backtop

Print 89 comment(s) - last by mindless1.. on Jun 14 at 2:03 PM

Ford EcoBoost V6
High gas prices and a potent turbocharged engine drive V6 sales for Ford's best seller

What good is a big ‘old domestic full-size pickup truck without a V8 engine under the hood? Half-ton pickups and V8 engines go together like peanut butter and jelly or Smith & Wesson. But with gas prices putting the squeeze on many consumers, those who can actually afford to purchase brand new vehicles are trying to be more economical. 

We already reported in late April that Ford is seeing incredible demand for its new EcoBoost V6 engine in the Ford F-150. Reports pegged the EcoBoost V6 engine option as taking 36 percent of all F-150 sales.

However, that figure jumped to 41 percent for the month of May. In addition, the 3.7-liter V6 engine option captured 14 percent, bringing the total haul for V6 engines to over half of all F-150 sales for the month.

According to PickupTrucks.com, the increasing interest in Ford's V6 engine options should come as no surprise given the current state of gas pries in the United States. However, the phenomena is still amazing when you consider that the take rate for V6 engines in competing Toyota Tundra and GMC Sierra/Chevrolet Silverado full size pickups is in the single-digit range.

Ford’s 3.7-liter V6 engine generates 300hp @ 6,500 rpm and 275 lb-ft of torque at 4,500 rpm. It is EPA rated at 17 mpg in the city and 23 mpg on the highway. The popular EcoBoost V6 makes 365hp @ 5,000 rpm and 420 lb-ft of torque at a low 2,500 rpm. It has EPA ratings of 16/22. 

Both engines run on regular unleaded gasoline, which is a plus with high gasoline prices.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
I'm curious as to the ACTUAL mileage
By steven975 on 6/2/2011 11:13:57 AM , Rating: 1
I guess I was under the impression the Ecoboost actually yielded both improved performance and increased economy.

This does not appear to be the case, as the EPA milage is lower...but with a turbo-V6, will people achieve even worse mileage in real life?




RE: I'm curious as to the ACTUAL mileage
By steven975 on 6/2/2011 11:15:00 AM , Rating: 2
You know, because they'll floor it all the time. I know since going with a forced induction system, I do that and my mileage went down.


By AssBall on 6/2/2011 11:39:17 AM , Rating: 2
I don't think you understand how flat the torque curve is on the Ecoboost. No need to floor it when you get max torque at 2500 rpm. It's not like a Lancer...


RE: I'm curious as to the ACTUAL mileage
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 6/2/2011 11:33:19 AM , Rating: 4
The EcoBoost mileage is better compared to the V8 which is rated at 15/21 and has less power/torque.


RE: I'm curious as to the ACTUAL mileage
By Samus on 6/2/2011 12:21:52 PM , Rating: 4
It's not all that surprising the V6 take rate is so high. These V6s have more power than all the 5.0 F150s of the 80's and 90's had and what most of the 5.4's had in the past decade.

Direct injection is amazing. Which is why Toyota and GM aren't selling V6s in their mid-sized trucks. Their V6 offerings are weak. Which is too bad, because the Tundra V8 is awful, being plagued with recalls, electronic failures, exhaust manifold cracks and cam reliability problems. What I find most interesting about the Tundra V8 is that is in a North American market exclusive, built here in the land of the V8, and it is still awful. It isn't like Toyota has no experience with V8s either. They cleaned up in F1 back in the day, and even made a pushrod V8 for Nascar in the 90's that was unbeatable for the sole season they competed. I guess that technology never trickled down to the consumer market.


RE: I'm curious as to the ACTUAL mileage
By YashBudini on 6/2/11, Rating: 0
RE: I'm curious as to the ACTUAL mileage
By LRonaldHubbs on 6/2/2011 2:49:57 PM , Rating: 2
Sure looks like plastic to me...


RE: I'm curious as to the ACTUAL mileage
By YashBudini on 6/2/11, Rating: 0
RE: I'm curious as to the ACTUAL mileage
By Samus on 6/3/2011 1:25:24 AM , Rating: 2
F1 has used composite intake and EXHAUST manifolds for two decades.

Even the old 80's Mustangs toyed with plastic manifolds. However, they warped over time and occasionally cracked, leading to parts getting sucked into the engine. It wasn't common, but it did happen enough for them to stop producing them.

Of course, we've come a long way in the consumer market since the 80's. Most vehicles now have composite intake manifolds because of its superior weather resistance, wear capacity and thermal properties, and it is cheaper than aluminum. Sometimes it's even dual stage so the internal runners shorten at higher RPM to increase flow (make more power, less torque) and go to long runners at low RPM (more torque, less power) something that simply can't be accomplished with an aluminum design.

It's only a matter of time before many components like suspension are made of composites. Fiberglass is far superior to steel (mostly weight savings, but they never sag and the spring rate will never change over time.) I look forward to a composite cylinder head, though. That'll be the day!


By YashBudini on 6/3/2011 12:06:52 PM , Rating: 2
RE: I'm curious as to the ACTUAL mileage
By Manch on 6/2/2011 11:51:40 AM , Rating: 3
Compared to a V8 which it's an alternative to, it does get better mileage albeit by 1mpg. While the base V6 gets 1mpg better its towing capacity is a lot less. Also look at the torque/rpm. It obtains max torque at a lower rev which is great for well...towing. One caveat tho, the superior towing capacity compared to the V8 is only if you have the tow package & 3.73 gears. Otherwise it's the same.

V6 300 hp @ 6500/275 lb-ft tq @ 4500/tows:5800/3.73
5.0 360 hp @ 5500/380 lb-ft tq @ 4250/tows:9800/3.55~3.73
ECOBOOST 365 @ 5000/420 @ 2500/tows:11300(3.73) 9800(3.55)

If you drive it like a truck and not a race car then yeah, you'll get better mileage. It's not like the turbo is always in use. Casual driving it wont be a factor. I test drove one, and I have to say I'm impressed. Being that it's a first year run, personally I'd hold off, but that's because i never by a year 1 car. I wait for the kinks to get worked out(Theres always somthing).I have a turbo'd car and a twinscrew supercharg'd car and as long as I'm not dropping the pedal my mileage stays pretty much stock.

Ford's no stranger to factory SC/turbos. They build them pretty beeefy to ensure longevity is not an issue.

Ford's spec sheet for the engines:
http://www.ford.com/trucks/f150/specifications/tow...


RE: I'm curious as to the ACTUAL mileage
By M4gery on 6/2/2011 12:06:26 PM , Rating: 1
I just dont see the point in this if its not more efficient than the V8 when actually doing work. But then, I never really cared much for Fords in the first place.


By bah12 on 6/2/2011 12:19:21 PM , Rating: 3
Then you don't need/use a truck to tow. The torque curve is very similar to a diesel, and that lends itself very well to towing. Just like a PC is not all about the Ghz a truck is not all about the HP. Low end torque is a BIG deal to people that actually tow with it.


RE: I'm curious as to the ACTUAL mileage
By Manch on 6/2/2011 12:44:30 PM , Rating: 3
Well 420lb/ft @ 2500 vs 380lb/ft @ 4250. That's ~10% more Tq @ 2/3 the rpm. That means pulling the same weight, the ecoboost will be able to get up to speed quicker and easier, so it will burn less gas getting up to speed, so it is more efficient.


RE: I'm curious as to the ACTUAL mileage
By lagomorpha on 6/2/2011 1:20:43 PM , Rating: 2
You can't really directly calculate fuel economy based on torque curves. If you get more torque at lower rpm but use a turbo you're going to have more fuel/air in each cylinder and have to take that into account. What you want to look for is the "Brake Specific Fuel Consumption" graph and plug in typical driving conditions. Brake specific fuel consumption does usually improve during most driving for engines tuned for lower rpm power but there are more factors involved.


By Manch on 6/3/2011 9:46:47 AM , Rating: 2
I'm not, I was just trying to keep it simple. :D


RE: I'm curious as to the ACTUAL mileage
By shaidorsai on 6/2/2011 12:12:29 PM , Rating: 2
How do you figure 365 hp vs 300 for a 1 mpg reduction isnt an improvement? 365 hp is a big step up for 300...and the torque number is huge too.

All I can say is I wish the 3.7L v6 was available back in 2006 when I bought my F150. The 4.6L V8 makes just over 200HP and only gets around 17 mpg on the highway. The 23 reported here would have made me very happy and is a solid gain in both performance and efficiency.


By Manch on 6/2/2011 12:34:03 PM , Rating: 2
YOu're truck was also tested using the old EPA calculations, so it's mileage is a bit less using the new ones.


"Death Is Very Likely The Single Best Invention Of Life" -- Steve Jobs











botimage
Copyright 2013 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki