Buellracer

Ok everybody, I've seen SO many threads get jacked by people wanting to start a 5.0 vs Eco around here. To try and keep some of the other threads on topic, if you got somethin' on your chest or you just wanna brag, fight or have a 5.0 vs Eco throwdown then bring it!
I'll start by saying my Ecoboost is THE FASTEST stock pickup truck I've ever been in! I even traded in my 2010 corvette on it and I think this truck has got some serious *****!
Now what's up?!!!

medicff0879

Me too!! I traded my 2009 Pontiac G8 GT in on this truck (for a multitude of reasons) and it is one fast *** 5300+lb 4x4 truck!! Of course, according to some of the morons here, a low 13, upper 12 second 4 door car isn't fast in comparision to an impractical 400lb crotch rocket, or 2 door corvette, 370z, or whatever else small car you can think of!!

BlueOval84

I think it's more of a family divided than it is a sibling rivalry!

09FordFX4

They're both great engines. I myself would prefer the 5.0 over the Eco, but I'm a huge 5.0 fan.

Snowflake

I have the eco but have driven the 5.0 and the 3.7. Love my eco for the quiet. Love the 5.0 for the sound. But oh boy that little 3.7 she is a screamer!

my67falcon

I hate that the 3.7l has been so overshadowed. Over 300hp from a NA 6 is awesome to say the least but so soon do we forget. It was not that long ago that mid 200 hp in a gas V8 truck was the norm and now we have an entry level 6 banger truck that can tow enough to appease the majority of 1/2 truck owners, scoots down the road rather quickly and gets great gas mileage to boot.

medicff0879

I looked for an answer to this question last night, and found most of what I was looking for. However, wanna confirm here.

Why is it that the 5.0L in the Mustang makes 412hp and 390 lbft torque, yet, they put it in a big a** truck and reduce the hp by almost 50 and the torque by 10? Now, with that question, I found that the reason they did this was to put the powerband in more tune with the needs of a truck/ vs. the mustang, but, did they really need to kill 50hp doing it? Not to mention decrease the torque? I honestly, would have considered the 5.0 over the Eco for the whole "V8" experience of owning a truck, however, I saw the torque numbers and couldn't resist the Eco.

Any thoughts as to why they couldn't get more out of the 5.0L after putting in the F 150?

BLU4TJW

Purely strategy. They needed the investment in the Ecoboost to be both accepted by bureaucratic legislation and the buying public. Getting the consumer to leave their trusty V8's was a huge gamble. But they spec'd out the motors accordingly, giving us two amazing engines. Yet, the EB comes across as more desirable for the 'need for the most power' crowd and the 'need for the most mpg' crowd. As much as the EB can pull like a mule, into the boost, and those mpg's plummet quick. But Ford knows how we use our trucks better than we do. Sure, alot of us work our trucks, towing, hauling, playing, etc. But Ford focus groups also tell them that most people use theses big honkin' trucks for commuting, 'hauling' groceries, and carting little ones to soccer practice. Those are the people who will see that EB shine. Power when needed, lots to brag about, and respectable fuel numbers for a truck.

In a couple of years, they may add a couple of turbos on that beauty 5.0, plop it into the Raptor, and voila! These forums will be filled with 6.2 vs. 5.0 TT banter.

TurboSalsa

Maybe it's a marketing strategy but more likely it's two completely different applications. The 5.0 in the GT doesn't make 412 hp until 6500 rpm, that's way too high strung for truck use. Nobody wants to be revving the nuts off of their engine in a truck.

medicff0879

LOL, revving the nuts outta their trucks huh LOL!! Well put, that is kinda what I gathered was the answer. I didn't find an article (nor research further) into where the GT makes its 412hp. I just read in the motortrend review that the motor was tuned more appropriately for a truck application. I just wonder why they had to kill so much power, yet they are putting it into a MUCH bigger/heavier vehicle? Could they not have kept the hp range up, as well as the torque and just shifted the power band down further in the RPM, without losing 50hp?