can someone explain the Ecoboost to me?

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

columnshift

Joined
Oct 6, 2014
Messages
264
Location
Minnesota
So i'm looking at newer truck specs, and i'm comparing two engines... one conventional v8, and this new fangled ford ecoboost. And let me be honest - I just don't get it. The v8 (with the 4cyl multi displacement whatever mode) shows better MPG on the highway, the power of both engines is about the same, when I hear of people towing with the Ecoboost heavy figures they report the single digit tow figures i'd expect elsewhere, and then I look at crate motor prices and the Ecoboost is priced as expensive as a diesel into the five figures.

This isn't meant to be a Ford bashing thread but what am I not getting?? :-/

I read some article on what it's MEANT to do, I just don't know if it's doing it. I saw technical papers talking about how engines show the best Brake Specific Fuel Consumption under higher loads and lower rpm's, and in theory the Ecoboost is trying to widen this "higher efficiency island" over a much much wider range of rpm and loads using the turbo, somehow. It just seems that it's not actually doing it very well in the real world while costing more than the v8's its claiming to replace with worse mileage. I'd also be concerned about lifespan of a small displacement overworked engine - and yes I know about Ford's "nonstop 200,000 miles driving/ heavy construction work/ etc" promo puff pieces except that starting and stopping the engine on endless short trips is going to be harder on it than nonstop driving anyway.
 
Last edited:
There is no naturally aspirated half ton v8 truck that pulls in the heat and altitude like an ecoboost. Full stop.

I routinely tow on the sae2807 testing route and the EB absolutely wipes the floor with everything else - especially in the summer.

On cruise control I got 21+ out of it with 4 people doing sedan duty.

Dave
 
I hope this helps although it may not directly address your concern. I drive a 2016 F150 Supercab w 2.7 Eco. On my daily 10 minute commute of mixed driving, my long term average is 20.5 mpg using the trucks display. I think it's 1 mpg optimistic based off two calculations. Highway driving at 65 mpg is over 25, and occasionally 26. I don't have anything to tow. The truck has 8900 miles on it.
 
Eccoboost is a turbo. If you drive it with the proverbial lead foot, you will get poor gas mileage like you would in any other turbocharged vehicle. The turbo charged car should get better mileage when not towing.
 
Originally Posted By: volk06
First off ford does not use cylinder deactivation on the V8 unless that recently changed. Also, the MPG are not near the same. Are you sure you're comparing all Ford engines? Also why does everyone assume these engines are overworked? They build these bottom ends pretty solid.

http://m.ford.com/content/MobileFord/trucks/f150/specifications.html


I assumed the OP was comparing the Ecoboost to either the GM Ecotec or Mopar Hemi with cylinder deactivation. I can speak to the GM engines as I currently have a '14 Silverado. I have the power of a traditional V8 (which is less than the Ecoboost when running under boost) The last ecoboost F150 I drove pulled like crazy, but at the expense of economy. At highway speed my truck often is running in V4 mode while the Ford will be using 6. It's a choice between boosting for power or throttling down for economy. I personally like NOT having the durability concerns of dual turbos. But at the same time I have the concerns associated with the AFM system. I have never had an issue with the system but some have. As far as mileage I can run all day at 65-75 and average 21 on the interstate. My truck excels at local driving with the onboard computer staying around 20mpg in hilly, rural 2 lane driving.

For me the V-8 with cylinder deactivation was a better choice, but of course I have a bowtie bias. If I wanted more power I can opt for the GM 6.2. and keep similar gas mileage performance. With the ecoboost it seems you either have "eco" or "boost" but not both at the same time. Just my $0.02
 
Well I live out west where we have "hills" in the 9,500' range and I'd take a turbo any day of the week.

A traditional V8 will loose 1/3 of it's power at altitude, and that sucks towing the boat up to Lake Alpine ... Or trying to tow over Tioga Pass, etc.

If you do not have altitude to deal with, it's a different story ...
 
I have a 170+ mile commute for work. I have been driving my truck the last three weeks just to see how it would do. The speed limit ranges from 55-70. I found that if I keep it between 60 and 65 for the duration of the commute, it'll consistently return fuel economy over 27mpg. If I push it to 70+ it'll consistently return fuel economy over 23mpg. My lifetime mpg is 16.9mpg, 4,000miles of that is towing. The truck has 9,200miles. It's really exceeded my expectations in both fuel economy as well as power. I was dead set on getting the 5.0 but as soon as I drove the Ecoboost, I was sold.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: tomcruise
I have a 170+ mile commute for work. I have been driving my truck the last three weeks just to see how it would do. The speed limit ranges from 55-70. I found that if I keep it between 60 and 65 for the duration of the commute, it'll consistently return fuel economy over 27mpg. If I push it to 70+ it'll consistently return fuel economy over 23mpg. My lifetime mpg is 16.9mpg, 4,000miles of that is towing. The truck has 9,200miles. It's really exceeded my expectations in both fuel economy as well as power. I was dead set on getting the 5.0 but as soon as I drove the Ecoboost, I was sold.


What rear end do you have and is it a 4x4?

UD
 
I was looking at the 3.5 eco vs the v8 as well..I think it comes down to how much you plan on towing. I think the ecoboost 3.5 has a higher rated towing capacity. I suppose it depends on your needs.
 
Well I can tell you the eco boost takes off like a scalded cat from a top with a good brake torque launch.
 
Originally Posted By: sopususer
I assumed the OP was comparing the Ecoboost to either the GM Ecotec or Mopar Hemi with cylinder deactivation. I can speak to the GM engines as I currently have a '14 Silverado. I have the power of a traditional V8 (which is less than the Ecoboost when running under boost) The last ecoboost F150 I drove pulled like crazy, but at the expense of economy. At highway speed my truck often is running in V4 mode while the Ford will be using 6. It's a choice between boosting for power or throttling down for economy. I personally like NOT having the durability concerns of dual turbos. But at the same time I have the concerns associated with the AFM system. I have never had an issue with the system but some have. As far as mileage I can run all day at 65-75 and average 21 on the interstate. My truck excels at local driving with the onboard computer staying around 20mpg in hilly, rural 2 lane driving.

For me the V-8 with cylinder deactivation was a better choice, but of course I have a bowtie bias. If I wanted more power I can opt for the GM 6.2. and keep similar gas mileage performance. With the ecoboost it seems you either have "eco" or "boost" but not both at the same time. Just my $0.02


Here we have a level-headed analysis! I love it!

01.gif
 
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Originally Posted By: tomcruise
I have a 170+ mile commute for work. I have been driving my truck the last three weeks just to see how it would do. The speed limit ranges from 55-70. I found that if I keep it between 60 and 65 for the duration of the commute, it'll consistently return fuel economy over 27mpg. If I push it to 70+ it'll consistently return fuel economy over 23mpg. My lifetime mpg is 16.9mpg, 4,000miles of that is towing. The truck has 9,200miles. It's really exceeded my expectations in both fuel economy as well as power. I was dead set on getting the 5.0 but as soon as I drove the Ecoboost, I was sold.


What rear end do you have and is it a 4x4?

UD


It's 2wd with 3.31 rear end.
 
The eco or boost but not at the same time is a good way of putting it. When you are putting down the highway, its a N/A V6, but if you throttle up to pull a hill or want to win a on-ramp race its gonna burn some fuel.
 
A guy next door to our work place has just hit 100K with his F150 Eco 2.7, most of it towing a 2-slot horse trailer and associated tac. He's a lead foot and has had zero problems, so far. He and his wife go to rodeo events, she's a barrel racer. They like the power especially when they're in mountain country.

The only mods are an extra transmission filter/cooler. In his words, so far, so good.
 
I can explain the Ecoboost to you real easy - my '11 FX4 with 3:73s hits the 100mph speed limiter so easily, I'll never own anything else. When I bought it, I was living in Houston i.e. sea level. Now I live in the mountains in Arizona at 5600 ft elevation. No discernible difference in power. 97k miles, zero oil consumption. Modern turbos rule.
 
Originally Posted By: double vanos
I can explain the Ecoboost to you real easy - my '11 FX4 with 3:73s hits the 100mph speed limiter so easily, I'll never own anything else. When I bought it, I was living in Houston i.e. sea level. Now I live in the mountains in Arizona at 5600 ft elevation. No discernible difference in power. 97k miles, zero oil consumption. Modern turbos rule.


+1
 
If all you compare is the freeway mileage on a GM to a 3.5 Ecoboost, you are right - the numbers for fuel mileage look similar. If you look at the overall though, the Ecoboost generally gets better mileage. Different ways to get to similar ends - minimize fuel consumption when its not needed, but have the power on hand when it is. I don't know that one is right and one is wrong, just different.

That being said, go drive them if you haven't already. It will make some more sense after you do. Similar to others, I've got the smaller ecoboost - 2.7 in my F150, and I am averaging a solid 20 MPG. That's in mixed driving (not all freeway/highway speeds), running run of the mill 87 octane with 10% ethanol. I have not taken it out yet for a long highway only run (which if you say a tankfull, that's a 720 mile run with a 36 gallon tank
smile.gif
). I came to this truck from an '04 F150 with the 5.4. No matter what I did with that truck, it delivered the same fuel mileage - it did not respond well to any fuel saving attempts. This truck, if I try, can deliver better than what I get, but I am not trying to hypermile it by any stretch...

And as others point out - it is eco or boost. The power is there, but you will burn fuel to get it. And that means if you tow all the time, the V8 may be a better choice (fuel mileage only). On the flip side, the boost means altitude matters less if you drive in the mountains (factored into my thinking as frequent Colorado visitor), and the power is just there when its needed.

Good luck in your decision...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

W
Modern Turbo Engine Reliability and Durability
3 4 5
Replies
88
Views
5K
wtd
GON
Purchased Ford's Extended Service Protection for the 2019 F350 6.7L diesel
2 3
Replies
42
Views
2K
USask2000
T
Ford GAA 1100 Cubic Inch WW2 Tank Engine
Replies
11
Views
2K
OVERKILL
Ronin73
2023 Ford F150 3.5 EcoBoost Recommendation
Replies
17
Views
1K
Whimsey
GON
Trying to identify who is the OEM of this 2019 F-350 Super Duty puck system 5th wheel hitch
Replies
11
Views
2K
GON
Back
Top