Best powertrain setup for RCSB?
11-30-2018, 03:09 PM
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Best powertrain setup for RCSB?
Hey all,
It's been a while but I'm finally getting around to looking at F150s again after I lost my last one to the accident. I absolutely despise the Canyon I've been driving for the past half year; non-stop problems with the 8L45 trans and the suspension.
I'm currently curious in the RCSB; it's what I would have wanted even back then, had I the luxury of waiting for a factory order. Just wondering, for all of you who do run 13th gen 4WD RCSBs, what powertrain combo do you have, and what would you suggest?
I used to have the 5.0 3.73 in my '17 SuperCab, but with the 13MPG I was getting around town I reckon for a much lighter RCSB, a 5.0 3.31/3.55 might make more sense. There's also the 2.7EB that I've heard so much about, and I do love the potential for 21MPG combined, but maybe 3.73 would be a bit better for the EB. Unfortunately, Ford doesn't put the 3.5EB in RCSBs for some reason, and the best thing about the 5.0 was that I didn't need to rev much to get around.
But then again, quite a bit has changed since 2017. Does the 10R80 and PI+DI Coyote and 2.7 mean that 3.73 is still viable for a RCSB, fuel economy wise?
Thanks in advance.
It's been a while but I'm finally getting around to looking at F150s again after I lost my last one to the accident. I absolutely despise the Canyon I've been driving for the past half year; non-stop problems with the 8L45 trans and the suspension.
I'm currently curious in the RCSB; it's what I would have wanted even back then, had I the luxury of waiting for a factory order. Just wondering, for all of you who do run 13th gen 4WD RCSBs, what powertrain combo do you have, and what would you suggest?
I used to have the 5.0 3.73 in my '17 SuperCab, but with the 13MPG I was getting around town I reckon for a much lighter RCSB, a 5.0 3.31/3.55 might make more sense. There's also the 2.7EB that I've heard so much about, and I do love the potential for 21MPG combined, but maybe 3.73 would be a bit better for the EB. Unfortunately, Ford doesn't put the 3.5EB in RCSBs for some reason, and the best thing about the 5.0 was that I didn't need to rev much to get around.
But then again, quite a bit has changed since 2017. Does the 10R80 and PI+DI Coyote and 2.7 mean that 3.73 is still viable for a RCSB, fuel economy wise?
Thanks in advance.
The following users liked this post:
nubbins_ (11-30-2018)
11-30-2018, 05:17 PM
#4
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Out of interest, what kind of MPGs are you seeing in your 2.7 truck, and what mix of city/hwy do you do? The 5.0 has the rumble and the linear power delivery that I know and love, but at the same time, in a 122" WB truck I'd be forced to make do with the 23 gallon tank, and I know the 2.7EB would benefit me immensely over the 5.0 in that regard. If it's pretty good, then I know the 3.55 gears are a good fit for the 2.7. What made you want to switch from the 5.0?
But basically, I can't lose regardless of what I choose, just slight differences. 5.0 and I go back to that beautiful sound and WOT power, 2.7 and I get my first taste of twin turbo and 400 lb-ft at sub-3000rpm. The 3.6 LGZ I've been running in the Canyon is an innovative engine, but it's a dog compared to both F-150 engines. One concern I have is the new ratings on the 5.0; back in 2017 it was rated 387 lb-ft at 3850rpm, now it's 400 lb-ft at 4500rpm. If Ford did sacrifice the lower end torque curve to achieve that 400 lb-ft number up at nearly 700rpm higher, then I'm not sure I want that from an engine that already needs to rev compared to the EBs.
I wonder if it's possible to wrangle my way into a 9.75" rear end on a RCSB truck. Maybe I'd need some crazy connections to make that happen.
Last edited by nubbins_; 11-30-2018 at 05:24 PM.
