ford newb towing question
11-12-2014, 06:34 AM
#21
The 5.0 does a good job towing at max load in the hills. I just towed 500 miles this weekend with a 5.0 2013 scsb with 3.55 gears and 1800lb payload. The trailer was at about 7500lbs and that is right at max per ford and it was a gooseneck trailer. I pulled a 2 mile 5% grade starting at 40mph and by about the 1mile point I was backing off throttle and sitting at 70 mph at which speed I crested the hill. The truck accelerated easily in 4th up that hill and several other long steep grades on the route never dropped below 4th and usally was in 5th or 6th.
The 5.0 with the 6 speed tranny is a great towing truck and would easily pass the new standards with far more on the hitch than ford rates it for. The key is the tranny which let's the engine really find its sweet spot and stay there no matter the load or road.
The 5.0 with the 6 speed tranny is a great towing truck and would easily pass the new standards with far more on the hitch than ford rates it for. The key is the tranny which let's the engine really find its sweet spot and stay there no matter the load or road.
11-12-2014, 07:02 AM
#22
Mine is just under 1800 lbs it's an stx super cab 4x4. I think max rated for the engine and cab is 1860 and mine is just under 1800 with the options and such. It drops to level in the rear while hooked up, from being up in the back empty. The truck really handles it well and rides very nice.
11-12-2014, 02:29 PM
#23
Seriously. You are saying that the only measure of a desirable towing engine is low end torque. I think that the criteria that you are using to determine what is or is not a good towing engine is simply not broad enough, and I can prove it;
The FORD 6.2 which you both state is an inferior engine, is an F250 engine borrowed into the F150. The 3.5EB is a Ford Taurus engine borrowed into an F150. To me, the 6.2 isn't just a better engine, it is infinitely better engine.
The FORD 6.2 which you both state is an inferior engine, is an F250 engine borrowed into the F150. The 3.5EB is a Ford Taurus engine borrowed into an F150. To me, the 6.2 isn't just a better engine, it is infinitely better engine.
11-13-2014, 05:47 PM
#25
Lol read your "proof". Its the worst argument EVER..... "The 6.2 is a better motor because they use it in the F250. The Ecoboost sux because they use it in the Taurus" not a shred of "proof" that you claim to be laying down in the post, just a ridiculous argument that lacks even a shred of intellegence. The 6.2 started in 2011 in both the f150 and f250 so it is not an "f250 engine borrowed into an f150" its a shared engine. Keep in mind that i am not claiming either engine is superior, ive never driven a 6.2
Last edited by king nothing; 11-13-2014 at 06:15 PM.
11-13-2014, 06:17 PM
#26
FORD is stating it for you, me and everyone else to see. The 6.2 is a purpose built truck engine found in the F250 and is made to take the kind of use and abuse that an F250 is expected to survive. The ecoboost is a car engine designed specifically for the FORD Taurus and now being touted as the engine of choice in the F150. Honestly, if the ecoboost is so much better than the 6.2 than why is FORD not using it in the F250. Some people are so bold as to say that the ecoboost is in many ways superior to the Powerstroke diesel so why is the ecoboost not in the F350.
The ecoboost is a CAR engine built specifically for CARS. Mind you it is a good car engine and it definitely has its merits but it is a CAR engine none the less. So is the 5.0 for that matter but you don't hear the 5.0 guys whining and crying.
Of the 3 engines available in the F150 FORD choose to put only 1 of those in the F250 and that is the 6.2. This decision was no doubt made by people who are a heck of a lot smarter that you and I but you seem to having trouble coming to terms with that. For Pete's sake FORD built these engines and put them where they belong.
Honestly, what the heck is wrong with you.
FORD built these engines, they know where they belong, the 6.2 is a heavy truck engine and the ecoboost is a car/ F150 engine. This does not mean that the ecoboost isn't a good engine but she ain't no 6.2!
I NEVER said the ecoboost sucks, I just stated that the ecoboost is not the better engine. I myself prefer the 5.0 but it is in no way better than the 6.2.
The ecoboost is a CAR engine built specifically for CARS. Mind you it is a good car engine and it definitely has its merits but it is a CAR engine none the less. So is the 5.0 for that matter but you don't hear the 5.0 guys whining and crying.
Of the 3 engines available in the F150 FORD choose to put only 1 of those in the F250 and that is the 6.2. This decision was no doubt made by people who are a heck of a lot smarter that you and I but you seem to having trouble coming to terms with that. For Pete's sake FORD built these engines and put them where they belong.
Honestly, what the heck is wrong with you.
FORD built these engines, they know where they belong, the 6.2 is a heavy truck engine and the ecoboost is a car/ F150 engine. This does not mean that the ecoboost isn't a good engine but she ain't no 6.2!
I NEVER said the ecoboost sucks, I just stated that the ecoboost is not the better engine. I myself prefer the 5.0 but it is in no way better than the 6.2.
11-13-2014, 11:45 PM
#27
FORD is stating it for you, me and everyone else to see. The 6.2 is a purpose built truck engine found in the F250 and is made to take the kind of use and abuse that an F250 is expected to survive. The ecoboost is a car engine designed specifically for the FORD Taurus and now being touted as the engine of choice in the F150. Honestly, if the ecoboost is so much better than the 6.2 than why is FORD not using it in the F250. Some people are so bold as to say that the ecoboost is in many ways superior to the Powerstroke diesel so why is the ecoboost not in the F350.
The ecoboost is a CAR engine built specifically for CARS. Mind you it is a good car engine and it definitely has its merits but it is a CAR engine none the less. So is the 5.0 for that matter but you don't hear the 5.0 guys whining and crying.
Of the 3 engines available in the F150 FORD choose to put only 1 of those in the F250 and that is the 6.2. This decision was no doubt made by people who are a heck of a lot smarter that you and I but you seem to having trouble coming to terms with that. For Pete's sake FORD built these engines and put them where they belong.
Honestly, what the heck is wrong with you.
FORD built these engines, they know where they belong, the 6.2 is a heavy truck engine and the ecoboost is a car/ F150 engine. This does not mean that the ecoboost isn't a good engine but she ain't no 6.2!
I NEVER said the ecoboost sucks, I just stated that the ecoboost is not the better engine. I myself prefer the 5.0 but it is in no way better than the 6.2.
The ecoboost is a CAR engine built specifically for CARS. Mind you it is a good car engine and it definitely has its merits but it is a CAR engine none the less. So is the 5.0 for that matter but you don't hear the 5.0 guys whining and crying.
Of the 3 engines available in the F150 FORD choose to put only 1 of those in the F250 and that is the 6.2. This decision was no doubt made by people who are a heck of a lot smarter that you and I but you seem to having trouble coming to terms with that. For Pete's sake FORD built these engines and put them where they belong.
Honestly, what the heck is wrong with you.
FORD built these engines, they know where they belong, the 6.2 is a heavy truck engine and the ecoboost is a car/ F150 engine. This does not mean that the ecoboost isn't a good engine but she ain't no 6.2!
I NEVER said the ecoboost sucks, I just stated that the ecoboost is not the better engine. I myself prefer the 5.0 but it is in no way better than the 6.2.
The following users liked this post:
king nothing (11-14-2014)
11-18-2014, 11:42 PM
#28
While I won't get quite as animated, I believe Boulevard has a point. When it comes down to durability and longevity under load- I suspect there is a reason the 6.2L made it to the F250 rather than another iteration of the Ecoboost. Realistically the size and number of cylinders mean nothing for a truck. It's the longevity when it comes to the HDs. My money would be on the 6.2L as an all day work horse. The EB is a happy medium for light duty part time applications as far as I am concerned. A good engine, but not a 6.2L. Man I wish they hadn't discontinued it 
11-19-2014, 08:26 AM
#29
Senior Member
While I won't get quite as animated, I believe Boulevard has a point. When it comes down to durability and longevity under load- I suspect there is a reason the 6.2L made it to the F250 rather than another iteration of the Ecoboost. Realistically the size and number of cylinders mean nothing for a truck. It's the longevity when it comes to the HDs. My money would be on the 6.2L as an all day work horse. The EB is a happy medium for light duty part time applications as far as I am concerned. A good engine, but not a 6.2L. Man I wish they hadn't discontinued it
Why didn't they put it in the SuperDuties? Marketing. It was a new, unknown engine and most folks just wouldn't accept it in a Superduty. Especially as unloaded mileage isn't as important there. A lot of folks still will not accept it in one, or even in an F150.
But we might see it or something similar in the next-gen Al bodied Superduties.
