View Poll Results: Are V8 Half Tons On The Way Out?
Yes
66
24.54%
No
203
75.46%
Voters: 269. You may not vote on this poll
Are The V8's Days Numbered?
Senior Member
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 289
Likes: 35
Not hardly IMO. With all the technology and greater amount of moving parts comes decreased reliability. If there is anything truck guys want more than anything out of their truck is to know that it is reliable! Especially pulling an 11k lbs trailer down the road.
If I needed a new motor in my truck today and the only Ford F150 V8 motor I could choose was the 5.0, I'd go buy a Chevy LS6 Crate motor. I'll probably get blasted for that.
It's not that I don't think that the 5.0 and similar engines (3.7 V6 and 3.5 EB) aren't reliable, but do I think they are as realiable as my 5.4 3v or a Ford 6.2 2v V8? Hell no!
For me, the simpilar the better. I pull a 7k lbs Enclosed Motorcycle Trailer with 3.73 and 33" tall tires. Even going up the hills of the panhandle the truck is not lacking for power. When my 5.4 can do everything like that just fine, then I don't see the point in making the engine more complicated just to have it make a little more power. You could do some headwork and cams and get the 5.4 to 5.0 numbers easy. That would have been a better option for Ford to take than a DOHC Ti-VCT 5.0 IMO. Thats why I like the 6.2 above all the other Ford engine options.
It's still to early in the new engine line up lifespan to see how reliable they are; but I would bet money that over the lifetime all the other engine options will cost you more in maintenance/repair or just flat out die before the 5.4 3v and the 6.2 2v. Just my opinion.
Edit: I'll also add, I think we will see a shrinkage in the cast iron "old technolgy" for a small time, but I think people will realize that the decreased reliability and increased maintenance costs isn't worth the extra power.
If I needed a new motor in my truck today and the only Ford F150 V8 motor I could choose was the 5.0, I'd go buy a Chevy LS6 Crate motor. I'll probably get blasted for that.
It's not that I don't think that the 5.0 and similar engines (3.7 V6 and 3.5 EB) aren't reliable, but do I think they are as realiable as my 5.4 3v or a Ford 6.2 2v V8? Hell no!
For me, the simpilar the better. I pull a 7k lbs Enclosed Motorcycle Trailer with 3.73 and 33" tall tires. Even going up the hills of the panhandle the truck is not lacking for power. When my 5.4 can do everything like that just fine, then I don't see the point in making the engine more complicated just to have it make a little more power. You could do some headwork and cams and get the 5.4 to 5.0 numbers easy. That would have been a better option for Ford to take than a DOHC Ti-VCT 5.0 IMO. Thats why I like the 6.2 above all the other Ford engine options.
It's still to early in the new engine line up lifespan to see how reliable they are; but I would bet money that over the lifetime all the other engine options will cost you more in maintenance/repair or just flat out die before the 5.4 3v and the 6.2 2v. Just my opinion.
Edit: I'll also add, I think we will see a shrinkage in the cast iron "old technolgy" for a small time, but I think people will realize that the decreased reliability and increased maintenance costs isn't worth the extra power.
Ford went to DOHC because it is more flexible. The 5.0 makes more power and gets better fuel economy than the 5.4 did. The 5.4 was at the end of its design life and apparently Ford saw no reason to continue pouring money into an engine that was already maxed out. Also, people tend to forget that by 2010 the 5.4 was in its 14th year of service, I would expect nothing less than utter reliability for an engine that's been in use that long.
It's still to early in the new engine line up lifespan to see how reliable they are; but I would bet money that over the lifetime all the other engine options will cost you more in maintenance/repair or just flat out die before the 5.4 3v and the 6.2 2v. Just my opinion.
I was playing with Excel today and doing some thinking. I read a lot of nay-sayers calling the longevity of the EcoBoost and 5.0 into question because they're not "truck engines" as in they have DOHC, turbos and an intercooler (EB), and the sin of all sins in truck engines - aluminum blocks. I know I've read several times that "these new engines just won't make it to 250,000 miles, period" so I decided to evaluate that claim from an economic standpoint.
If you were to drive a 2V 5.4l engine (which seems to be the most long-lived variety based on what I've read) for 250k miles on the highway at 16 mpg, it would require 15,625 gallons of gas. At an average price (over the next 10 years) of $4/gal, that works out to $62,500 spent on gas over the life of the vehicle.
If you were to drive a comparably equipped (4x4 SCrew) EB truck, which I chose because it seems to get picked on the most for expensive to fix, at 21 mpg highway it would require 11,904 gallons of gas. At the same $4 average that would cost $47,620 over the life of the vehicle.
The money saved in gas adds up to about $14,900 which, if I remember correctly, would be about the cost of buying a brand new EcoBoost engine off the shelf.
Conclusion: Only if your 2V 5.4l goes 250,000 miles with nothing but preventative maintenance and the competing EcoBoost blows its engine do you come out on top financially. The numbers for the 5.0 are even more favorable. Yes, the new engines may not be *as* durable and long-lived as the old ones but they do so much better fuel economy-wise that the total cost of ownership over the life of the truck is lower.
If you were to drive a 2V 5.4l engine (which seems to be the most long-lived variety based on what I've read) for 250k miles on the highway at 16 mpg, it would require 15,625 gallons of gas. At an average price (over the next 10 years) of $4/gal, that works out to $62,500 spent on gas over the life of the vehicle.
If you were to drive a comparably equipped (4x4 SCrew) EB truck, which I chose because it seems to get picked on the most for expensive to fix, at 21 mpg highway it would require 11,904 gallons of gas. At the same $4 average that would cost $47,620 over the life of the vehicle.
The money saved in gas adds up to about $14,900 which, if I remember correctly, would be about the cost of buying a brand new EcoBoost engine off the shelf.
Conclusion: Only if your 2V 5.4l goes 250,000 miles with nothing but preventative maintenance and the competing EcoBoost blows its engine do you come out on top financially. The numbers for the 5.0 are even more favorable. Yes, the new engines may not be *as* durable and long-lived as the old ones but they do so much better fuel economy-wise that the total cost of ownership over the life of the truck is lower.
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 606
Likes: 37
From: Texas
I wonder if people thought the 4.6 and 5.4 would would be garbage when they came out, since they replaced some very reliable engines? 4.9 v6, 5.0 and 5.8.....
Theres a post going on about how people would love to have a diesel F150, howd they would trade today if it was available. Also not hard to find people saying the EB isnt reliable because of the turbos.....doesnt make sense to me.
Theres a post going on about how people would love to have a diesel F150, howd they would trade today if it was available. Also not hard to find people saying the EB isnt reliable because of the turbos.....doesnt make sense to me.
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 823
Likes: 75
From: Canada
I agree that people were probably skeptical about the 4.6 and the 5.4 when they first came out. Every new engine has to prove itself in the real world by real people and not by undergoing these "non-bias" manufacturer comparison tests that you can watch on youtube 
.
.
Better OUT then IN
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,343
Likes: 255
From: South Florida (Ft. Lauderdale area)
I wonder if people thought the 4.6 and 5.4 would would be garbage when they came out, since they replaced some very reliable engines? 4.9 v6, 5.0 and 5.8.....
Theres a post going on about how people would love to have a diesel F150, howd they would trade today if it was available. Also not hard to find people saying the EB isnt reliable because of the turbos.....doesnt make sense to me.
Theres a post going on about how people would love to have a diesel F150, howd they would trade today if it was available. Also not hard to find people saying the EB isnt reliable because of the turbos.....doesnt make sense to me.
Everyone has their own opinion, and each and every one of them is right... it's their opinion after all.
For example, I've posted about what is the better way to level the front - and got dozens of opinions - some say Billetein shocks some say spacers. BOTH methods have very strong opinions as to "my way is the best". Again, not trying to start something here but this is what always happens.
We've heard about Ecos and 5.0s failing but most of them are great. Let's face it, not sure what the percentages are but, I'm sure a few percent of all F150 owners are on these forums - the vast majority are not.
This is a great place to share information however, it usually ends up with people complaining about something.
All anyone can do is listen to all the thoughts and opinions, ignore the rude nasty ones and make your own judgment.
Senior Member
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 289
Likes: 35
I wonder if people thought the 4.6 and 5.4 would would be garbage when they came out, since they replaced some very reliable engines? 4.9 v6, 5.0 and 5.8.....
Theres a post going on about how people would love to have a diesel F150, howd they would trade today if it was available. Also not hard to find people saying the EB isnt reliable because of the turbos.....doesnt make sense to me.
Theres a post going on about how people would love to have a diesel F150, howd they would trade today if it was available. Also not hard to find people saying the EB isnt reliable because of the turbos.....doesnt make sense to me.
I admit, the new generation of F150 engines has more than a few step changes and they are a bit different than we're used to but as time goes on I'm sure we will wonder how we ever got along with the old engines. I have faith that there are smart people working on cars we actually want to drive and that each generation of cars and trucks will be better than the one that preceeded it.
I Like Tires
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,828
Likes: 250
From: Texas
Maybe the EcoBoost won't be as reliable as your 5.4 or the 6.2 or maybe it will. Who knows. No one can say for sure how an engine will hold up after 15 years, but saying one will be less reliable because it has more moving parts is bunk.
Ford went to DOHC because it is more flexible. The 5.0 makes more power and gets better fuel economy than the 5.4 did. The 5.4 was at the end of its design life and apparently Ford saw no reason to continue pouring money into an engine that was already maxed out. Also, people tend to forget that by 2010 the 5.4 was in its 14th year of service, I would expect nothing less than utter reliability for an engine that's been in use that long.
Ford went to DOHC because it is more flexible. The 5.0 makes more power and gets better fuel economy than the 5.4 did. The 5.4 was at the end of its design life and apparently Ford saw no reason to continue pouring money into an engine that was already maxed out. Also, people tend to forget that by 2010 the 5.4 was in its 14th year of service, I would expect nothing less than utter reliability for an engine that's been in use that long.
However we will have to agree to disagree that an engine with more moving parts is less realiable. It's more parts in an engine that CAN fail that in order to operate the vehicle you CAN'T have fail. There are also more sensors and computers controlling every little detail of the engine, such as Ti-VCT.
And when you can see Corvettes, Trans Ams, and Camaros with LS1 engines for sale on eBay/Craigslist with 100k+ miles and still running strong; you know they did something right with that engine. Those are cars that you know were probably ridden hard and put away wet. I will be interested in seeing if in a few years the same can be said for the 5.0 Mustang. I hope I'm wrong, because if I am, then we have found the Holy Grail of engine technology! Power+MPG+Reliability! Past experience with this line of technology however has left me skeptical
Regardless what we both can agree on is only time will tell.
Curmudgeon
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 411
Likes: 3
From: Central Indiana
And I don't think the 4.6 and 5.4 became "garbage" over time, but Ford's engineers apparently came to the conclusion that they had reached the end of the road with that design and that meeting future emissions and fuel economy standards would be difficult with that design. So, we have new engines once again.
P.S. The 4.9 was an inline 6 (I-6), not a V-6. Frankly, I wish there were more I-6 engines on the market as they generally make more torque than a V-6 with the same displacement. But, the long block of an I-6 engine is harder to package inside a car than a V-6, so most of them have disappeared from the automotive landscape.
Member
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 78
Likes: 10
There will always be v8's out there, but they are going to be completely different than anything we have now. We really need to take a page from Europe and start using diesel's. With the ecoboost and all these new "high power small displacement" engines all they are doing is take the diesel idea of direct injection as well as slightly higher compression ratios and turbocharging to up the efficiency when we could have just used diesels in the first place. They might be slightly higher priced than a regular 4.6/5.4/6.2/5.0 motor, but the ecoboost are as well and people don't seem might paying that premium. Diesel prices are a bit higher, but you also get a much better mpg. Hell my 97 dodge ram 2500 would get an easy 23-25 mpg with a city/highway mix and that was making 550hp and 1150tq.
Senior Member
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 289
Likes: 35
I'm not trying to sound like the 5.0 and others are unreliable. I think they are great engines, I'm actually as eager as a kid on christmas to test drive my uncles 5.0 lariat when we go to see the family for christmas.
However we will have to agree to disagree that an engine with more moving parts is less realiable. It's more parts in an engine that CAN fail that in order to operate the vehicle you CAN'T have fail. There are also more sensors and computers controlling every little detail of the engine, such as Ti-VCT.
And when you can see Corvettes, Trans Ams, and Camaros with LS1 engines for sale on eBay/Craigslist with 100k+ miles and still running strong; you know they did something right with that engine. Those are cars that you know were probably ridden hard and put away wet. I will be interested in seeing if in a few years the same can be said for the 5.0 Mustang. I hope I'm wrong, because if I am, then we have found the Holy Grail of engine technology! Power+MPG+Reliability! Past experience with this line of technology however has left me skeptical
I remember that thread, I believe I posted on it. Very well written and a very innovative perspective on the subject matter.
Regardless what we both can agree on is only time will tell.
However we will have to agree to disagree that an engine with more moving parts is less realiable. It's more parts in an engine that CAN fail that in order to operate the vehicle you CAN'T have fail. There are also more sensors and computers controlling every little detail of the engine, such as Ti-VCT.
And when you can see Corvettes, Trans Ams, and Camaros with LS1 engines for sale on eBay/Craigslist with 100k+ miles and still running strong; you know they did something right with that engine. Those are cars that you know were probably ridden hard and put away wet. I will be interested in seeing if in a few years the same can be said for the 5.0 Mustang. I hope I'm wrong, because if I am, then we have found the Holy Grail of engine technology! Power+MPG+Reliability! Past experience with this line of technology however has left me skeptical
I remember that thread, I believe I posted on it. Very well written and a very innovative perspective on the subject matter.
Regardless what we both can agree on is only time will tell.
My 300 I6 I just bought has 223k miles on it, it has been well maintained and should go for another 100k if I'm lucky, but it gets 10-12 mpg city. At $4/gal this will eat you alive whether the engine starts every time or not.
Turbocharging, direct injection, and DOHC probably don't make sense at $1.50 a gallon, but it's unlikely gas prices will ever be that low again.
Ford could continue to make old school cast iron big block V8's for durability's sake, but the F150 is a big moneymaker and I don't think they want to see truck sales fall off again like they did in 2008. Whether for work or for play, everyone wants good gas mileage and Ford is just doing what they need to to cover all their bases.