In defense of the 2.7 ecoboost - Page 2 - Ford F150 Forum - Community of Ford Truck Fans

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

In defense of the 2.7 ecoboost

 
Old 01-26-2019, 10:23 PM
  #11  
Member
 
Fly50's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: NJ
Posts: 31
Thanked 6 Times in 3 Posts
Default

I have a 5.0 wouldn't have it any other way.
One of my buddies has the 3.5 tuned he would not have it any other way.
Another good friend just picked up a 2.7 for the gas mileage, he wouldn't have it any other way.
Lots of good choices, not a bad situation to be in!
Fly50 is offline  
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Fly50 For This Useful Post:
HangDiver (01-28-2019), kehyler (01-27-2019), Sod (01-26-2019), wabakami (02-12-2019)
Old 01-26-2019, 10:24 PM
  #12  
Yooper39
 
Yooper39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Northern WI
Posts: 57
Thanked 11 Times in 5 Posts
Smile

Originally Posted by Fx2.7 View Post
I’ve 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.


I think you have to get a Limited or Raptor to get the 450hp edition of the 3.5 eco. I could be wrong—wouldn’t be the first time.
Yooper39 is offline  
Old 01-26-2019, 11:36 PM
  #13  
Senior Member
 
2017bluetruck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: SE Wisconsin
Posts: 350
Thanked 106 Times in 84 Posts
Default

The weight to size to power ratios mean very little. Consider the wide cubic inch variety of a small block Chevy 283 to 400 cubic inches. The range of factory horsepower from the same basic block configuration.Same applies to many manufactures engine lines. Opposite end of the spectrum consider the 5.9 Cummings medium diesel in the same ratios.
I do favor the 2.7, think it an very strong and potent power-plant, but consider the original post caparison fairly meaningless. KM
2017bluetruck is online now  
Old 01-27-2019, 12:02 AM
  #14  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 114
Thanked 20 Times in 18 Posts
Default

Thereís only so much energy that can be created from burning fuel and oxygen. It doesnít matter wether itís from large displacement or small displacement with turbo or supercharger. The power delivery profile is usually the biggest difference. Todayís engines are pretty close to their peek efficiency with the technologies available. Using a small boosted engine saves little to no fuel compared to a larger displacement engine because it still takes the same amount of fuel to get the same amount of power.
chadfo is offline  
Old 01-27-2019, 12:15 AM
  #15  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Posts: 207
Thanked 21 Times in 14 Posts
Default

My experience was nothing but great with the 2015 2-7. 48k miles and zero issues and peppy as all get out. But I am torn between a 2-7 CC 5/5 and a 3.5 CC 6/5.
friesbruh is offline  
Old 01-27-2019, 12:25 AM
  #16  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Posts: 1,501
Thanked 367 Times in 259 Posts
Default

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.
mikeinatlanta is offline  
Old 01-27-2019, 12:38 AM
  #17  
The Anti-Chrome
iTrader: (2)
 
Summers22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Kansas
Posts: 15,566
Thanked 3,063 Times in 2,332 Posts
Default

To the OP, why did you feel the little, small 2.7 needed any "defending"? I sure don't feel like my 5.0 needs defending.
Summers22 is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to Summers22 For This Useful Post:
OCMike (01-28-2019)
Old 01-27-2019, 12:47 AM
  #18  
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 88
Thanked 16 Times in 12 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Summers22 View Post
To the OP, why did you feel the little, small 2.7 needed any "defending"? I sure don't feel like my 5.0 needs defending.
And the dick swinging contest continues...
JaredC01 is offline  
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to JaredC01 For This Useful Post:
finsfan21 (01-27-2019), mizzouxc (02-13-2019), Scott2373 (01-27-2019)
Old 01-27-2019, 01:24 AM
  #19  
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Posts: 33
Thanked 8 Times in 5 Posts
Default

My biggest concern is durability, which seems pretty positive so far.

It's an age old problem, across the spectrum of nearly all industry: How do you get more power out of smaller and smaller motors? The question applies to cars and trucks, tractors, and drones. Cameras, printers, and lawn mowers. Everyone seeks the most satisfying power to size ratio, and the limits are constantly stretched, surpassed, and somewhat limited, just by the simple power limitations that physics define.

In other words, just like other trucks I've had:

I'll just drive the wheels off of it.
jame9259 is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to jame9259 For This Useful Post:
michaelb41 (02-02-2019)
Old 01-27-2019, 01:52 AM
  #20  
Member
 
bisonp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 95
Thanked 16 Times in 13 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by jame9259 View Post
My biggest concern is durability, which seems pretty positive so far.
After owning a 5.4, I had absolutely no confidence that Ford can build a reliable modern V8. I've had turbos before, they don't worry me near as much as Ford's variable valve timing systems. A worry well placed, if other threads are any indication.

2.7 is cheaper, more available on the lots, and returns better economy than the 3.5 or 5.0 while being nearly if not just as fast. No need to defend it, it's best in class by a mile compared to the competition. It does come with limited payload and towing, but that's where the other two come in. Choices are a good thing, each engine has its strong points.
bisonp is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to bisonp For This Useful Post:
N4HHE (02-12-2019)

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: