact, the 3.5 EB outweighs the Coyote by almost 60 lbs. Consider that a v6 weighs MORE than a V8. The V8 has 2 more pistons, two more rods, longer heads, longer block, longer crank, longer manifolds, etc, etc. That 60 lbs difference isn't two turbos and some thin wall tubing, it's engine beef. It's a lot of the reason the Raptor EB makes 450 hp and 510 hp with not much more than an engine management tweek.

The EB carbon problem is NOT related to the F150 engines. Anyon etrying to sell you that line is trying to sell you a bridge of land in teh florida leys.

Early EB engines in the cars and SUV's did have some valve cooking issues, and that's what the snake oil salesmen selling "catch cans" keep pushing as a problem with ALL EB engine. It's all flat out lies lies to generate a revenue stream for themselves.

I, personally, have caught one of these chareltons trying to keep pushing the myth on an F150 board. He was posting up that he had several 3.5 EB engines in his shop that he had taken pictures of with carboned up valves. The pictures were absolutely horrible. So much carbon the ports were at least half blocked. But his mistake was that he wasn't posting pictures of 3.5 EB engines. They weren't EB engines at all. In fact, they weren't even ford engines. He had posted pictures of an Audi/Volks engine. It was an early Direct injection engine that did indeed have horrible cooking issues. His mistake was that I was able to recognize the intake ports as an Audi/volks intact tract as they have very district channels machined into the port walls that no other engine does. When he was challenged, he stopped replying and pulled all his pictures posts down. I ran across him on another board pulling the same trick. Strangely enough, it turns out he owned and "internet business" that sold $400 "catch cans" that were "guaranteed" to solve the EB cooking issue in the F150. Total BS.

don't believe it just because you read it on the internet.....

Bottom line, you can't go wrong with either the Coyote or the EcoBoost towing inside their ratings. even the 2.7 makes a fine towing rig within it's rating (and sometimes, outside them, although I won't advocate that to anyone).

The difference in what you choose is what you want to do with it:

All out towing; 3.5 EB, configured right, you can get it in a 12,200 lb rating. That's a RCLB 2WD. Step up to a full boat crewcab 4x4 and you're still 11,600lbs

Great towing and that V8 sound: Coyote. Configured the same as the 3.5 EB above, you're looking at 11,000 lbs/10,800 lbs. but where the 3.5 Eb gets it done with 3.55 gears, the 5.0 needs 3.73. Drop the 5.0 to 3.55 gears like the EB and you're looking at 10,000lbs/9100lbs. That's the torque difference and where it is in the RPM range that makes it different between the two engines.
Decent towing and better MPG than both the Coyote and EB: 2.7, but you have to accept your towing rating limitations. No Heavy duty payload package available on the 2.7 either, which brings the payload capacity of most F150's up into the 2000 lb range. The HDDP is availabel on 3.5 EB trucks up to the Lariat trim, I can't recall if you can get the HDDP on the Coyote trucks.

Honestly, there's not a bad choice between the three of them. You just have to decide which way you want to go.

Catch cans!!! OMG... That reminds me of the early days when I just got my EB and used to actively participate in an EcoBoost forum. After doing my own research and the constant drumbeating from a select few on the doom and gloom of not using one, I concluded that the forum in general lacked credibility and left. After all, what other half-truths and misdirections are being promoted??

As far as the EB? Love my '14 3.5!! Just passed 40k and my second summer of towing. Non towing mileage is awesome, I do a lot of city driving and still see 18-19mpg. Long non-towing trips like the 90 minute drive to my camp yield 20-22.

Want to have some real fun? Run premium 100% of the time. For faster results disconnect the battery for a few minutes. You'll pick up at least 1mpg and a small but noticeable increase in power. I've heard that even Ford states this in the owners manual although I've never read mine.

[ronheater70]

Originally Posted by Dave Lyon

This is what I don't understand - people buy a 1/2 ton then immediately add air bags or other suspension modifications to the truck in order to manage their load. In my mind, if you need to do that - you need a bigger truck designed with heavier suspension, heavier brakes, frame ets..ect.

just my thoughts.

Yea I don't get that either. When you need to start adding all this miscellaneous stuff for your truck to manage the weight you are pulling, then its a sign (to me anyway) that you need to lighten the load or up the truck., Now if you go out once or twice a year, and your truck is paid for and dont want the additional cost, I can see modifying what you have.

[Stovebolt]

Originally Posted by howie70

Thanks for the info but I guess I didn't ask the question properly LOL. How many miles was on your previous EB's when you traded/sold them? I am curious about longevity. I hear people say they had no issues but then they trade sell them with low mileage.

The last one had 130,000 miles and was still going strong. I had no issues other than a broken inner door handle on the rear drivers side door which happened when it was still under warranty.

[Restcure]

Originally Posted by Shackrat

...Run premium 100% of the time. For faster results disconnect the battery for a few minutes. You'll pick up at least 1mpg and a small but noticeable increase in power. I've heard that even Ford states this in the owners manual although I've never read mine.

From my 2013 owners' manual:

3.5L V6 EcoBoost engine

“Regular” unleaded gasoline with a pump (R+M)/2 octane rating of 87 is
recommended. Some stations offer fuels posted as “Regular” with an
octane rating below 87, particularly in high altitude areas. Fuels with
octane levels below 87 are not recommended. Premium fuel will provide
improved performance and is recommended for severe duty usage such
as trailer tow.

[Stovebolt]

Originally Posted by Restcure

From my 2013 owners' manual:

3.5L V6 EcoBoost engine

“Regular” unleaded gasoline with a pump (R+M)/2 octane rating of 87 is
recommended. Some stations offer fuels posted as “Regular” with an
octane rating below 87, particularly in high altitude areas. Fuels with
octane levels below 87 are not recommended. Premium fuel will provide
improved performance and is recommended for severe duty usage such
as trailer tow.

I previously stated that I ran with my trailer a 2000 mile route regular one time and premium another time, same route. I noticed no difference other than a 1 MPG gain with premium but that could have been wind condition difference or who knows. It felt exactly the same. Towing though I do recommend switching to premium because you will not build up as much carbon in the engine.

[buffalobutt]

Originally Posted by Restcure

From my 2013 owners' manual:

3.5L V6 EcoBoost engine

“Regular” unleaded gasoline with a pump (R+M)/2 octane rating of 87 is
recommended. Some stations offer fuels posted as “Regular” with an
octane rating below 87, particularly in high altitude areas. Fuels with
octane levels below 87 are not recommended. Premium fuel will provide
improved performance and is recommended for severe duty usage such
as trailer tow.

I run 87 octane 100% of the time in my 12 EB and have no problem at all. Some shop manuals call for 6 quarts of oil in an EB engine, that will over fill mine by about 1/2 quart on the dipstick, I only allow service personnel to install 5 quarts in my engine, the following morning while the engine is cold I bring it up to the full mark with oil I keep on hand It is my belief it is equally as bad to overfill as it is to under fill. Have a nice day.