6.2 or 3.5 ecoboost?

[15 Z71]

So there has been a big debate at work which is faster and can tow better. Hand full of guys say the 3.5 is better some say the 6.2 is. What do you all think? I would think the 6.2 would be.

[truckguy82]

Not saying this with any bias as I love all kinds of motors.

 

The 6.2 is without a doubt a better powerplant overall. I’d think most ford 3.5 owners that know a lot about both motors would agree as well.

[2018GMC]

Both engines produce great hp and torque numbers.

 

Torque comes in at lower rpm on the 3.5 ecoboost.

 

Ford recently revised the ecoboost with (2) fuel injection systems. Port injection and Direct injection. This was to address the carbon build up issues in intake and valves. All DI motors will get some carbon build up since the fuel is directly injected into the combustion chamber vs port fuel injection which helps clean carbon off valves since fuel is injected in the intake. Only way to clean intake on ecoboost is to disassemble since the turbo can't handle any cleaners run through the intake. Naturally Aspirated engines can have cleaners run through the intake to aid in carbon buildup removal.  

 

My vote is for 6.2 since I own one and this is a GM forum. 

[aseibel]

Ford 3.5 L V6 EcoBoost: 375 hp and 470 lb⋅ft

GM 6.2L V-8 Small Block: 420 hp and 460 lb-ft

 

I did not verify sources, I just googled it and copied the first numbers I found.

 

Towing ability and speed depend on axle ratio as much as anything. A guy with a GM 4.3 liter V-6 could still beat you off the line with the right gearing. but for the sake of arguing, I also go with the GM 6.2.

[i82much]

Ecoboost has advantage of making its own atmosphere at altitude.  For high elevation towing, forced induction is the way to go.  But 6.2 starts off with big power advantage so this mitigates the issue to some extent.

 

For lower elevation towing, if you are willing to let the 6.2 rev, it should beat the ecoboost handily.  

 

The disadvantages of NA engines are elevation and high rpm.  High RPM is more of a psychological issue than a real one - modern engines can handle what you throw at them, it is the driver that quits before the engine.  

 

I drive a 6.0 2500HD and I do not feel the least bit concerned about letting it rev.

[SierraHD17]

EcoBoost.  Hands down.

[Hogtiming]

Assuming same gear ratio, I would go with the 6.2 with 8 speed transmission. As mentioned earlier, gear ratio plays a HUGE role in "speed" and towing

[Jon A]

They are very different engines, both with advantages and disadvantages.  Some may like one better than the other for very real reasons, unfortunately there is so much fanboyism it's hard for prospective buyers to actually learn the differences so they can make an informed choice.

 

The Ecoboost's ability to tow at low RPM can make for a more pleasant towing experience.  While for the most part it is mental, it does have some real advantages.  When towing lots of weight up a hill, 6.2 needs to find the right gear so it may hunt gears a bit more and with older 6-speed trucks the right gear might not exist resulting it it being slower up the hill.  The 6-speeds need a tune improving shift points and/or gears in order to be able to keep up in the toughest tests.

 

This issue has largely been eliminated with the 8-speed and now 10-speed transmissions.  With them, the right gear always exists so the 6.2 can maintain the speed limit towing pretty much anything you'd ever want to tow with a 1/2 ton up the steepest of hills, so "towing power" isn't really an issue.

 

While most fanboys may not ever work the truck hard enough to run into it, the Ecoboost does have a major disadvantage towing heavy loads in the mountains, especially at high altitude, especially in hot weather--COOLING.

 

Many Ecoboost owners have eventually gotten rid of theirs simply due to frustrations with overheating when they're worked hard.  Here's a visual:

 

 

 

Issues like this are way too common.  If you look at the Ecoboost towing forums, there are tons of threads about heat issues.  Heavy loads up long passes in high ambient temps—especially at high altitude—commonly heats them up to the point they enter “Reduced Engine Power” mode where the engine begins cutting boost until the turbos are basically shut off.  Owners commonly force downshifts to increase the engine RPM as a matter of course (sort of negates that whole “low RPM torque tows just like a big diesel” bragging point). Owners of these tucks also spend money on bigger radiators, intercoolers, aftermarket oil coolers, etc, but even with all that, nothing seems to “fix” the issue. 

 

Contrast that with the lack of threads here about overheating issues.  It's really not an issue for us.  While they may heat up more than I'd like in stock form, most users won't notice and/or view it as a problem as it's pretty rare to even get a warning message (usually hot transmission or engine oil) and the idea of boost being cut and the truck slowing down is something we never have to deal with.  And a couple simple, cheap mods is all it takes to make our trucks stay very cool comparativelyin these conditions.

 

I posted some in-depth test results evaluating the cooling system here:

 

 

I think the fact it has largely been greeted with crickets is evidence that most GM owners never give the cooling system a second thought because they never have problems.  That's a serious advantage the 6.2 has over the Ecoboost.

 

While cooling is the big one, the 6.2 does have a couple more advantages. 

 

Mileage when towing is one.  You can have Eco or you can have Boost.  You can't have both at the same time.  Gas engines under boost need to run richer mixtures than N/A engines to keep from blowing up.  That's just a fact of life.  When towing moderate loads, especially if there are any hills, you can generally expect better mileage from the 6.2 than the Ecoboost is going to give you.

 

Another is sound.  This might be even more mental than towing at low RPM, but it can be important to some.  Not needing fake engine noise pumped in through the speakers in order to keep the truck from sounding like a large vacuum cleaner might not be the biggest deal to some, but it can be to others.

[KARNUT]

I’ve done some tuning on diesels that I’ve owned through the years with an eye towards performance. If I was younger still working I would give one a shot just to see how it would perform with a good tune. I just wouldn’t be able to help myself.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Doublebase]

3 hours ago, 2009GMC said:

Both engines produce great hp and torque numbers.

