View Poll Results: Reliability 2.7 Eco vs. 3.5 NA FFV vs. 3.5 Eco vs. 5.0 FFV ?
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 36. You may not vote on this poll
Reliability 2.7 Eco vs. 3.5 NA FFV vs. 3.5 Eco vs. 5.0 FFV ?
12-30-2014, 08:30 PM
#11
Can't answer that without a review of the two engine's architectures. The block structures and materials are totally different and the designer's thermal and other objectives are beyond my knowledge. My 3.0 Fusion engine has a coolant capacity of 10.6 QTS...sounds very miniscule, but...? To be candid, I was very surprised at such a small capacity. My Hyundai 1.6 engine contains 5.3 QTS, exactly half of the Fusion, but it warms up within blocks.
2.7L EcoBoost® V6 16.4
3.5L EcoBoost® V6 15.6
12-30-2014, 10:32 PM
#12
If I had to put money down it would be on the 2.7 over the 3.5 ecoboost. Shorter timing chains, cgi block, cylinders designed to handle greater pressures, piston jets and a higher coolant capacity. Mostly i just HOPE its more reliable because that's the engine i want with the better fuel economy yet plenty of power. My biggest concern right now with the 2.7 is how it will be with carbon buildup. I won't be buying one until there are plenty with over 200,000 miles. The 5.0 will most likely prove to be the most reliable in the end. Don't know about the base engine and don't really care.
12-30-2014, 10:50 PM
#14
Senior Member
If I had to put money down it would be on the 2.7 over the 3.5 ecoboost. Shorter timing chains, cgi block, cylinders designed to handle greater pressures, piston jets and a higher coolant capacity. Mostly i just HOPE its more reliable because that's the engine i want with the better fuel economy yet plenty of power. My biggest concern right now with the 2.7 is how it will be with carbon buildup. I won't be buying one until there are plenty with over 200,000 miles. The 5.0 will most likely prove to be the most reliable in the end. Don't know about the base engine and don't really care.
IMO, the 2.7 is a jewel, but I have many apprehensions about the intake coking issue in ALL GDI engines. The silence of manufacturers about mitigating the issue doesn't provide much assurance to me. I will purchase a proven 5.0 engine in my 2015 F150.
12-30-2014, 11:00 PM
#15
Senior Member
Short term reliability on the new engines is anyone's guess. Long term reliability (let's say over 150k miles), I've got to assume a naturally aspirated engine without direct injection will be more reliable. Direct injection can cause oil dilution, which could could cause problems, especially over many miles. I've got to think the turbos will cause stress on the engine in the long term also. I do realize turbo gas engines aren't a totally new concept, but if I had to buy a used vehicle with high miles, I'd be leery of the turbo car. If you plan on trading before 100k miles, it's probably a toss up. Of course you could get a 5.0 that knocks after the first oil change...lol.
12-30-2014, 11:02 PM
#16
6.2
