Ford Eco-boost vs silverado 5.3

[hattaresguy]

For fleet use I'd just buy the Silverado's, cheapest to purchase and maintain.

My biggest concern about running a turbo charged motor in fleet use like the Ecoboost is well abuse. Most of my subs are not the best with maintenance and a high strong boosted V6 isn't going to make 200k miles on 15k mile Jiffy Lube changes.

GM drive trains are very tolerant of abuse, as far as I'm concerned the 4.3 and 6L are the gold standard in work vehicle motors. Having said that I beleive both are discontinued for 14 so YMMV with the new stuff, who knows.

I'd buy the 5.0 if you want the Fords over the 3.5.

What about 3/4 tons? You can get 2500HD's for that money and they will hold up better longer if your doing a lot of heavy towing than half tons.

 

[another Todd]

Since this is a treat for the "partners" that they all deserve, why not let the partners choose what they want individually or collectively? I am not sure if this works with your business model though (because I don't know what it is).

 

[volk06]

We have the Chevys and fords in our fleet at work and I've pulled with the new Chevy 5.3, ford 5.0 and the 3.5l.

They all get about the same gas mileage. The Chevy 5.3 a little better than the other two, however it doesn't quite pull the trailers as easy but does it just fine. The 3.5l pulls the best, 5.0 behind it, then the 5.3. For a new engine, I'm disappointed it doesn't run away from the 5.0, especially since the 5.3 is DI. If I were running a fleet it would be Ford 5.0l F150. I just pulled a 6-7k trailer with a 3.55 rear end through Missouri with a 5.0 and it pulled it with breeze, I could still accelerate going up large hills. The maintenance in the 5.0 is cheaper as the oil is cheaper than dexos in bulk. I love my ecoboost but I don't think id run a fleet of them.

In the end I'd price out F150s with 5.0Ls. It'll be cheaper than the ecoboost and you can easily do 10k ocis on the 5.0l. The new DI 5.3L is too new to know about any issues.

 

[Nate1979]

On the Chevy forums there are some very long threads on unsolved vibration issues plaguing the new 2014's.

 

[sasha]

If i need a truck i would get a chevy. Updated OHV engines that are still way less complex that the ecoboost. Just my quick 5 cents.

 

[supton]

Originally Posted By: hattaresguy

GM drive trains are very tolerant of abuse, as far as I'm concerned the 4.3 and 6L are the gold standard in work vehicle motors. Having said that I beleive both are discontinued for 14 so YMMV with the new stuff, who knows.


All new motors this year, direct injection and all. Even the 4.3L V6 (completely new) has DI and cylinder deactivation.

Originally Posted By: another Todd
Since this is a treat for the "partners" that they all deserve, why not let the partners choose what they want individually or collectively? I am not sure if this works with your business model though (because I don't know what it is).


Decision by committee? About what truck to buy? Can't see that ending well! The price break is for buying four from the same dealership, has to be from the same place.

 

[jimmy87]

The 6.0L and the duramax are a carry over from the last model, 6L may have gotten some minor tweaks for the new body style trucks but the actual power train remains the same for the most part.

 

[Trav]

Originally Posted By: Clevy
And thanks guys for all your feedback. I'm open to options.

Around last Sept my brother an i looked at Chev, Ford and Dodge and went with the Toyota Tundra 4.6 4x4.
Everything you mention for 28K glätten out the door not stripped either and included a Toyota bed liner. They estimated 19 MPG highway but it routinely gets 22 MPG (US).
Price and drive train is what sealed the deal. The Ford eco boost is not something we wanted to get involved with DI and 2 turbochargers that can be real expensive after warranty.

The Chev with the 5300 AFM has a lot of oil consumption reports and was a deal breaker.
The Dodge was priced out of this world and not even in the competition.

The Toyota 4.6 engine and transmission is the nicest of the bunch bar none. Its strong enough and silent, the build quality of this truck is stellar.
I look at things like ease of maintenance, the wiring harness and how its put together, where they run the brake lines and how hard they will be to change after 10 yrs in the salt belt and things like this.

We weighed all things up using "what if this needs replacing scenarios" after warranty and the Tundra stood head and shoulders above the others with ease.
Not being an American i have no bias to American trucks i look at them all with the same eye, mentally tearing it apart (literally) as i am looking at it.

 

[D189379]

Does the 5.3 still have the AFM oil burning issue? Or has that been taken care of?

 

[Volvohead]

GM made a few band-aid fixes to the AFM, but finally corrected it substantially in '10 with an adjustment to the ring pack (as I was told).

