Originally Posted by nubbins_

I also don't get this "us vs. them" mentality. The only engine in the lineup that doesn't impress me is the old 3.5NA, only because I spent 6 years with that motor in a 5000lb SUV. Save the hostility for Chevy

Apples showed that the 5.0 has undergone considerable torture testing, equivalent to dozens of Daytona 500 races. And compared to how most of us are advised to baby our engines, it's rather hideous what the 5.0 has been subjected to. The EB has undergone considerable testing as well, with that one engine being subjected to the same shock testing, then pulled and put into an F-150 pitted against other trucks, then pulled again and put into the Baja 1000.

Somehow some of you don't seem to be satisfied, The early 5.0 had ?valve? problems. The early EB had condensation problems. The 2017 EB was redesigned, and the 2018 5.0 was redesigned. Regardless of what engine there will always be a handful that turn into poop for one reason or another (as we are seeing with the 2.7 EB). Unless it's some sort of major systemic flaw there really shouldn't be any reason to be concerned.

Statistics show that one of these days we'll come across a singular thoughtful answer written up by a knowledgeable engineer about the actual internal workings of an EB and a 5.0 and how Ford designs and tests these motors with respect to durability. Until then we'll wallow in this endless state of layman's speculation to desperately justify something.

and hey, in this day and age if you really want a guaranteed bulletproof engine above all else you're in the wrong place. You really ought to be over on FTE with a 6.2 F-250 (or even better, 6.0 chevy 2500). But in that case you could enjoy your 10 mpg and the handling of a 6500 lb brick. And what's most telling is that even for the SOHC (or pushrod for the 2500) gasser, there still are examples of engines that have quit before their time, and that's against the backdrop of damn impressive reliability.

Originally Posted by Tiredofeverything

What if both engines were used for extensive towing. 100000 miles to 200,000 miles which one would you trust more getting that next 100,000 miles?

Originally Posted by Tiredofeverything

What if both engines were used for extensive towing. 100000 miles to 200,000 miles which one would you trust more getting that next 100,000 miles?

Originally Posted by chimmike

Just in case any of y'all are paying attention, Chip Ganassi Racing went 1-2 podium at the Rolex 24 in Ford GT's (3.5 ecoboost)...not saying this is a great comparison...but they led practically the entire race. Despite all the additional 'moving parts'.

Not bad considering around here, most consider v8's the end-all, be-all.

Originally Posted by Apples

Congrats! to Ganassi Racing, the drivers, and the 3.5 EcoBoost'd Ford GT.

Looks like the 3.5 survived the equivalent of 6 runnings of the Daytona 500...