backtop


Print 95 comment(s) - last by shaidorsai.. on Sep 27 at 4:23 PM


3.5-liter EcoBoost V6
V8 what? EcoBoost V6 is probably going to be a hot seller for the F-150

When we brought you news of Ford's overhauled F-150 powertrain lineup for 2011, most people were quite happy with the changes made. However, there were some that were skeptical about the possible power ratings for the optional EcoBoost V6 engine.

Some simply weren't buying into the idea that the 3.5-liter EcoBoost V6 -- a twin-turbocharged engine that sees duty in the Ford Taurus SHO and Ford Flex -- could possibly produce even more power in a truck platform that would undergo much more stress.

Today, however, Ford is giving the naysayers a healthy dish of crow to eat with the final power/torque figures for the EcoBoost V6 engine option in the 2011 Ford F-150. The engine will generate 365 hp at 5,000 rpm and an outrageous 420 lb-ft of torque at 2,500 rpm. Even more impressive is that 90 percent of peak torque will be available from 1,700 rpm to 5,000 rpm. Towing capacity with the new engine matches that of the larger 6.2-liter V8 engine option -- 11,300 pounds. Better still, all of this is achieved using regular unleaded fuel.

For comparison, the EcoBoost V6 generates 365 hp at 5,500 rpm and 350 lb-ft at 1,500 rpm in the Taurus SHO.

The new EcoBoost will be a more expensive engine option than the 5.0-liter V8 which generates 360 hp and 380 lb-ft of torque.

“Truck customers should think of the EcoBoost truck engine as a gas-powered engine with diesel-type capability and characteristics,” said Jim Mazuchowski, Ford's V6 engines program manager. “The twin turbochargers and direct injection give it the broad, flat torque curve that makes towing with a diesel so effortless – and hard acceleration so much fun.”

“Customers have embraced the EcoBoost solution of delivering the power they desire with the fuel economy they demand in a no-compromise package,” added Derrick Kuzak, group vice president, Global Product Development. “From the start, we have pledged that this solution applies to any engine and any customer. The EcoBoost truck engine for the 2011 F-150 will deliver those attributes and has been specially tuned and tested to deliver the best-in-class towing and capability our truck customers demand.”

The EcoBoost V6 engine option will be available for the F-150 in early 2011. Although Ford didn't give any specific fuel economy numbers for the engine, it will more than likely be more fuel efficient than the less powerful 5.0-liter V8.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

I'm patient
By MGSsancho on 9/21/2010 2:22:02 AM , Rating: 2
I'll wait till these systems achieve 100k, 150k and 200k miles on them in real world. I have no beef with the engine I have been burned by every ford I've owned in the past 40 years. maybe they are better I'm sure but I will wait and see




RE: I'm patient
By gemsurf on 9/21/2010 7:42:55 AM , Rating: 2
I have a 94 Ranger 4 liter sitting in the driveway with 180k on it. (My 4th Ranger) Other than normal maintenance, the only problem I've had is a siezed tensioner pulley for the serpentine belt. What was crazy, was it got so hot it literally spun the threads out of the aluminum bracket and spit it back on top of the manifold. Had it gone down or forward it would have busted the crap out of tons of expensive stuff, but since it didn't I was up and running for less than $40!

I'm a Ford guy because I've had success with many Fords! I also have a 2007 Mountaineer (Merc) with 60K and plan to sell the Ranger next year and buy one of the F150 SuperCrews next year.


RE: I'm patient
By Pneumothorax on 9/21/2010 9:14:41 AM , Rating: 1
You do realize your Ranger engine AND the 4.6/5/5.4 Liter V8's are much less complex designs than this ecoboost engine. Not only do you have turbos - which have a low probability of making it to 180K without replacement, you also have HPFP/Direct Injectors which haven't been proven yet over the long haul. I'm also curious to see if Ecoboost has solved the other major issue with Turbo DI engines - intake valve buildup. Since you don't have air/fuel (gas makes a great solvent) cleaning the valves anymore.


RE: I'm patient
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 9/21/2010 12:23:27 PM , Rating: 3
HD diesel pickups use DI and turbos; they can't be THAT bad...


RE: I'm patient
By Pneumothorax on 9/21/2010 2:16:26 PM , Rating: 2
That's the problem. The diesel engine block itself is stout and will outlast the chassis. It's the supporting "cast", the turbos and di components that run into trouble. I'm very pro-diesel (have a 335d myself), but I'm also aware that maintenance on them isn't going to be cheaper vs. a naturally aspirated motor. For many super-duty diesel truck owners, the money they saved on mileage is eaten up by the higher maintenance costs, but a diesel truck engine is superior by it's virtue of much greater torque vs. the equivalent sized gasser. I'd also like to see endurance tests like going up a steep grade, towing max capacity, and at 105F for this ecoboost v6 vs. the new 5 liter V8. I'd also wager the fuel economy isn't going to be much different in those conditions.


RE: I'm patient
By Spuke on 9/21/2010 2:46:59 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
but I'm also aware that maintenance on them isn't going to be cheaper vs. a naturally aspirated motor
Depends on the car. My DI turbo 4 cyl has only oil, oil filter and air filter changes until 100K. Lowest maintenance car I've EVER owned. Looking at the Taurus SHO's maintenance schedule, looks exactly the same as my car. Can't imagine much more maintenance on the F150.


RE: I'm patient
By Pneumothorax on 9/21/2010 4:14:39 PM , Rating: 2
I'm not talking about cheap oil changes and basic maintenance. I'm talking about the inevitable turbo failures and etc. that are part of a forced induction engine. For the majority of the fickle car buying public it won't be an issue as most will dump the car/truck long before six figure mileage. For the people who actually use their truck to work/haul stuff, 100,000 miles isn't a lot and long-term costs become a bigger factor.