Our '11 has zero consumption.

I would have no concerns with the Chevy 5.3 at this point.

 

[hattaresguy]

It must be a regional thing, around here Ram trucks are the cheapest. I have seen them advertised in the paper for $5k less than a Chevy and who knows what the 15 F150's will be priced at.

 

[Trav]

Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
It must be a regional thing, around here Ram trucks are the cheapest. I have seen them advertised in the paper for $5k less than a Chevy and who knows what the 15 F150's will be priced at.


Could be. I have a feeling the 2015 aluminum Ford will be a good bit higher in price or they will cheapen it somewhere. Hopefully not but who knows.

 

[Clevy]

Originally Posted By: Volvohead
GM made a few band-aid fixes to the AFM, but finally corrected it substantially in '10 with an adjustment to the ring pack (as I was told).

Our '11 has zero consumption.

I would have no concerns with the Chevy 5.3 at this point.



Thanks.
Exactly what I was looking for.

At this point we are at a flip a coin moment. Personally I love the fords but the chev is a great truck,and over the years they've proven to get me both into and out of some pretty wicked mud and snow.
My dodge's had more power but were horrible as far as 4wd ability,towed great though.
I'm digging up info right now to see what the lots were selling their inventory at when the new trucks hit the lot and might delay the purchase til then if it means a larger savings.
I sure do like the Eco-boost but the 5.0 is my dream engine,even though it's not in the right vehicle,and the hemi has been uber reliable for me in the various vehicles I've had them in,and then there's old reliable,the 5.3 which in a couple trucks I've kicked the snot out of them yet they keep on rolling for me.
If dodge will give decent financing terms they would definitely be an option but at the present terms they aren't in the game,no matter how much I like the hemi.

And SteveSRT,your absolutely right. I'll own them for long enough and enough miles they won't owe me a cent.
Funny. You know me well for being an internet friend.
Nice.

 

[Volvohead]

The AFM was a big question with us, too.

I took pains to get answers before we made the move on ours.

I also learned that besides the incremental fixes, the AFM system doesn't like dirty oil pushed to the OLM limits. That factor seems alleviated since Dexos was implemented in '11, pretty much limiting the oil to a Syn-blend or better.

The only other way around AFM is to install a third-party ECM remapping that disables it, which imperils the powertrain warranty.

It really depends on how you're going to use the truck. For more serious off-road duty, I think Ford makes a slightly stouter chassis. But we preferred the drivetrain behavior and road manners of the Chevy a little better, and I don't do off-road or construction work site work. Both are solid work trucks.

 

[millerbl00]

Any new tech has compromises....



quote

Yes it is, and likely high strength alloy as well. All you can knock an aluminum body panel on is maybe expense to repair. Otherwise, the idea of a truck shedding HUGE weight without any compromises is an amazing feat.

I remember when GM started forging its lower control arms out of aluminum on their heavy duty chassis'. All my techs went nuts thinking they were junk, but they are actually much stronger than the steel parts they replaced! [/quote]

 

[millerbl00]

Look like we did not have to wait long for the new tech to fail...


Other vehicles called back by GM Thursday include 103,158 older Chevrolet Corvettes for a headlight problem, 140,067 Chevrolet Malibus from the 2014 model year for a hydraulic brake booster malfunction, 19,225 Cadillac CTS 2013-14 models for windshield wiper failures and 477 full-size trucks from the 2014 and 2015 model years for a tie-rod defect that can lead to a crash

 

[SteveSRT8]

You do understand that you have a much better chance of getting hit by lightning than owning one of 477 trucks involved in the recall.

Sure doesn't sound like any "new tech" was involved either, unless windshield washers and tie rods rate highly in your perception.

GM is just a victim of the same disease that EVERY SINGLE mass producer of cars and trucks is: Bean counters want cheaper, sounds like they got it!

 

[millerbl00]

The new Silverado has aluminum suspension components. Any aluminum suspension componet connected to a dissimilar metal can setup a resonance that can loosen componets. GM and Ford are using aluminum.


Ask one of the 477 how they feel

As a manufacturer you have to over design to take into account real world situtions. They are cutting the specs too close to save a penny

 

[hattaresguy]

So what? 477 out of what a few million trucks? Sounds like a bad batch of parts from a supplier.

If I had one of those 477 I'd be enjoying my new truck and have the dealer take care of it when I went in for my free oil change.

 

[millerbl00]

Until that tie rod comes loose and you wreck.