Topic Sponsor
2015 - Present Ford F150 General discussion on the latest generation Ford F150 truck.
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

In defense of the 2.7 ecoboost

 
Old 01-26-2019, 09:34 AM
  #1  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 637
Received 86 Likes on 56 Posts
Default In defense of the 2.7 ecoboost

Hi All,

Disclosures and an appeal for civility: I did some fun comparisons recently and I'd like to share the results. Let me say first that I'm not trolling, but I could easily see this thread devolving. Please extend some effort to keep things civil. I'll also disclose right up front that while I own a 2018 2.7 ecoboost.

Main point: The main point of this thread is to defend that while the 2.7 L is small (obvious), it doesn't strike me as being too small *per liter* (which is more subtle). This is my personal opinion of course, which I'll attempt to substantiate below.

First is that its a heavy engine. Wikipedia (link here) says that the 2.7 L ecoboost weighs 440 lbs, or 163 lbs per liter of engine size.
  • That is 27% heavier per liter than 3.5 L ecoboost (source)
  • That (essentially) identical weight per liter to 3.0 L powerstroke (source)
  • That is 10% heavier per liter than the 6.7 powerstroke (source)
  • That is 87% heavier per liter than the 5.0 coyotoe (source)
Second, the output of 148 ft lbs per liter seems reasonable compared against engine make of similar materials (CGI/aluminum)
  • That is 1% higher per liter than the 2018 3.0 L powerstroke
  • That is 7% higher per liter than the 2018 powerstroke (and I expect the 2019 powerstroke will be essentially identical based on the next bullet)
  • That is essentially identical per liter to the 2019 cummins
Now to be even handed, the 120 hp per liter it produces does strike me as high. Due to this, I intend to keep a close eye on the engine temperatures of the 2.7 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, and overall it seems well built for its size. For my intended uses (90% unladen, 10% towing 7k lbs) it was 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.

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.

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

Last edited by kehyler; 05-13-2019 at 06:38 AM. Reason: Edit 1 to add highoutput 3.5 ecoboost comparison in hp)
kehyler is offline  
The following 21 users liked this post by kehyler:
berniedes (01-26-2019), Bpain05 (02-13-2019), Bubbabiker (01-26-2019), dannytexas (01-27-2019), Dwilk82 (01-27-2019), funnyman06 (01-27-2019), HBS (01-28-2019), HOSSzBOSS (04-22-2019), jetrep (04-18-2019), Liv'nbytheBungie74 (01-27-2019), mds (01-27-2019), N4HHE (02-12-2019), rbird2 (01-26-2019), rmc63 (02-22-2019), roots (02-13-2019), Sod (01-26-2019), SwatDawg15 (01-29-2019), tbird2003 (01-26-2019), tugboat1959 (01-26-2019), wabakami (02-12-2019), Yooper39 (01-26-2019)
Old 01-26-2019, 07:20 PM
  #2  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 637
Received 86 Likes on 56 Posts
Default

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.
kehyler is offline  
The following users liked this post:
Christenson9 (03-29-2019)
Old 01-26-2019, 08:08 PM
  #3  
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Bolivia/Oak Island NC
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

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.
RipMar is offline  
The following 3 users liked this post by RipMar:
Liv'nbytheBungie74 (01-27-2019), michaelb41 (02-02-2019), Qubie77 (06-12-2019)
Old 01-26-2019, 08:29 PM
  #4  
Senior Member
 
Munkeebutt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: MS
Posts: 528
Received 163 Likes on 103 Posts
Default

Interesting
Munkeebutt is offline  
Old 01-26-2019, 08:37 PM
  #5  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Virginia
Posts: 169
Received 31 Likes on 17 Posts
Default

Iíve had two 2.7s. I liked (lloved) the first one so much when l bought a 2018 after my 2015 the only engine l would consider was another 2.7 Lariat 501. I would like a Platinum with its 450 HP but the moonroof and 72 grand, no thanks.
Fx2.7 is offline  
The following users liked this post:
Liv'nbytheBungie74 (01-27-2019)
Old 01-26-2019, 08:43 PM
  #6  
Senior Member
 
doug97gxe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Southwest Connecticut
Posts: 2,155
Received 457 Likes on 337 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by kehyler View Post
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.
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
doug97gxe is offline  
Old 01-26-2019, 08:43 PM
  #7  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 176
Received 25 Likes on 20 Posts
Default

Well it just goes to show you that Ford did their math on this engine. And kudos to the OP for his comparison math!
noclutch is offline  
The following 3 users liked this post by noclutch:
kehyler (01-27-2019), Liv'nbytheBungie74 (01-27-2019), rbird2 (01-27-2019)
Old 01-26-2019, 08:52 PM
  #8  
Yooper39
 
Yooper39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Northern WI
Posts: 66
Received 17 Likes on 8 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by doug97gxe View Post
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
Fanboy much? I bought the 2.7 because I wanted it. After all the 2018 5.0 problems I read about I would rather have a Ram Hemi if I had to have a V8. Plus I drove a 5.0 and a 2.7 side by side and the 5.0 felt like a slug.

Last edited by Yooper39; 01-26-2019 at 09:07 PM. Reason: Grammar
Yooper39 is offline  
The following 7 users liked this post by Yooper39:
David Jones (01-28-2019), JabD71 (02-13-2019), jetrep (04-18-2019), kehyler (01-27-2019), N4HHE (01-26-2019), rmc63 (02-22-2019), Scott2373 (01-27-2019)
Old 01-26-2019, 08:57 PM
  #9  
Senior Member
 
doug97gxe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Southwest Connecticut
Posts: 2,155
Received 457 Likes on 337 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Yooper39 View Post


Fanboy much? I bought the 2.7 because I wanted it. After all the 5.0 problems I read about I would rather have a Hemi is I had to have a V8. Plus I drove a 5.0 and a 2.7 side by side and the 5.0 felt like a slug.
Good for you
doug97gxe is offline  
The following users liked this post:
Ohsix (01-27-2019)
Old 01-26-2019, 09:17 PM
  #10  
Yooper39
 
Yooper39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Northern WI
Posts: 66
Received 17 Likes on 8 Posts
Default

I’m really looking forward to Spring when I can pull my 2016 Jayco Jayfeather 23RLSW with my F150. My Jayfeather is 5,995lbs GVWR and 4,605 dry. If it pulls my camper as well as my previous 2013 Ram Hemi w/8-speed and 3.21 rear axle pulled it I’ll be a very “Happy Camper”! Based on what I’ve read, my F150 should handle it without a problem and its tow rating is 1,300lbs higher than the Ram was.

Last edited by Yooper39; 01-26-2019 at 09:21 PM.
Yooper39 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: In defense of the 2.7 ecoboost


Contact Us - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
 
  • Ask a Question
    Get answers from community experts
Question Title:
Description:
Your question will be posted in: