Jump to content

New Eco Boost Test.

becker87

By becker87
in Future GM News & Rumors

Recommended Posts

Snow White Enthusiast

Snow White

Posted
Posted

I'm not impressed, chevy did the same thing with the 4.3L in the EARLY 90'S with the typhoon/syclone. this is not ground breaking. I've seen plenty of twin turbo's 4.3L or single turbo 4.3L/262 engines. The 4.3L with twin turbo's will absolutely destroy that dinky little 3 whatever mouse motor.

 

get over it ford.

MikeNH Senior Enthusiast

MikeNH

Posted
Posted
I'm not impressed, chevy did the same thing with the 4.3L in the EARLY 90'S with the typhoon/syclone. this is not ground breaking. I've seen plenty of twin turbo's 4.3L or single turbo 4.3L/262 engines. The 4.3L with twin turbo's will absolutely destroy that dinky little 3 whatever mouse motor.

 

get over it ford.

 

 

Yeah because the Sy/Ty trucks were known for their towing/hauling ability. And twin turbo 4.3s certainly weren't factory, so comparing it to a factory engine that has to meet all sorts of federal requirements in addition to whatever standards Ford may have is foolish. It'd be the same as bashing a stock 5.3 for being slower than one with a tune on the ECM. I'd still probably go with one of Ford's V8s if I end up in a F150 myself though.

Stevens03 Senior Enthusiast

Stevens03

Posted
Posted

The Sy/Ty were awesome just because they were in small trucks and super fast. But don't act like it's the newest thing since sliced bread :)

 

Not bashing ford, just saying they've hyped it up like it's the greatest thing and I'm just not impressed. Anyone can stick a turbo on a motor... and of coarse it's going to run good, just don't claim is better than anything else out cause its not.

MikeNH Senior Enthusiast

MikeNH

Posted
Posted
The Sy/Ty were awesome just because they were in small trucks and super fast. But don't act like it's the newest thing since sliced bread :)

 

Not bashing ford, just saying they've hyped it up like it's the greatest thing and I'm just not impressed. Anyone can stick a turbo on a motor... and of coarse it's going to run good, just don't claim is better than anything else out cause its not.

Like I said in the other EB thread, I think the engine is very impressive from a tech standpoint and Ford has gone a long way to make both the EB and the base V6 engines that aren't pathetically underpowered like nearly every fullsize V6 has been. But, I will hold final judgment until an independent source does instrumented testing on the new engines, because although I don't think Ford would be foolish enough to actually rig a test, bending the truth is an entirely different matter. I sit next to our marketing guy at work, I have a decent understanding of the games they play :lol:

Stevens03 Senior Enthusiast

Stevens03

Posted
Posted
The Sy/Ty were awesome just because they were in small trucks and super fast. But don't act like it's the newest thing since sliced bread :)

 

Not bashing ford, just saying they've hyped it up like it's the greatest thing and I'm just not impressed. Anyone can stick a turbo on a motor... and of coarse it's going to run good, just don't claim is better than anything else out cause its not.

Like I said in the other EB thread, I think the engine is very impressive from a tech standpoint and Ford has gone a long way to make both the EB and the base V6 engines that aren't pathetically underpowered like nearly every fullsize V6 has been. But, I will hold final judgment until an independent source does instrumented testing on the new engines, because although I don't think Ford would be foolish enough to actually rig a test, bending the truth is an entirely different matter. I sit next to our marketing guy at work, I have a decent understanding of the games they play :(

 

 

Whats pathetic is that ford kept the underpowered 5.4 as long as they did :lol: Its about time they pony up and compete. I think it's going to be over priced and isn't going to sell well but we'll see.

becker87 Senior Enthusiast

becker87

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I think it will sell well for the sole reason that people are nieve and will believe anything Ford tells them. Such as the MPG numbers or when they show tests like this that campare their top of the line engine to GMs main-stream smaller engine. The 5.0L with be there main-stream engine so why not comare that to the 5.3L, is it beats it then so be it, at least it would be a fair fight.

MikeNH Senior Enthusiast

MikeNH

Posted
Posted
Why not compare the GM 6.2L. Is the EB not suppose to be there best engine for towing?

See the last bit of my above post- the 6.2 would likely beat the EB engine so Ford got a 5.3 powered truck, which is down on HP and TQ to the EB, but you also cannot get 3.73s to match the Ford. And I'd think the Ford 6.2 would be the best towing engine they have, but that is limited to the high-trim trucks which won't be the big sellers. I think Ford is hoping to make the EB a high volume engine so (assuming it does offer a MPG advantage, which no one really knows for sure yet) their CAFE numbers look better.

 

As for the 5.4 being underpowered, I still disagree. It may be slower than the other brands but it can still safely tow/haul a full load. I've said it before and it seems I need to say it again- the need some people have to tow giant trailers up mountains at sustained high speeds is not only unsafe, but stupid.

becker87 Senior Enthusiast

becker87

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Why not compare the GM 6.2L. Is the EB not suppose to be there best engine for towing?

See the last bit of my above post- the 6.2 would likely beat the EB engine so Ford got a 5.3 powered truck, which is down on HP and TQ to the EB, but you also cannot get 3.73s to match the Ford. And I'd think the Ford 6.2 would be the best towing engine they have, but that is limited to the high-trim trucks which won't be the big sellers. I think Ford is hoping to make the EB a high volume engine so (assuming it does offer a MPG advantage, which no one really knows for sure yet) their CAFE numbers look better.

 

As for the 5.4 being underpowered, I still disagree. It may be slower than the other brands but it can still safely tow/haul a full load. I've said it before and it seems I need to say it again- the need some people have to tow giant trailers up mountains at sustained high speeds is not only unsafe, but stupid.

 

 

The 5.0 will be the main stream engine for Ford, not the EB(or that is what i have read anyway) Although i think the 5.3 had a good showing staying close to the more powerful Hemi with lower gearing.

Stevens03 Senior Enthusiast

Stevens03

Posted
Posted

I agree... It seems for years, ford been lying in commercials for quite some time. The 5.0 seems like a good comparison to me too with the 5.3 but the 5.3 has some years on it too.

MikeNH Senior Enthusiast

MikeNH

Posted
Posted
I agree... It seems for years, ford been lying in commercials for quite some time. The 5.0 seems like a good comparison to me too with the 5.3 but the 5.3 has some years on it too.

That is another problem. Ford started with the modular engines in 1997 for the trucks and at the time they likely outclassed the ole 305/350 in the GMs. Jump to 99 when the LS-style engines found their way underhood of the GMs and they probably came out ahead (I say probably because in both cases I was too young to drive). Toss in the brief gains by Dodge, Nissan and Toyota in there somewhere but in the end, I'd say the engine leapfrog game has always been, and will likely continue to be limited to GM vs. Ford. If both brands were to totally revamp their powertains in the same year, or even close to it, the comparison tests would be great because both would likely have the brand's latest and greatest. But, I think they intentionally space the remakes so one doesn't get totally embarrassed by the other new guy. Ford does this for 2011 and has possibly surpassed GM engines. In a couple years, GM will have something new too that will probably beat Ford. As long as the world doesn't end in 2012. :)

P71_CrownVic Senior Enthusiast

P71_CrownVic

Posted
Posted
Why not compare the GM 6.2L. Is the EB not suppose to be there best engine for towing?

See the last bit of my above post- the 6.2 would likely beat the EB engine so Ford got a 5.3 powered truck, which is down on HP and TQ to the EB, but you also cannot get 3.73s to match the Ford. And I'd think the Ford 6.2 would be the best towing engine they have, but that is limited to the high-trim trucks which won't be the big sellers. I think Ford is hoping to make the EB a high volume engine so (assuming it does offer a MPG advantage, which no one really knows for sure yet) their CAFE numbers look better.

 

As for the 5.4 being underpowered, I still disagree. It may be slower than the other brands but it can still safely tow/haul a full load. I've said it before and it seems I need to say it again- the need some people have to tow giant trailers up mountains at sustained high speeds is not only unsafe, but stupid.

 

 

Which is exactly why a sane person would NEVER use the boat anchor 5.4 for towing. And I fully disagree...the 5.4 is an unsafe engine to use for towing when used in the F-150 which is FAR too overweight. To wit:

 

 

 

4th Place: 2009 Ford F-150 Lariat SuperCrew 4x4

 

Despite the smooth-shifting six-speed automatic, the F-150's 8.4-second run to 60 mph from a standstill. Perhaps it's optimized for towing, we theorized. A mere 6,500-pound trailer should be a minor annoyance for a truck with an 11,200-pound tow rating, right?

 

Well, it didn't work out that way. Simply put, the Ford got beaten on our 11.5-mile test grade, coming in dead last by 27 seconds in a test that should have stressed it least. It was the only truck to drop below 50 mph, sagging to 47.8 mph at one point, and it spent the most time at wide-open throttle.

 

Furthermore, the 3.73:1 axle ratio that's needed to generate the advertised tow rating drastically affects everyday fuel economy. Our unburdened F-150 achieved 12.6 mpg, well below the window sticker ratings of 14 mpg city and 18 mpg highway (which were achieved with the standard 3.55:1 ratio).

 

As for the goofy, completely biased test in the OP...well...that is the only way Ford can win against the competition...turn the tables heavily in their favor.

 

Who the hell compares a new, modern DT engine with forced induction and fancy cams to an ancient, pushrod naturally aspirated engine...and then crows about it like they just pulled a fast one?

 

Using Ford's logic, the 3.7 V6 is an utter POS because it's handily beat by Max and Al.

jro909 Senior Enthusiast

jro909

Posted
Posted

heres the way i look at it...a small 6 banger dosen't belong in a fullsize, i don't care if it has 5 turbos on it..v8s take abuse alot better and last longer(in my opinion) the only exception to this would be diesels but thats a different animal...other point, why the hell would i want a turboed 6 banger that gets the same mileage as a none turbos v8? more shit to break on the turboed v6 vs an already stout v8 with room for potention

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...