2011-12 Ecoboost vs. V8 5.0??
03-02-2013, 11:18 PM
#271
Only $700 per turbo
Hey RRskinner... you say that you don't trust Fords turbos!!!!! Well Ford does not build the turbos for the F150. Borg Warner supplies the turbos for the Ecoboost F150 and many other auto manufacturers around the world. It's safe to say that these turbos aren't crap and will last way past 200k miles. So once again, what was your point?? Ford didn't just find some old 3.5L and decide to slap turbos on it and say "Eureka" we have a new engine. Ford totally redesigned the 3.5L and used Diesel technology for the pistons,cylinders, rings, crank, main bearings, ect. Ford was considering 5-6 years ago making a 3.5L light duty Diesel but because of all the EPA restrictions shelved the project. Ford then decided to go with a 3.5L twin turbo gas engine and converted there research of a light diesel into a gas powered platform. This is why the Ecoboost is over built and will last. My extended family " Cousins" work at Ford in Dearborn Michigan. My Uncle retired after 35years with Ford. You need to realize that the Ecoboost was built to handle alot more stress than your average 3.5L
http://www.borgwarner.com/en/Company...2FFacts%2Easpx
http://www.borgwarner.com/en/Company...2FFacts%2Easpx
You might need this. I hope the eco delivers.
03-02-2013, 11:27 PM
#272
Meaner than ymeski56
Click to Enlarge
40-30671ON
Turbocharger - OEM New
$695
$200
More info
Monday
More info
12 Months
0
You might need this. I hope the eco delivers.
If you hope it delivers then why do you continually bash it? That's like saying you hope you get rich but saying you won't 
03-02-2013, 11:42 PM
#273
I believe the 3.5 is the way, the truth and the light. So when Ford claims you get more power, which is created with intake, compression, power and exhaust with a mix of 15 parts air and 1 part gas, by turbocharging, that is true. The smaller engine has less wear surface and less friction is created and as long as you don't use the turbos, you will get somewhat better gas mileage.
As I said before, the additional maintenance expense and costs of the turbo system has a break even of fricken forever...to never. So if you buy it, do it for whatever reason, but not to save money.
Other idiots claim it is not new technology because turbos have been around for a long time. My 1972 plane has turbos. I fly higher and faster, where there is no speed limit--I get it. In 1976 I was putting turbos in addition to the Super charger on a dragster--I get it. Dragster engine life is measured in minutes and what racers are doing to the engines is brutal
All I am trying to say are two things I consider factual. If you run more HP through an engine, it's life will be shorter. Back to airplanes for a second because those exact same engines have been around forever. You typically run the engines at 70%. Try running one at 100% non-stop and see what happens. Try over-boosting the turbos and see what happens.
Point two: Turbos are not new technology. Adjustable vein turbos are and no offense to Ford, but I don't trust the quality of the turbos they put in. In my plane it costs $3000 and more to rebuild one ray jay turbo. New they are $5000. The turbo system and the problems they are having is because it is new technology as a system and Ford is trying to re-engineer it because they are having problems. Quit making blanket statements and generalized arguments. If you claim that I am contradicting myself then detail out your argument. Just because you might fail to comprehend exactly what I am saying does not make my logic false. Pearls before swine!
As I said before, the additional maintenance expense and costs of the turbo system has a break even of fricken forever...to never. So if you buy it, do it for whatever reason, but not to save money.
Other idiots claim it is not new technology because turbos have been around for a long time. My 1972 plane has turbos. I fly higher and faster, where there is no speed limit--I get it. In 1976 I was putting turbos in addition to the Super charger on a dragster--I get it. Dragster engine life is measured in minutes and what racers are doing to the engines is brutal
All I am trying to say are two things I consider factual. If you run more HP through an engine, it's life will be shorter. Back to airplanes for a second because those exact same engines have been around forever. You typically run the engines at 70%. Try running one at 100% non-stop and see what happens. Try over-boosting the turbos and see what happens.
Point two: Turbos are not new technology. Adjustable vein turbos are and no offense to Ford, but I don't trust the quality of the turbos they put in. In my plane it costs $3000 and more to rebuild one ray jay turbo. New they are $5000. The turbo system and the problems they are having is because it is new technology as a system and Ford is trying to re-engineer it because they are having problems. Quit making blanket statements and generalized arguments. If you claim that I am contradicting myself then detail out your argument. Just because you might fail to comprehend exactly what I am saying does not make my logic false. Pearls before swine!
Now you can shut up because you are just like us ecoboost owning fools.
Btw, engine life is not tied to HP output, look at locomotives and big rig trucks. Engine life is determined based on how an engine is built or overbuilt for a given output. The ecoboost has a forged crank, connecting rods, and pistons. It is overbuilt just as much as the 5.0. So what you consider factual is in fact not.
Last edited by jejeosborne; 03-02-2013 at 11:55 PM.
03-02-2013, 11:58 PM
#274
Click to Enlarge
40-30671ON
Turbocharger - OEM New
$695
$200
More info
Monday
More info
12 Months
0
You might need this. I hope the eco delivers.
My boat 170ft Breaux Bay Craft I run has 7,800hp and runs 28+kts. We carry 380Lt (Long Tons) of above deck cargo. Its got (4) 3512B series CAT's. Each engine is Twin Turbo and we have almost 26,000hrs of HARD use on them without a turbo failure. Turbos are the most simple mechanical part, much like a turbine engine there is only a spinning shaft.
Lol I got this. I can install it myself, your so way off. Did you even READ my prior post????? Let me grab some pics seeing that I'm on my boat. Meantime who pays retail??? Click link below
http://pages.ebay.com/motors/link/?n...d=190798771849
03-03-2013, 12:03 AM
#275
Senior Member
I have 2 dogs.
The following users liked this post:
3.7 (03-03-2013)
03-03-2013, 12:14 AM
#276
I know this is off topic but.. These are pictures of our twin turbo 3512 Cat engines that are 9yrs old with 26,000 hrs of Extremely hard use here in oilfield.
#3 & #4 engine
#3 turbos
#1 & #2 engine
#3 & #4 engine
#3 turbos
#1 & #2 engine
03-03-2013, 12:18 AM
#278
Meaner than ymeski56
But that can't be possible
03-03-2013, 12:27 AM
#279
I sometimes think that all the oil our rig drills for is used to keep our boat running. We burn 380gal an hour at full WOT which is all this boat does. Crew Supply boats have 2 speeds: Stop & WOT.. LOL rig is always in a.hurry for something. We burn about 22,000 gal of fuel every 3 days.
03-03-2013, 01:45 AM
#280
Meaner than ymeski56
I sometimes think that all the oil our rig drills for is used to keep our boat running. We burn 380gal an hour at full WOT which is all this boat does. Crew Supply boats have 2 speeds: Stop & WOT.. LOL rig is always in a.hurry for something. We burn about 22,000 gal of fuel every 3 days.
I thought we burned a lot at a truckload a month average. Winter and harvest we burn more but that's expected. Forgive my lack of knowledge but what kind of boat are you talking about? I'm in ag, not oil so I'm not in tune with all the terms
