New F150

Jon A · April 18, 2015

First, the only reason the 2.7 got a better time was there happened to be more traffic when they ran the 6.2--it easiliy had enough power to accelerate far beyond the speed limit at any time if they had wanted to do so. This was not a WOT "race."

Second, Ford must be thanking their lucky stars this test occured in the middle of the winter, instead of the middle of August....

Sierra Jon · April 18, 2015

I think it's a pretty nice truck. Jury is still out on body work, ecoboost and the price but they are nice.

I went to the Detroit Auto show this year (awesome) and had the pleasure of doing the F150 plant tour and Henry Ford museum. Highly recommended!

I went into the facility thinking I was happy to be a GMC owner and came out happy to buy American.

Cowpie · April 18, 2015

The testing is very real world. Maximum GCWR loaded up and climbing a pretty long grade at 10,000 feet elevation. Summer has nothing to do with it as far as a turbo. A turbo is undergoing, on the hot side, temps that are well beyond anything ambient. I typically get the same EGT's on my turbo based engines regardless of winter or summer on long hard pulls, whether it is -20F or 100F. And none of my turbos are water cooled like the ones in the F-150. Just basic oil supply lines. And I even have turbo blankets on the hot side of my turbos! By using a blanket, there is less "heat soak" stress on the turbo and the cool side (intake) actually runs substantially cooler Which helps with better boosting. A blanket on the hot side keeps heat away from the cool side, and keeps the exhaust temps such that the expanded exhaust flows better and helps considerably with lower EGT's and better turbo spool up. By using a blanket on the hot side, my EGT's typically run 100-200F cooler under load and the intake side temps out of the turbo are 20-40F cooler and boost is up by 4-5 lb under that same acceleration. I have even been known to heat wrap the flange pipe coming off of the hot side of the turbo to gain even more. Getting stuff together now to heat wrap a flange pipe on one I haven't done yet.

Ford might have actually done even better in the heat of summer! The air would have been even thinner and the gasping, asthmatic, naturally aspirated 6.2L would have had even more trouble. The 2.7, irregardless of atmosphere pressure, would have generated boost that the ECM called for. I have no love fest for the Ford products ( or any other OEM for that matter ), but this trying to grasp at anything to be negative against Ford Ecoboost is a little strange. Almost like the stupid oil debates that go on from time to time. Primarily based on bias, feeling, and perception.. Kinda the same mindset on economics.... it isn't fair that someone else have more than someone else, so let's lower everyone to the bottom level instead of providing opportunity for the bottom level folks to reach a higher level. i would hope this turbo thing going on by Ford, the supercharger thing going on by Toyota, etc would motivate GM to pull it's collective head out of where they sit and provide us with some serious force fed gas and ethanol based motors.

But that might be around the corner. Ricardo, a GM partner, has put together a beefed up 3.2L V6 Extreme Boosted Direct Injection motor that runs primarily on E85 fuel and matches the 6.6L Duramax diesel in HP, Torque, and fuel economy. Been undergoing testing in some Silverado 3500HD trucks for a while. It only costs half as much to make compared to the Dmax, doesn't need any more emissions junk than we have on the gassers now, and total weight of a truck with the 3.2 EBDI motor is 400b less than the same vehicle with a Dmax.

kstruckcountry · April 18, 2015

No one has a problem with turbos, for the hundredth time. What I don't like is tiny motors running tons of boost. I don't think anyone would have a problem with a 5.0L or even 6.2L turbo.

Jon A · April 18, 2015

Summer has nothing to do with it as far as a turbo.

Except for the ambient temp the cooling system gets to work with.

A turbo is undergoing, on the hot side, temps that are well beyond anything ambient. I typically get the same EGT's on my turbo based engines regardless of winter or summer on long hard pulls, whether it is -20F or 100F. And none of my turbos are water cooled like the ones in the F-150. Just basic oil supply lines. And I even have turbo blankets on the hot side of my turbos! By using a blanket, there is less "heat soak" stress on the turbo and the cool side (intake) actually runs substantially cooler Which helps with better boosting. A blanket on the hot side keeps heat away from the cool side, and keeps the exhaust temps such that the expanded exhaust flows better and helps considerably with lower EGT's and better turbo spool up. By using a blanket on the hot side, my EGT's typically run 100-200F cooler under load and the intake side temps out of the turbo are 20-40F cooler and boost is up by 4-5 lb under that same acceleration. I have even been known to heat wrap the flange pipe coming off of the hot side of the turbo to gain even more. Getting stuff together now to heat wrap a flange pipe on one I haven't done yet.

That's a nice story. Here are a couple threads where you ought to educate the owners who find their EB overheating when trying to tow up hills in the summer why it shouldn't be happening:

http://www.f150online.com/forums/v6-engines-including-ecoboost/476614-3-5-ecoboost-overheating.html

http://www.f150online.com/forums/towing-hauling/489004-overheating-ecoboost-when-towing.html

http://www.f150online.com/forums/2009-2014-f-150/454019-2010-5-4l-outperforms-2011-ecoboost.html

http://www.f150online.com/forums/2009-2014-f-150/455790-ecoboost-overheating.html

And there are plenty more where those came from....

Primarily based on bias, feeling, and perception.. Kinda the same mindset on economics.... it isn't fair that someone else have more than someone else, so let's lower everyone to the bottom level instead of providing opportunity for the bottom level folks to reach a higher level. i would hope this turbo thing going on by Ford, the supercharger thing going on by Toyota, etc would motivate GM to pull it's collective head out of where they sit and provide us with some serious force fed gas and ethanol based motors.

Small, GASOLINE turbo engines are great for sports cars and econoboxes. There are good reasons nobody in the trucking industry uses them and it has nothing to do with bias.

Cowpie · April 18, 2015

No one has a problem with turbos, for the hundredth time. What I don't like is tiny motors running tons of boost. I don't think anyone would have a problem with a 5.0L or even 6.2L turbo.

And why does size mean anything except to your woman? It is the quality of the components involved that should be the only concern. Ton's of boost? A bit melodramatic isn't that? Those motors are only putting out around 17-18 lb of boost max, only on full power. I would rather trust a smaller motor with serious guts than a mediocre component motor of larger displacement. So many folks have been conditioned in the mindset that "there is no replacement for displacement" that they have a difficult time thinking anything of smaller displacement can actually do well.

The main reason that gas engines are not used for commercial trucking has more to do with fuel efficiency, volatility, and engine design than anything else. But, there are many fleets that are buying NG powered semi trucks ( either LNG or CNG ) that deliver virtually the same performance as their diesel counterparts now. DME is the next thing that commercial engine designers are looking at. And Cummins has developed a 2.8L E85 motor that equals anything the 5.7 hemi does and it will be going into some commercial vans soon. And commecial semi are progressively working their way to smaller displacement motors. Paccar (Pete and KW), International (Navistar), Volvo and Mack, etc are all on the 12 and 13L game in spades. Some of their products, you cannot spec a 14, 15, or 16L engine anymore.

truckofwinandawesome · April 18, 2015

And why does size mean anything except to your woman? It is the quality of the components involved that should be the only concern. Ton's of boost? A bit melodramatic isn't that? Those motors are only putting out around 17-18 lb of boost max, only on full power. I would rather trust a smaller motor with serious guts than a mediocre component motor of larger displacement. So many folks have been conditioned in the mindset that "there is no replacement for displacement" that they have a difficult time thinking anything of smaller displacement can actually do well.

The main reason that gas engines are not used for commercial trucking has more to do with fuel efficiency, volatility, and engine design than anything else. But, there are many fleets that are buying NG powered semi trucks ( either LNG or CNG ) that deliver virtually the same performance as their diesel counterparts now. DME is the next thing that commercial engine designers are looking at. And Cummins has developed a 2.8L E85 motor that equals anything the 5.7 hemi does and it will be going into some commercial vans soon. And commecial semi are progressively working their way to smaller displacement motors. Paccar (Pete and KW), International (Navistar), Volvo and Mack, etc are all on the 12 and 13L game in spades. Some of their products, you cannot spec a 14, 15, or 16L engine anymore.

you keep comparing Heavy Duty Commercial Diesel Engines with Light Duty Gasoline Engines, that have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in Common!

Cowpie · April 19, 2015

Yeah, your right. Internal combustion engines have nothing in common.

truckofwinandawesome · April 19, 2015

Yeah, your right. Internal combustion engines have nothing in common.

ha ha, Very Funny: what I meant by that was Heavy Duty Commercial Engines and Light Duty Gasoline Engines are governed by two COMPLETELY Different Emissions Regulations; and operate with EXTREME Differences in the way the Fuel is Combusted.

Cowpie · April 19, 2015

Except for the differences between spark ignition and compression ignition, the principles are the same. And I do believe I mentioned NG engines being used more frequently in commercial heavy trucks, and they are governed by the same emission standards as gasoline engines. Go down to a heavy truck dealer and take a look at a NG fueled setup and see for yourself. UPS, FedEx, Conway, et al are incorporating NG powered semi trucks in their fleets. It uses spark ignition, EGR, and catalytic converters just like a pickup or a car. And they are turbocharged. You really need to get up to speed on what is going on in commercial trucking engine design. You are still back with Smokey and the Bandit.

truckofwinandawesome · April 19, 2015

Except for the differences between spark ignition and compression ignition, the principles are the same. And I do believe I mentioned NG engines being used more frequently in commercial heavy trucks, and they are governed by the same emission standards as gasoline engines. Go down to a heavy truck dealer and take a look at a NG fueled setup and see for yourself. UPS, FedEx, Conway, et al are incorporating NG powered semi trucks in their fleets. It uses spark ignition, EGR, and catalytic converters just like a pickup or a car. And they are turbocharged. You really need to get up to speed on what is going on in commercial trucking engine design. You are still back with Smokey and the Bandit.

or, Since I DO have a Cummins Promotion ID (due to my Heavy Equipment schooling); I can go on Quickserve Online and see it for myself.

Cowpie · April 19, 2015

Ok then, check out the Cummins Westport ISX 12 NG motor that is offered in Freightliner, Volvo, Mack, Kenworth, and Peterbilt in both CNG and LNG configurations. while you're at it, do a look up on the Cummins 2.8L E85 motor just for grins.

Jon A · April 23, 2015

The main reason that gas engines are not used for commercial trucking has more to do with fuel efficiency....

But you don’t seem to understand why.

Yeah, your right. Internal combustion engines have nothing in common.....Except for the differences between spark ignition and compression ignition, the principles are the same.

There are actually quite a few substantial differences. The biggest one that matters here is the required fueling strategies:

Gasoline engines, when under boost, must run excessively rich—not in order to have enough torque to pull the truck down the road (which is all a diesel really needs)—but to keep from blowing itself up. N/A gas engines can do much better—GM’s Ecotech3’s run stoichiometric up to 90% throttle. Try that with a gas turbo and you’ll blow it up. That’s just the way things work. Different “principles” at work.

For a sports car, you don’t care; for an econobox that’s only “on boost” a small percentage of the time, you don’t care. But for a truck that hauls stuff for a living spending much of its time under boost, you’re pouring money on the ground. That’s why they’re a poor choice. The trucking industry knows this. EcoBoost fans do not.

But, there are many fleets that are buying NG powered semi trucks ( either LNG or CNG )

And that’s because that even at today’s low prices, NG is dirt cheap compared with gasoline and diesel. There's nothing wrong with it as a fuel, but if it wasn't so much cheaper....

On the subject of the EB having water cooled turbos, it doesn’t seem you’re making the connection between that and then entire engines overheating under conditions that are working the turbo hard. Instead of only the EGT’s getting out of line, when the turbo gets hot it’s dumping that heat into the overall cooling system and can contribute to the engine itself overheating.

While everybody likes to brag about how the turbo engine looses less power at high altitude, they never seem to mention (usually because they don't know) that necessarily means the turbo is working that much harder and producing that much more heat. This is why many find the overheating issues are worse at high altitude.

That doesn’t mean there’s something wrong with water cooled turbos and the principles of the system work, it just means there’s are additional Engineering challenges to be overcome.

Clearly, they can be difficult to overcome with a small engine in a light duty application that doesn’t benefit from the massive cooling systems the HD trucks have.

That item isn’t specific to gasoline engines either—the RAM Ecodiesel does the same thing only worse. Several tests of it pulling a long grade towing a moderate weight have had it entering reduced power mode before getting to the top even pulling less and in cooler temps than the EcoBoost. But at least it’s getting good mileage while doing it…..

j-ten-ner · April 23, 2015

Interesting stuff guys. Keep it up.

What I'm wondering too is how much one could boost an engine and still have it drivable under daily and normal conditions.

Even if they use high strength material for such small engines to handle the torque and power.

But wouldn't it be limited by other problems like the "blow by"? I mean there is only so much you can do to seal the piston - cylinder wall gap. When you look at the dragster engines and what immense amount of smoke/exhaust is coming out of the crank case vent...sure the crazy valve timing does it's part too.

This is what scares me with those scooter engines in full size trucks. IMO they're running at their limits already. I don't mean the power and torque. You can always squeeze one or two more horses out of it.

I mean you can only stretch the physics sooo much. There is an end somewhere.

so long

j-ten-ner

Cowpie · April 29, 2015

But the overheating issue would suggest they didn't get the cooling system right, i.e. not enough radiator and fan draw. That has nothing to do with the motor itself. International had the same problem when they offered the Maxxforce 13 and then really cranked up the EGR in 2010 (EGR is water cooled on diesel motors before going to intake). Too much demand on the cooling system. It is one thing to attack the motor, but from you comments about overheating, the motor is not the problem.