Boatman_FX4

Just wanted to add on here I've been doing researching on my 14' 5.0l running like complete S*** up here in colorado. Ive been here 3 days now and it still hasn't adjusted itself. I live in Oklahoma and am on vacation here in Colorado at 7,500 feet above sea level and the truck won't downshift when floored, the power when accelerating is cutting out a little its just disappointing to have a brand new truck that can't adjust to the elevation. Im glad i don't live up here but wish ford made it work better at higher elevations. My 11' Eco boost ran like a beast in Colorado and Wyoming! got like 22mpg all the time even driving the **** out of it. Only good thing about the Eco in my opinion is that the turbos love the air up here. Anyways I'm done bit****.

Thanks Guys

vozaday

That's the major downfall of an NA engine. You could try a KAM reset to allow the engine to learn the fuel trims to the elevation quicker.

HunterSmitty

Congrats on taking a valid point (that turbo'd vehicles perform better at altitude) and make people question your credibility within the same post.

Boatman_FX4

Not sure what you meant but if your being a dick then theres no need for that just giving my two cents. But hey what do i know about trucks...

Ssls6

Here is a graph on altitude HP loss between the two (turbo versus non-turbo). A lot of confusion comes from a few applications where you have no boost at sea level then add boost only at altitude. This is called a normalized engine and it has no loss. The ecoboost is NOT a normalized engine. It uses boost at sea level to achieve its high output thus it will also loose power at altitude, just not as fast.

Source is the book
Turbochargers
By Hugh MacInnes, Betty MacInnes

HunterSmitty

I'm not sure, but I'd love to see proof of an EB that can deliver 22MPG while having the **** driven out of it.

71RDRNR

Maybe he meant to say driving and pissing....

acadianbob

I don't think so. The FI was preceded by NA which means "naturally aspirated"; as in NO forced induction. I think he clearly meant Fuel Injection.

Think he is wrong on the power loss though . . .

pfbz

Not exactly... That would be true if the engine was using ALL available boost, and as altitude rose, the turbo's would be able to cram fewer oxygen molecules into the cylinders. But that's not how our engines work. Boost is managed and modulated by the PCM with input from various sensors, including ambient barometric pressure which closely corresponds with altitude. It becomes merely a software problem to adjust (increase) the boost as barometric pressure decreases until you hit the physical limit of the turbo's, knocking/pinging, or other engine longevity concerns.

It's not clear exactly how much compensation the PCM actually does based on barometric pressure without unlocking and reverse engineering Ford's PCM code and tables, but it is not nearly as simple as '1% loss per 1,000 ft.

But the short answer for the OP is 'The EcoBoost absolutely ROCKS at high altitude...' It leaves Raptors and F150's with the 6.2L's huffing and puffing in it's dust, let alone the 5.0 engine.

frieed

Ecoboost uses a MAP sensor, stands for manifold absolute pressure, as in not relative to atmospheric pressure. As long as the turbos have the capacity to maintain a constant MAP pressure, the HP should stay the same.