When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
until you try one with the 10 speed... the 6 speed is a sloppy slouch
Interesting. My experience is the exact opposite. The 6-speed Gen2 5.0 had plenty of pep in daily driving. The shifts were deliberate but smooth and predictable The 10-speed Gen3 revs without going anywhere in 1st and 2nd, 3rd to 5th skip shift is unfailingly choppy when not at optimum operating temperature, and sometimes gets confused even when manually limited to gears 1-7 in dense city driving.
I feel like the 2.7 would have been the superior choice for me, with boost that packs a punch and is quick to respond. This year's iteration of the 5.0 powertrain is great for the vast majority of people, but seems pretty appalling in a very dense and hilly urban environment that prevents it from reaching its optimum power band. The area I live in is unforgiving to the point where I would probably see significant mpg gains with the 2.7 over the 5.0.
With the way the 2018 5.0 is now, it's long outgrown its simple and dead reliable roots. I wouldn't count on it being any better than the 2.7.
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.
Enjoy whichever engine you have of course!
When I was looking to buy the f150, took me forever just to decide on the engine size. V8, 3.5 turbo or 2.7 turbo. I don't tow a lot, have a 6x6x12 foot enclosed and a boat but when I do I wanted it to be smooth. Already had a 3.5 in the 2011 Explorer but it pulled the boat hard. After test driving the 2.7 turbo I immediate thought wow! Getting 24mpg at 62 mph was crazy especially for the off road fx4 package. Since 80% of it's use will be commuting, just made sense to get the 2.7 ecoboost and the v front trailer does pull hard but the 19ft boat pulls extremely easy.
I would probably get the 3.5L Ecoboost if I had to do it over but I'm not dissatisfied to say the least!
I bought my 2019 STX 2.7 ecoboost because it drove very well on the test drive, IMHO and a surprise to me pretty close in power to the 5.0. I also test drove. What was the deciding point between the two was the appearance.. The brand new 2018 XLT 5.0 had the chrome appearance package (I do not like chrome) The more expensive (less factory rebated) 2019 STX with the 20" alloy rims partially painted matching the Charcoal grey Looked awesome to me. My past trucks I have always compromised on the appearance for either price or function, but this time I went with the truck that I Love the way it looks.. The only thing I tow is an 18ft runabout boat, which the 2.7 eco pulls effortlessly, and gets way better MPG than my 2010 5.4 I traded in..
I bought my 2019 STX 2.7 ecoboost because it drove very well on the test drive, IMHO and a surprise to me pretty close in power to the 5.0. I also test drove. What was the deciding point between the two was the appearance.. The brand new 2018 XLT 5.0 had the chrome appearance package (I do not like chrome) The more expensive (less factory rebated) 2019 STX with the 20" alloy rims partially painted matching the Charcoal grey Looked awesome to me. My past trucks I have always compromised on the appearance for either price or function, but this time I went with the truck that I Love the way it looks.. The only thing I tow is an 18ft runabout boat, which the 2.7 eco pulls effortlessly, and gets way better MPG than my 2010 5.4 I traded in..
IMO the comparison is woefully incomplete. It only gives the result of the differing designs without delving into the implications. For a true comparison I'd be looking at things like bearing pressure per square inch of bearing area, cylinder pressures, piston speeds, rod ratios, and so on. While I'm a fan of the motor in general, a true engine comparison needs to take into account the amount of stress and structural headroom in the design. This is especially true when dealing with a truck motor where a lower stressed engine is more desirable.
I have been debating this issue in my head for some time now. The main issue for me was economy, as all of the engine choices will tow 7000 lbs. Two points of interest I learned today. 1. Most modern gasoline engines today are equal in the energy per liter of fuel. (Diesels do offer more hp/$ for fuel).
2. We/I left out the additional stresses applied to the 2.7 vs the 3.5 (as stated here). For me the V8's are no longer an option when considering economy. Conclusion... towing 10% of the time an keeping the truck less than 100k miles, the 2.7 is fine. The only 3.5L advantage is the extra hp for quicker towing acceleration and fun empty. My mind is made up... I need to have some fun now and again. Thanks!
While the manufacturer's mpg look similar, every one I know didn't get the V8 for fuel economy reasons. They are Old School, they like the sound of a V8, they want the extra peak HP. Inevitably all those reasons are why their real world MPG figures end up lower than the manufacturer's mpg. There is no denying the future is smaller displacement with comparable power. Add electric to the mix and we have a whole other topic.
Keep in mind I did highlight FOR ME. I personally no longer consider a V8 for fuel economy. AND in the 21st century I do not recall reading an "I bought a V8 to save money on fuel" article.
02-10-2019, 11:32 PM