RE: I'm patient
By sprockkets on 9/21/2010 6:17:39 PM , Rating: 2
It's probably why they are still offering the 5.0/6.2 V8.

I think time will tell if you are right, and while past evidence is on your side, Ford isn't someone who does crap like that with their trucks and doesn't bother testing them.

Now I want the V6 in a new company van for my work. The current V6 4 speed trany is a wimp.


RE: I'm patient
By Spuke on 9/21/2010 6:45:36 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I'm talking about the inevitable turbo failures and etc. that are part of a forced induction engine.
HD trucks use turbo's and have no premature failures, why would the F150 be the same? This isn't 1986 dude, turbos' nowadays are better designed and use better materials, not to mention, todays turbo's are water/oil cooled. This isn't your grandmas POS GM turbo car.


RE: I'm patient
By Spuke on 9/21/2010 6:48:28 PM , Rating: 2
Check out Mozee's post below on FOrd's durability testing. There's no way in hell Ford is going to put a POS engine in a vehicle that sells 50k units a month. No way.


RE: I'm patient
By iFX on 9/21/2010 7:37:27 PM , Rating: 2
I'm not sure you understand the difference (no offense intended). A diesel engine is comparatively overbuilt if you only intended to run it at gas engine compression levels. The difference is, a diesel engine might run a 40:1 compression ratio - if you ran that on a gas engine it wouldn't last a minute. Gas engines are typically designed for compression levels of 10:1 or less. Everything on a diesel engine is made to withstand much higher operating tolerances, gas engines just aren't, even "beefed" up gas engines with turbos.


RE: I'm patient
By dubyadubya on 9/21/2010 8:26:19 AM , Rating: 4
Only time will tell. I have not seen any info on the durability testing ford has done on this specific engine package but if its anything like what they did with the new 5.0 or 6.7 diesel it should hold up to anything. A single 5.0 was run on a dyno at WOT under full load for 40 days without fail. Ford also ran a dyno simulation of 62 Daytona 500's without a tear down. Engines were shock tested by making full dyno pulls followed by quick shutdowns and then injecting -20F coolant into the engine. This was repeated over and over. The 5.0 was so reliable ford only needed a few test mules. Following each test an engine was disassembled inspected and in most cases reassembled using the same components because everything was still in spec. The new 6.7 diesel was tested in the same or similar manner. I would guess the 3.5 was tested the same way. Info on the 5.0 http://www.mustang50magazine.com/techarticles/m5lp...


RE: I'm patient
By Mozee on 9/21/2010 5:01:40 PM , Rating: 2
Found some testing details for you, direct from Ford:

quote:
An all-new engine
Every Ford truck engine undergoes a tortuous testing program, and the EcoBoost truck engine was no exception.

“We’re testing this EcoBoost truck engine just as we would all of our other F-150 truck engines – we have exactly the same expectations and it has to pass all our truck durability and reliability tests,” said Kris Norman, powertrain operations manager. “From our standpoint, this is an all-new engine specifically designed and engineered for the F-150. Everything is validated to the higher stress levels and higher customer usage levels found in any F-150 engine.”

Three avenues that test and validate engines are computer analysis, laboratory testing and in-vehicle validation. For the 3.5-liter EcoBoost application in the 2011 F-150, that includes:

More than 1.5 million hours of analytical time

More than 13,000 hours of dynamometer testing, including more than 5,000 hours at full boost and more than 2,500 hours at or above 5,000 rpm; the dyno testing helps ensure durability in excess of 150,000 miles

More than 100,000 hours of vehicle test time encompassing the full range of potential customer operating conditions

All the tests together replicate more than 1.6 million miles of customer usage – the harshest-use customer. A customer profile reflecting extreme-use driving style, road types and vehicle usage, including maximum towing and payload situations, was developed to underpin the testing program.


RE: I'm patient
By dubyadubya on 9/21/2010 10:30:44 PM , Rating: 2
RE: I'm patient
By FITCamaro on 9/21/10, Rating: 0
RE: I'm patient
By weskurtz0081 on 9/21/2010 9:06:48 AM , Rating: 5
I think that's mainly because he is using anecdotal evidence to come to his conclusions about the entire company. I understand, it is classic consumer behavior, but it isn't the most accurate way to judge a company and its products.


RE: I'm patient
By FITCamaro on 9/22/2010 8:04:37 AM , Rating: 2
So if you have bad experience with a company time and time again, you continue to buy their products anyway? He wasn't saying no one should buy Ford, just that he wouldn't without seeing how long they last.


RE: I'm patient
By weskurtz0081 on 9/21/2010 9:07:41 AM , Rating: 5
Plus, how many Fords did he own? Why did he keep buying them if he kept "getting burned"? If I say I had the exact opposite experience, does that mean I am right and he is wrong?


RE: I'm patient
By Spuke on 9/21/2010 9:26:33 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
I love how a comment on his personal experiences over 40 years is downrated.
His experiences aren't the problem, IMO, it's that there's ALWAYS at least one of these comments. It's old. The company is obviously doing much better even the stats say so. How many people REALLY have problems with a car company's entire product line? Wouldn't two bad cars be enough to move on?


RE: I'm patient
By sprockkets on 9/21/2010 6:28:58 PM , Rating: 2
I love how a comment about a person's comment about 40 years is downrated.


"DailyTech is the best kept secret on the Internet." -- Larry Barber














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki