New to Eco, What to do
#22
Senior Member
Change Mine to
I change my 2011 f-150 xtr whit 5.0 for FX4 whit luxury package Ecoboost.
My 5.0 take less gas then my Ecoboost but i love the power of ecoboost .
i put 5star tune 94 perf/tow inside and it s a beast.
If i would have to change another time for sure i will go whit th EB.
My 5.0 take less gas then my Ecoboost but i love the power of ecoboost .
i put 5star tune 94 perf/tow inside and it s a beast.
If i would have to change another time for sure i will go whit th EB.
#23
Senior Member
true, I for one bought it for the towing power, summer hauling my 26 foot camper with 4wheeler in the bed and winter a snowmobile trailer, I was looking at half ton with a little bit more power than my 2004 5.3 silverado, it did fine towing but it was hard on it, I felt like I was raping the poor truck when towing my toys up and down the northwest mountains, so the ecoboost came out and I knew that was the way I had to go. There is no better feeling going up a incline with a big *** trailer doing 60 and the truck is barely over 3000 rpm and the turbos are just whistling.
#24
Senior Member
Turbos don't necessarily put more strain on an engine; your presumption only applies if you are putting a blower or turbo on a vehicle that didn't come with it. A purpose-built turbocharged engine is designed specifically to handle the conditions created under boost.
IMHO, the American prejudice against turbocharged engines is due to cars like the Daytona Turbo, built by American auto makers in the 80's, which were just badly designed engines, and were horrible examples of boost technology. (The Daytona had an oil-cooled turbo, built with very small oil galleys, so the turbo overheated, and if you weren't religious about oil changes, the top end would blow up when the galleys got plugged. Hence the engines typically didn't last 50,000 miles.)
The technology has been around for decades, and is perfectly capable of lasting if it is built well.
Last edited by Rider; 10-15-2012 at 09:51 PM.
#26
#27
Batteries Not Included
I just recently sold my 11 5.0 for a 12 eco, with intent of using as a daily driver. I average aroung 40k miles a year. So I'm hoping this eco will hold up. Ive read thru lots of threads on here and after listening to everybody it should do 200k with issue.
My question is what can i do now to help insure that. Not sure I want to put a tune on it, but wonder if it would be helpful long term?
Any suggestions would be helpful. As far as MPG which was a factor for going to ecoboost. Its better than my 5.0 hwy 19 compared to 17.5 in town they seem to be about same. Pretty happy about that.
Thanks
My question is what can i do now to help insure that. Not sure I want to put a tune on it, but wonder if it would be helpful long term?
Any suggestions would be helpful. As far as MPG which was a factor for going to ecoboost. Its better than my 5.0 hwy 19 compared to 17.5 in town they seem to be about same. Pretty happy about that.
Thanks
#28
Senior Member
My truck will likely have 60k at that point
#29
You've also got to remember that the forum is a place where a lot of people come to bitch and complain about poor mileage and a "55 mph shudder" so they can be part of the cool crowd. Enjoy your truck and don't worry about any issues until they present themselves. I've got an '11 EB FX4 and haven't had any of the problems that people here cry about. It's been a perfect truck and I tow a 5500lb trailer every weekend during the summer. Already plenty of power, no need for drivetrain mods.
#30
Audi/VW has been building single and twin turbo engines for better than 20 years, and these cars easily go 300,000 plus if you maintain them. The 1.8t can be modded from 150 to 300 hp and still last 200,000 with no work to the bottom end.
Turbos don't necessarily put more strain on an engine; your presumption only applies if you are putting a blower or turbo on a vehicle that didn't come with it. A purpose-built turbocharged engine is designed specifically to handle the conditions created under boost.
IMHO, the American prejudice against turbocharged engines is due to cars like the Daytona Turbo, built by American auto makers in the 80's, which were just badly designed engines, and were horrible examples of boost technology. (The Daytona had an oil-cooled turbo, built with very small oil galleys, so the turbo overheated, and if you weren't religious about oil changes, the top end would blow up when the galleys got plugged. Hence the engines typically didn't last 50,000 miles.)
The technology has been around for decades, and is perfectly capable of lasting if it is built well.
Turbos don't necessarily put more strain on an engine; your presumption only applies if you are putting a blower or turbo on a vehicle that didn't come with it. A purpose-built turbocharged engine is designed specifically to handle the conditions created under boost.
IMHO, the American prejudice against turbocharged engines is due to cars like the Daytona Turbo, built by American auto makers in the 80's, which were just badly designed engines, and were horrible examples of boost technology. (The Daytona had an oil-cooled turbo, built with very small oil galleys, so the turbo overheated, and if you weren't religious about oil changes, the top end would blow up when the galleys got plugged. Hence the engines typically didn't last 50,000 miles.)
The technology has been around for decades, and is perfectly capable of lasting if it is built well.
The following 6 users liked this post by TonyB.:
EcoboostKev (02-17-2013),
geno51 (02-16-2013),
Jammer90 (05-25-2014),
linkin_park_453 (02-16-2013),
zach92r (02-17-2013),
and 1 others liked this post.