11-30-2018, 07:56 PM
#5
Nice stuff. I did like my SCab 145" but there were still spots in the city that left me wishing for a shorter wheelbase (RCSB is even shorter than my extended cab Canyon!), including one parking lot where I got stuck.
Out of interest, what kind of MPGs are you seeing in your 2.7 truck, and what mix of city/hwy do you do? The 5.0 has the rumble and the linear power delivery that I know and love, but at the same time, in a 122" WB truck I'd be forced to make do with the 23 gallon tank, and I know the 2.7EB would benefit me immensely over the 5.0 in that regard. If it's pretty good, then I know the 3.55 gears are a good fit for the 2.7. What made you want to switch from the 5.0?
But basically, I can't lose regardless of what I choose, just slight differences. 5.0 and I go back to that beautiful sound and WOT power, 2.7 and I get my first taste of twin turbo and 400 lb-ft at sub-3000rpm. The 3.6 LGZ I've been running in the Canyon is an innovative engine, but it's a dog compared to both F-150 engines. One concern I have is the new ratings on the 5.0; back in 2017 it was rated 387 lb-ft at 3850rpm, now it's 400 lb-ft at 4500rpm. If Ford did sacrifice the lower end torque curve to achieve that 400 lb-ft number up at nearly 700rpm higher, then I'm not sure I want that from an engine that already needs to rev compared to the EBs.
I wonder if it's possible to wrangle my way into a 9.75" rear end on a RCSB truck. Maybe I'd need some crazy connections to make that happen.
Out of interest, what kind of MPGs are you seeing in your 2.7 truck, and what mix of city/hwy do you do? The 5.0 has the rumble and the linear power delivery that I know and love, but at the same time, in a 122" WB truck I'd be forced to make do with the 23 gallon tank, and I know the 2.7EB would benefit me immensely over the 5.0 in that regard. If it's pretty good, then I know the 3.55 gears are a good fit for the 2.7. What made you want to switch from the 5.0?
But basically, I can't lose regardless of what I choose, just slight differences. 5.0 and I go back to that beautiful sound and WOT power, 2.7 and I get my first taste of twin turbo and 400 lb-ft at sub-3000rpm. The 3.6 LGZ I've been running in the Canyon is an innovative engine, but it's a dog compared to both F-150 engines. One concern I have is the new ratings on the 5.0; back in 2017 it was rated 387 lb-ft at 3850rpm, now it's 400 lb-ft at 4500rpm. If Ford did sacrifice the lower end torque curve to achieve that 400 lb-ft number up at nearly 700rpm higher, then I'm not sure I want that from an engine that already needs to rev compared to the EBs.
I wonder if it's possible to wrangle my way into a 9.75" rear end on a RCSB truck. Maybe I'd need some crazy connections to make that happen.
The following users liked this post:
nubbins_ (12-01-2018)
11-30-2018, 09:19 PM
#6
Earthbound Rotorhead
I have a 2015 2.7 EB, w/ a 3.73 e lock in a S crew. it has over 127K on it and I love it. I drive a lot so mpg is very important to me, but that 2.7 is no dog either.
On two lane roads at 55-60 it gets over 22 mpg if you drive it nice. Highways out here are posted at 80mph. If you want to run like that all the time the aerodynamics and gears will cut your mileage severely.
In a RCSB w/ a 2.7 it should really scoot.
OCMIKE has a nice build thread on here with a RCSB, 5.0 and a Whipple super charger. If you don't have the RCSB bug yet go look it up.
On two lane roads at 55-60 it gets over 22 mpg if you drive it nice. Highways out here are posted at 80mph. If you want to run like that all the time the aerodynamics and gears will cut your mileage severely.
In a RCSB w/ a 2.7 it should really scoot.
OCMIKE has a nice build thread on here with a RCSB, 5.0 and a Whipple super charger. If you don't have the RCSB bug yet go look it up.
The following users liked this post:
nubbins_ (12-01-2018)
11-30-2018, 11:26 PM
#7
Senior Member
Thread Starter
most of my driving is 2 lane highway to work and home. I average 21-22 however on all highway I have seen 24-25. As far as switching I wanted to try it out and the 2.7 offers the same performance for a lower price. I actually ordered this truck and I would do it all over again. I do miss the flowmaster sound of my 5.0 but this 2.7 will run circles around it
I have a 2015 2.7 EB, w/ a 3.73 e lock in a S crew. it has over 127K on it and I love it. I drive a lot so mpg is very important to me, but that 2.7 is no dog either.
On two lane roads at 55-60 it gets over 22 mpg if you drive it nice. Highways out here are posted at 80mph. If you want to run like that all the time the aerodynamics and gears will cut your mileage severely.
In a RCSB w/ a 2.7 it should really scoot.
OCMIKE has a nice build thread on here with a RCSB, 5.0 and a Whipple super charger. If you don't have the RCSB bug yet go look it up.
On two lane roads at 55-60 it gets over 22 mpg if you drive it nice. Highways out here are posted at 80mph. If you want to run like that all the time the aerodynamics and gears will cut your mileage severely.
In a RCSB w/ a 2.7 it should really scoot.
OCMIKE has a nice build thread on here with a RCSB, 5.0 and a Whipple super charger. If you don't have the RCSB bug yet go look it up.
As for driving habits, I have a rather light foot as long as the engine has the power I need. The 5.0 was NA but had good low-end torque so that I never really needed to exceed 2000rpm in daily driving. My only experience so far with gas forced induction is the M274 in the C and GLC class, which makes good power at 2000rpm but needs to stay in the 2000-3000 to make best use of its single turbocharger, which can feel really limiting at times. How is the TT setup on the 2.7 in that regard? Is it a broad torque range like or is it pretty much limited to its rating of 2750rpm? All I can find for stock dyno is a graph by 5-Star that purports to show a >280lb-ft band between 2000-4750rpm, which sounds mighty good to me.
Last edited by nubbins_; 12-01-2018 at 03:07 AM.
Trending Topics
11-30-2018, 11:50 PM
#8
Senior Member
Not saying it's the best, but------
I ordered a 2017 RCSB with the 2.7 last year, with the intention of adding what I wanted and building something for my desires, small light and agile, for a 150. It is surprising how responsive it was and now even more so. A tuner with tunes, exhaust system, body mods to look like the sport option, suspension upgrades and wheels/tires. Kind of a sedate pre-runner. It surprises most folk with its response, power, and handling, while averaging 22MPG for the last year. I'm happy, and do like the sound! KM
I ordered a 2017 RCSB with the 2.7 last year, with the intention of adding what I wanted and building something for my desires, small light and agile, for a 150. It is surprising how responsive it was and now even more so. A tuner with tunes, exhaust system, body mods to look like the sport option, suspension upgrades and wheels/tires. Kind of a sedate pre-runner. It surprises most folk with its response, power, and handling, while averaging 22MPG for the last year. I'm happy, and do like the sound! KM
The following users liked this post:
nubbins_ (12-01-2018)
12-01-2018, 03:01 AM
#9
Senior Member
Thread Starter
most of my driving is 2 lane highway to work and home. I average 21-22 however on all highway I have seen 24-25. As far as switching I wanted to try it out and the 2.7 offers the same performance for a lower price. I actually ordered this truck and I would do it all over again. I do miss the flowmaster sound of my 5.0 but this 2.7 will run circles around it
Not saying it's the best, but------
I ordered a 2017 RCSB with the 2.7 last year, with the intention of adding what I wanted and building something for my desires, small light and agile, for a 150. It is surprising how responsive it was and now even more so. A tuner with tunes, exhaust system, body mods to look like the sport option, suspension upgrades and wheels/tires. Kind of a sedate pre-runner. It surprises most folk with its response, power, and handling, while averaging 22MPG for the last year. I'm happy, and do like the sound! KM
I ordered a 2017 RCSB with the 2.7 last year, with the intention of adding what I wanted and building something for my desires, small light and agile, for a 150. It is surprising how responsive it was and now even more so. A tuner with tunes, exhaust system, body mods to look like the sport option, suspension upgrades and wheels/tires. Kind of a sedate pre-runner. It surprises most folk with its response, power, and handling, while averaging 22MPG for the last year. I'm happy, and do like the sound! KM
I wouldn't be doing too much to the truck, for a 2018/19 RCSB 301A FX4 I'd probably just get some Wildpeak A/T3Ws like I'm running now, either Icon Stage1 like yours or Bilstein 6112 and 5100s, some skids from RCI and a FabFours or Hammerhead rear bumper. That's basically the route I take with a new truck now, except I made the mistake of buying Fox 2.0 for my Canyon.
