Quote:
Originally Posted by 68gtoMN
Sleepy, in situations like this you must remember the old adage which is timeless:
Never argue with an idiot - he will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience. The Ecoboost 3.5 was not designed to BEAT the Chevy 6.2 or any other engine purely on HP AND be expected to deliver better mileage in all situations. Nope. The goals were more modest. What Ford accomplished was to develop a compact and lightweight engine that produced great Torque (you know...the force the actually moves an object) from a very low RPM and maintain it across a wide RPM band. As a by product of the engine size, when not being called upon to tow heavy loads (twice the payload and towing of the Chevy hybrid 6.0), it would deliver great mileage. In addition, the smaller package and lighter weight would provide better weight distribution, better suspension tuning, better turning, better braking all without having to upgrade these ancillary systems (cost).
Ecoboost provides the equivalent (better) torque, sooner in the RPM range AND across a wider RPM range, from a smaller package all the while delivering equivalent or better fuel consumption figures. The engine was tested, on camera, through more severe duty cycles than most engines can imagine seeing in two lifetimes and it still maintained factory specs upon tear down.
Ford did a great job with their Ecoboost engine line. Perhaps not all will like the styling or brand or colors Ford offers. So be it. GM and Chrysler also make good trucks. The issue here is that Ford has effectively shifted the paradigm and some can't come to terms with it. Just like computer controls would spell the death knell to performance cars...er...oops - that did not happen, people can't grasp smaller, boosted engines replacing cubic inches...
The facts tell the true story. The Ford 3.5 Ecoboost delivers equal or better performance than the 6.2 Chevy or the 6.0 Hybrid without sacrificing it's work credentials (towing/payload).
There is another old adage to follow - don't spit into the wind.
With twin turbos, Ecoboost is blowing hard in Chevy's direction... |
In relationship to this particular post regarding the comments on torque.....my main retail business is the turbo Buicks best known among non owners the black Grand Nationals which in 1987 much to the dismay of Corvette was the fastest US production car..period.
This was was accomplished with a 3.8 V6 engine and a turbo coupled to a special valve body in a 2004R trans which travelled to a 3.42 rear end ratio in a 8.5 housing all in about a 3,300 lb G body car.
When this car came out most GM hot rodders found it hard to believe that this package was more potent than the Monte Carlo SS 305 with 3.73 gearing and a 7.5 housing in the rear.
This was probably the first example in the 1980s....where low end torque versus HP showed people what the difference was.....at 3,200 rpm the little V6 Buick was pumping out 330 lb pounds of torque....on a cool spring day this was and is impressive.
No one can predict accurately what the values will be down the road on the new Ford trucks....I can tell you from first hand experience how the 1987 Grand National value worked out as I leased one brand new and the buy out was 1/3 of what I sold it for.
The days are long gone when gas will be anywhere near $3 per gallon, most of us will never ever adapt to electric cars and trucks so if engineers from either GM-Ford-Chrysler camps
can make things work with gas engines get low end torque let them go at it with either turbos or superchargers or whatever.
One thing is certain we live in the USA and are fortunate enough to have a wide variety to choose from.
[email protected]
If your taking a poll I have owned mostly GM trucks.....