kehyler

Hi All,

Disclosures and an appeal for civility: I did some fun comparisons that I'd like to share. I'm not trolling, but I could easily see this thread devolving so let's extend some extra effort to keep things civil. I'll also disclose right up front that while I own a 2018 2.7 ecoboost.

Main point: To show that while the 2.7 L is small (obvious), it doesn't seem too small *per liter* (which is more subtle). This is my personal opinion of course, but I'll attempt to substantiate it.

The 2.7 ecboost weighs 440 lbs, or 163 lbs per liter of engine size (link here).

• 27% heavier per liter than 3.5 L ecoboost (source)
• Essentially identical weight per liter to 3.0 L powerstroke (source)
• 10% heavier per liter than the 6.7 powerstroke (source)
• 87% heavier per liter than the 5.0 coyotoe (source)
• 3% heavier per liter than 2019 6.7 cummins (source)

Second, its torque per size of 148 ft*lbs/L seems reasonable compared against engine make of similar materials (CGI/aluminum):

• 1% higher than the 2018 3.0 L powerstroke
• 7% higher than the 2018 powerstroke
• Essentially identical to the 2019 cummins
• 2% lesser than the 2019 3.0 L duramax
• 7% lesser than the 2019 3.0 L ecodiesel

Its horse power per liter of 120 hp/L does strike me as high. Due to this, I intend to monitor the 2.7 engine temperatures while towing, and I'm glad to see an oil cooler on my 2018 2.7 ecoboost.

• Is 80% higher per liter than the 2018 6.7 powerstroke
• Is 45% higher per liter than the 2018 3.0 powerstroke
• Is 9% higher (6% lesser) per liter than the 2018 3.5 ecoboost (high output version)
• Is 52% higher per liter than the 2018 5.0 coyote

So overall I'm glad Ford offered a 2.7 L engine in a full size truck; it seems well built for its size. For my intended uses (90% unladen, 10% towing 7k lbs) it seemed the most appropriate engine because I value low operating costs. Other people have other use-cases and they should choose the engine most appropriate for them.

Some other fun links:

It seems like 2018 2.7 ecoboost's crank ratings might be about 450 ft lbs and about 365 hp stock (link). That might have been on 93 octane, unsure.

Include my own towing experience:
https://www.f150forum.com/f82/just-h...466288/index2/

Include some cost comparisons:
https://www.f150forum.com/f118/parti...ew-mpg-444243/

Enjoy whichever engine you have of course!
https://www.f150forum.com/f123/what-...2/#post5981929

kehyler

I'm a little surprised at no comments so far. I thought the comparisons were interesting, especially that the 2.7 would weigh more than the 6.7 power stroke if you scaled it up.

RipMar

I've been more than happy with my 2018 2.7. Only had one small issue that was part of a TSB and it was fixed properly. I don't
tow or carry heavy loads ( just normal runs to Lowes ). The 2.7 made perfect sense for my needs.

Munkeebutt

Interesting

Fx2.7

doug97gxe

i think the 2.7 topic has been beaten to death already so nobody is commenting .. some 2.7 owners said they bought it for gas mileage.. we dispelled that myth in another thread where gas mileage is so close between engines driving style could change that. Then we had some 2.7 owners said they will save on gas yearly vs buying a bigger engine .. we dispelled that myth when you can't really budget on gas as gas prices change and life changes.. people take trips.. a monthly gas budget is not realistic when choosing a means of transportation when the MPG is so close between each other. Nobody will admit they bought it because it was cheaper and they didn't want to spend more so for now everyone is tired of engine topic dancing

noclutch

Well it just goes to show you that Ford did their math on this engine. And kudos to the OP for his comparison math!

Yooper39

doug97gxe

Good for you

Yooper39