 

Torque comes in at lower rpm on the 3.5 ecoboost.

 

Ford recently revised the ecoboost with (2) fuel injection systems. Port injection and Direct injection. This was to address the carbon build up issues in intake and valves. All DI motors will get some carbon build up since the fuel is directly injected into the combustion chamber vs port fuel injection which helps clean carbon off valves since fuel is injected in the intake. Only way to clean intake on ecoboost is to disassemble since the turbo can't handle any cleaners run through the intake. Naturally Aspirated engines can have cleaners run through the intake to aid in carbon buildup removal.  

 

My vote is for 6.2 since I own one and this is a GM forum. 

I didn't realize Ford was going to two injection systems, I've heard manufacturers were going to start doing it but I hadn't heard of any yet. Probably a great idea long term. 

 

I owned a car that had both direct and port injection and I never had an issue with carbon buildup on the valves (Lexus LS460). Not that that engine was perfect, it began consuming a lot of oil when it reached 170,000 miles...you could see the oil in the intake. 

 

As for the ecoboost - I know many people have had carbon buildup problems - and they've also experienced misfires due to the intercooler causing condensation to enter the engine. Water mixed with oil= a milky sludge. Pretty nasty. 

 

I'd take the 6.2 for towing over an ecoboost 

[busydaddy]

My 2011 ecoboost towed great and seemed fast as heck.. when it wasn’t in limp mode or in the shop(;

Over on the Ford forums I’d guess the number of ecoboost problems outnumber GM’s forums 2:1. To be fair I was in Ford’s 2011 era vs when I lurk here it’s in the 2015+.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[2018GMC]

They are very different engines, both with advantages and disadvantages.  Some may like one better than the other for very real reasons, unfortunately there is so much fanboyism it's hard for prospective buyers to actually learn the differences so they can make an informed choice.
 
The Ecoboost's ability to tow at low RPM can make for a more pleasant towing experience.  While for the most part it is mental, it does have some real advantages.  When towing lots of weight up a hill, 6.2 needs to find the right gear so it may hunt gears a bit more and with older 6-speed trucks the right gear might not exist resulting it it being slower up the hill.  The 6-speeds need a tune improving shift points and/or gears in order to be able to keep up in the toughest tests.
 
This issue has largely been eliminated with the 8-speed and now 10-speed transmissions.  With them, the right gear always exists so the 6.2 can maintain the speed limit towing pretty much anything you'd ever want to tow with a 1/2 ton up the steepest of hills, so "towing power" isn't really an issue.
 
While most fanboys may not ever work the truck hard enough to run into it, the Ecoboost does have a major disadvantage towing heavy loads in the mountains, especially at high altitude, especially in hot weather--COOLING.
 
Many Ecoboost owners have eventually gotten rid of theirs simply due to frustrations with overheating when they're worked hard.  Here's a visual:
 
[/url]  
 
Issues like this are way too common.  If you look at the Ecoboost towing forums, there are tons of threads about heat issues.  Heavy loads up long passes in high ambient temps—especially at high altitude—commonly heats them up to the point they enter “Reduced Engine Power” mode where the engine begins cutting boost until the turbos are basically shut off.  Owners commonly force downshifts to increase the engine RPM as a matter of course (sort of negates that whole “low RPM torque tows just like a big diesel” bragging point). Owners of these tucks also spend money on bigger radiators, intercoolers, aftermarket oil coolers, etc, but even with all that, nothing seems to “fix” the issue. 
 
Contrast that with the lack of threads here about overheating issues.  It's really not an issue for us.  While they may heat up more than I'd like in stock form, most users won't notice and/or view it as a problem as it's pretty rare to even get a warning message (usually hot transmission or engine oil) and the idea of boost being cut and the truck slowing down is something we never have to deal with.  And a couple simple, cheap mods is all it takes to make our trucks stay very cool comparativelyin these conditions.
 
I posted some in-depth test results evaluating the cooling system here:
 
 
I think the fact it has largely been greeted with crickets is evidence that most GM owners never give the cooling system a second thought because they never have problems.  That's a serious advantage the 6.2 has over the Ecoboost.
 
While cooling is the big one, the 6.2 does have a couple more advantages. 
 
Mileage when towing is one.  You can have Eco or you can have Boost.  You can't have both at the same time.  Gas engines under boost need to run richer mixtures than N/A engines to keep from blowing up.  That's just a fact of life.  When towing moderate loads, especially if there are any hills, you can generally expect better mileage from the 6.2 than the Ecoboost is going to give you.
 
Another is sound.  This might be even more mental than towing at low RPM, but it can be important to some.  Not needing fake engine noise pumped in through the speakers in order to keep the truck from sounding like a large vacuum cleaner might not be the biggest deal to some, but it can be to others.

Well said Jon!

[HondaHawkGT]

Too many timing chain/cam phaser/turbo issues with the Ecoboost. No thanks.

[M1ck3y]

This is all just a matter of opinion. The fast lane truck did a test with the 6.2 and the 3.5. Ford beat GM while maintaining the max speed allowed for the test. It could have gone faster. Where as the chevy was maxed out, literally floored towing up a steep grade at high elevation. As far as which is quicker, I'd say the ecoboost. I haven't raced one, but its 700 pounds lighter; that's huge (I have a noticeable difference in acceleration when I'm at a 1/4 tank vs full). Not to mention you can get a roush intake/tune and still have a 3 year warranty for a 1000 bucks. How does 80 horsepower sound?

 

That being said, I have a 6.2 and I would make the same decision again. To me the benchmark for trucks is Chevy.  Besides I want a V8, not a V6...

 

Actually I want a twin turbo V8