[big hammer]

Originally Posted by 68gtoMN

Ecoboost haters are in the house. Love your trucks - you purchased them! Regardless of what you drive/like, I find it difficult to fathom that people would not respect what Ford has achieved with their ecoboost line of engines. From a durability standpoint, one can only rely on their torture test results. Still, I have not seen issues in forums/blogs/media with durability to date. In addition, the lighter engine makes steering/handling/ride better.

Hate all you like. Ford took the risk, did the engineering, made the investment, did the testing and has produced a 3.5 liter engine (217 Cubic inch) that outperforms the 6.2 liter (~384 Cubic inch) GM product.

Ecoboost - 420 lb/ft @ 2,500 RPM, 90% TQ from 1700-5000 RPM, 365 HP @ 5,500 RPM
6.2 - 417 lb/ft @ 4,300 RPM, 403 HP @ 5,700 RPM

the gm 6.2 (which does not have two turbos strapped to it to make up for it's shortcomings) also makes around 300 ft\lbs of torque right from idle. and it makes more hp than the ecgayboost.

[Simple Man]

I had an 83 GMC 1/2 ton back in the day, that was a piece o' krap from day 1. Traded it on a Ford, and have NEVER looked back!

[455Grandville]

Originally Posted by big hammer

the gm 6.2\6speed combo hands down. ecoboosts are for little girls.

I already outran one in my Ecoboost

Then there's the fuel economy advantage

Originally Posted by 68gtoMN

Ecoboost haters are in the house. Love your trucks - you purchased them! Regardless of what you drive/like, I find it difficult to fathom that people would not respect what Ford has achieved with their ecoboost line of engines. From a durability standpoint, one can only rely on their torture test results. Still, I have not seen issues in forums/blogs/media with durability to date. In addition, the lighter engine makes steering/handling/ride better.

Hate all you like. Ford took the risk, did the engineering, made the investment, did the testing and has produced a 3.5 liter engine (217 Cubic inch) that outperforms the 6.2 liter (~384 Cubic inch) GM product.

Ecoboost - 420 lb/ft @ 2,500 RPM, 90% TQ from 1700-5000 RPM, 365 HP @ 5,500 RPM
6.2 - 417 lb/ft @ 4,300 RPM, 403 HP @ 5,700 RPM

They're mad the Ecoboost will outrun 'em

Originally Posted by mike nixon

If you're going to work it FORD
If you're gonna Drive it like a CAR GM

If you wanna work on it Dodge.

And if you're going to beat it to death International or Mack

[GT182]

Originally Posted by Transporter

What, no Peterbilt?

Yeah. And no Kenworth either?

[Tom Vaught]

Originally Posted by 455Grandville

I already outran one in my Ecoboost

Then there's the fuel economy advantage

They're mad the Ecoboost will outrun 'em

And if you're going to beat it to death International or Mack

Have to admire some of the members for being loyal to a given vehicle. That being said, nothing will change after this "poll" is completed. I would hope that the GM camp has the most votes considering that this is a GM Brand Forum Site.

I do think that the ECOBOOST vehicle met its objectives which were very good power, excellent F.E., VERY DURABLE engine and driveline, (see "Torture Test"), and greatly improved the appeal of the F-150 vehicle platform.

We always did well in the commercial 250 & 350 market.

Tom Vaught

[6 Grrrs]

I forgot to add that I have been a GM guy most of my life. Owned one Chrysler, also had a ChryCo product for a work vehicle - Both were POS. I own 2 chevy trucks. Let's face it, my 454SS isn't really a truck, but it does tow & can haul. My other truck -- K2500 4x4 w/Vortec 5.7L/4L80E (motor out due to cracked heads).

If all you GM loyalists think GM makes great trucks, study up on the Vortec 5.7 issues. Great power wise, but they all suffer from some very expensive, high probability failures:

they all have fuel injector spider issues
they all have intake manifold gasket failures
they all have EGR system failures
they all have (plastic) distributor issues
they all have front axle engagement issues
they all have transmission failures (4L60E - 1/2 ton)
they all have rear axle failures (10 bolt - 1/2 ton)
they all have A/C compressor failures
they all have instrument cluster failures
etc, etc, etc


I love the GMT400 style trucks, but I've been down this road before and I'm sorry I bought another one. I had a K1500 before that was a TBI 5.7. It had the trans & rear end, front diff lock, etc failures. Granted my K2500 is a 15 year old truck, but GMT800 style 3/4 ton trucks were way overpriced, and usually had the rocker panels rotted off.

On the other hand, I know several guys with Fords that have more miles than mine does with very little issues. At least not the same issues over and over again. A close friend just got rid of his 2000 Ford for a 2009 F150 (2 years ago). His 2000 had 110k miles and nothing wrong. I used his 2009 to tow my GTO to the P-Y Open house and was very impressed with it. Not so much with power, but the Ecoboost fixes that. He actually wishes he could have gotten an Ecoboost. I have heard around town mileage isn't all that great with an Ecoboost, but he claims 12-13mpg from his 5.4L back and forth to work. I used to get that with my TBI 5.7L.

Again, I have never owned a Ford. I always felt GM built the best trucks, period. I never cared for Ford products. I am starting to see the error in my ways and I believe Ford is on their game and is building better vehicles than GM or Chrysler. Especially trucks!

The Toyota is a nice vehicle and I firmly believe the Tundra helped push the Domestic companies into building better trucks. The Nissan Titan is OK too. Just not for me.

[bigunde]

Ecoboost v/s 6.2 GM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTHL5...eature=related

[ponchjoe]

Originally Posted by big hammer

the gm 6.2\6speed combo hands down. ecoboosts are for little girls.

2010 GMC 6.2 Max Trailer Pkg!

[455Grandville]

Originally Posted by Tom Vaught

Have to admire some of the members for being loyal to a given vehicle. That being said, nothing will change after this "poll" is completed. I would hope that the GM camp has the most votes considering that this is a GM Brand Forum Site.

I do think that the ECOBOOST vehicle met its objectives which were very good power, excellent F.E., VERY DURABLE engine and driveline, (see "Torture Test"), and greatly improved the appeal of the F-150 vehicle platform.

We always did well in the commercial 250 & 350 market.

Tom Vaught

The Ford has always been heavier built frames then GM. Ive seen plenty of GM frames rust, bend and crack and even break when put to heavy use. GM used coil springs in some years

Drivelines ? Look at Fords past -

What truck engine(s) can hold a candle to the old 300 inliner ?
That engine saw use in medium duty trucks, and many industrial applications and is an icon for durability & reliability.

Ford 460 : much longer lived engine then the Chebby 454. '54s were overheating SOBs and notoriously short lived, especially in motorhome chassis.

Ford had faults in the late 80s when they used the Mazda 5 speed in F150s and with the E-4OD tranny in some years.

Originally Posted by bigunde

Ecoboost v/s 6.2 GM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTHL5...eature=related

Seems the Ecoboost driver took off late. Im wondering why co-workers 6.2 I raced didnt run that well ?

Ford gets the Chebby here : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBXPgdbSPvw

[yak]

what could be wrong with a new quad cab ecoboost that pulled 8-10 mpgs pulling a 2 place ski doo trailer from winnipeg mb canada that drove 5.5 hours north? the guy is not impressed lol

[big hammer]

Originally Posted by 455Grandville

I already outran one in my Ecoboost

Then there's the fuel economy advantage




They're mad the Ecoboost will outrun 'em



And if you're going to beat it to death International or Mack

ecgayboost isn't even in the same league as the 6.2 chev in real life. nevermind the horrible fuel mileage you get with that cute 'lil 6 banger.

[big hammer]

Originally Posted by ponchjoe

2010 GMC 6.2 Max Trailer Pkg!

that's what mine has!

[The Champ]

Originally Posted by 455Grandville

Seems the Ecoboost driver took off late. Im wondering why co-workers 6.2 I raced didnt run that well ?

Ford gets the Chebby here : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBXPgdbSPvw

Apparently the same trucks, the Chevy wins again. That's 2 out of 3 for the Chevy...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lX79x...feature=fvwrel

Ford ecobust failure - "2011 f150 with 15,000kms! Fail on fuel milage! (13-17mpg) it smokes,stalls, and they r puttig a new tranny in it as i write! Do NOT buy an ecoboost! Save a hassle, buy yourself a chev!!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OcHfarlD6rw

What 2012 full size truck has the best epa fuel mileage rating? You might be surprised to learn that it's not a Ford (despite all the Ford ads to the contrary) and it has more HP and more torque than the most fuel efficient Ford....

And it's the longest lasting, most dependable truck in the country...

[68gtoMN]

Originally Posted by big hammer

the gm 6.2 (which does not have two turbos strapped to it to make up for it's shortcomings) also makes around 300 ft\lbs of torque right from idle. and it makes more hp than the ecgayboost.

MC Hammertime, The HP number is FAR less significant than is Torque...you know...the actual rotational force used to move the vehicle. Here the small Ford engine whoops the GM offering. To help you with your equations, we turn to our HS physics classes to know that Torque = Force x Distance. Force = Mass x acceleration. Torque then = Mass x Acceleration x Distance. To get to HP, one needs to divide Force (Torque) by Time. HP then = Mass x Acceleration x Distance / Time. The Ford produces more peak torque, produces that peak torque across nearly its entire rev range and would easily out-run a 6.2 while towing anything.

So you say the 6.2 has 300 lb/ft at 1,000 rpm? Ok, what is the torque converter flash (RPM) for this engine. With the flash RPM, is this close to peak torque or the GM engine? Apply the same question to the ecoboost. What you will find it that the ecoboost engine will make peak torque just off idle and carry it past 5000 RPM.

Both are great engines. You, however, seem to be stuck in denial(i) land

[Old Blue 66]

Originally Posted by big hammer

the gm 6.2 (which does not have two turbos strapped to it to make up for it's shortcomings) also makes around 300 ft\lbs of torque right from idle. and it makes more hp than the ecgayboost.

Here we go......

[68gtoMN]

Originally Posted by The Chump

Apparently the same trucks, the Chevy wins again. That's 2 out of 3 for the Chevy...

What is the state of tune of the chevy? Any mods? Besides, if you want to know which will run faster, you take it to the drag strip and run from a light and both trucks give it their all... Running on the street tells little. As you can see, none of these runs was identical in start tactics or speed run... FAIL

Originally Posted by The Chump

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lX79x...feature=fvwrel

Ford ecobust failure - "2011 f150 with 15,000kms! Fail on fuel milage! (13-17mpg) it smokes,stalls, and they r puttig a new tranny in it as i write! Do NOT buy an ecoboost! Save a hassle, buy yourself a chev!!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OcHfarlD6rw

Nice use of a single data point without offering context or any other reference point to show the difference between repair rates of Ecoboost trucks versus 6.2 Silverados... FAIL.

Originally Posted by The Chump

What 2012 full size truck has the best epa fuel mileage rating? You might be surprised to learn that it's not a Ford (despite all the Ford ads to the contrary) and it has more HP and more torque than the most fuel efficient Ford....

And it's the longest lasting, most dependable truck in the country...

Hey Lendon...did you forget to take your meds again? You again try to be too clever by half by attempting to shift the debate to most fuel efficient truck, then further to most fuel efficient engine. In doing so, you have effectively compared an apple with a mango.

Let me help you (again) with your claims and your facts. You know, it's about time you did your own research for a change...I'm getting tired of clearing up your mistakes for free. As Mark Twain once said, "Never let facts get in the way of a good story"... See picture below from the Official EPA website....



Based on similar power output ratings (Chevy still down), I compared the Chevy offering SFE to the Ecoboost and then the normal 5.3 2WD. The Dodge was even lower with similar power. Ecoboost wins. Gosh, aren't facts tough to deal with.

Also, I agree that the Ford is the longest lasting, most durable/dependable truck on the market by working vehicles with over 200,000 miles on them. The statistic you like to rely on is registrations which is inconclusive (it tells nothing of miles or use; hence, durability).

Again, like your truck. Buy what you like. Just try...try a little bit...to deal with fact once in a while...

[455Grandville]

Originally Posted by The Champ

Apparently the same trucks, the Chevy wins again. That's 2 out of 3 for the Chevy...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lX79x...feature=fvwrel

Ford ecobust failure - "2011 f150 with 15,000kms! Fail on fuel milage! (13-17mpg) it smokes,stalls, and they r puttig a new tranny in it as i write! Do NOT buy an ecoboost! Save a hassle, buy yourself a chev!!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OcHfarlD6rw

What 2012 full size truck has the best epa fuel mileage rating? You might be surprised to learn that it's not a Ford (despite all the Ford ads to the contrary) and it has more HP and more torque than the most fuel efficient Ford....

And it's the longest lasting, most dependable truck in the country...

Whoooa, whooa, whoooa, here you are and earlier you stated this :

Originally Posted by The Champ

I
Our own resident board stalker...

One last thing, to get us back on topic...

So, I repond back to prove a point, you call it stalking. OK. But you respond to me (obviously sore about it) and somehow that's not stalking ? Interesting.

Originally Posted by big hammer

ecgayboost isn't even in the same league as the 6.2 chev in real life. nevermind the horrible fuel mileage you get with that cute 'lil 6 banger.

You seem really bring up gay stuff alot; are you twelve or are you just latent about your homosexuality ?

Back to the trucks: maybe if Ford had screwed the taxpayers over by getting a big fat government welfare check, things would be different. Shame on them for being honest and not screwing us.

[drailed]

Always had Fords and have never really had any big issues. I also think they are a nicer looking truck but thats my opinion. I havent cared for the looks of the Chevys since 87 inside or out. The cummins in the Dodge is nice but I have never owned a Dodge truck to form an opinion for myself as far as the rest of the truck goes.

[428 78T/A]

Originally Posted by David Jones

I choose a Tundra.

X3.

[big hammer]

Originally Posted by 455Grandville

You seem really bring up gay stuff alot; are you twelve or are you just latent about your homosexuality ?

Back to the trucks: maybe if Ford had screwed the taxpayers over by getting a big fat government welfare check, things would be different. Shame on them for being honest and not screwing us.

it sure seems to have got your attention hasn't it? you seem quite "excited".

don't get so upset. it's apparent from your lack of self discipline that you are already coming to terms with the fact that you "drank the kool-aid" with your ford purchase.