@djfllmn anything of note with the 2.7EB and 10R80? Any weird shifting or other issues? My 6R80 played flawlessly with the 5.0, but current GMC truck represents a complete 180° reversal from that and performs worse than anyone can normally imagine, so I want a repeat of the 6R80, not the 8L45.
Last edited by nubbins_; 12-01-2018 at 03:26 AM.
12-01-2018, 05:40 AM
#10
How long did it take from ordering to delivery? I've never actually ordered before, but this might be my first. And in comparison to your previous 5.0s, does the 2.7 rev high by comparison while driving around in the city?
I gave the Borla 2.7 S-Type a listen and it's actually surprisingly unique, sounds very smooth and European. Do you think the 3.73s are necessary for the 2.7 if I'm just going to 265/70R17 E-rated at most? Or would that be a waste of gas in the city? I'm way too paranoid to tune, the most I can do is use the Hypertech unit to reprogram my speedometer if I ever need to lol.
I wouldn't be doing too much to the truck, for a 2018/19 RCSB 301A FX4 I'd probably just get some Wildpeak A/T3Ws like I'm running now, either Icon Stage1 like yours or Bilstein 6112 and 5100s, some skids from RCI and a FabFours or Hammerhead rear bumper. That's basically the route I take with a new truck now, except I made the mistake of buying Fox 2.0 for my Canyon.
@djfllmn anything of note with the 2.7EB and 10R80? Any weird shifting or other issues? My 6R80 played flawlessly with the 5.0, but current GMC truck represents a complete 180° reversal from that and performs worse than anyone can normally imagine, so I want a repeat of the 6R80, not the 8L45.
I gave the Borla 2.7 S-Type a listen and it's actually surprisingly unique, sounds very smooth and European. Do you think the 3.73s are necessary for the 2.7 if I'm just going to 265/70R17 E-rated at most? Or would that be a waste of gas in the city? I'm way too paranoid to tune, the most I can do is use the Hypertech unit to reprogram my speedometer if I ever need to lol.
I wouldn't be doing too much to the truck, for a 2018/19 RCSB 301A FX4 I'd probably just get some Wildpeak A/T3Ws like I'm running now, either Icon Stage1 like yours or Bilstein 6112 and 5100s, some skids from RCI and a FabFours or Hammerhead rear bumper. That's basically the route I take with a new truck now, except I made the mistake of buying Fox 2.0 for my Canyon.
@djfllmn anything of note with the 2.7EB and 10R80? Any weird shifting or other issues? My 6R80 played flawlessly with the 5.0, but current GMC truck represents a complete 180° reversal from that and performs worse than anyone can normally imagine, so I want a repeat of the 6R80, not the 8L45.
@nubbins_ as far as the trans. It was a little funky until it got some miles on it and i got the PCM reprogrammed from a TSB. Now it's smooth as silk for the most part. Its like any automatic trans. You can make it shift funky depending on throttle input changes when it is about to shift but I have no complaints otherwise
Last edited by djfllmn; 12-01-2018 at 10:07 AM.
