Can someone explain the manufacturing differences between a 2.7 and 3.5 EB ?
05-27-2018, 12:06 PM
#11
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Thanks so much for the support.... I can imagine your assessment is correct in that an overwhelming majority of people don't have issues and thus have no need or desire to post about their experiences on forums. It makes sense that those that do:
Thanks to those that are willing to offer sound and objective advice to a potential owner - very generous and kind of you all.
A random thought: Went by a Ford dealer today, and sat in a few trucks that were 'unlocked' on the lot..... one happened to be a 'cab-and-a-half'..... and I noticed that when I got in and shut the driver's door, there was a staccato vibration from shutting the door that literally shook panels throughout the truck for a few seconds after the door was shut... I opened and closed the door several times and noticed the same thing.... almost like body panels were loose everywhere and were affected by the impact of simply shutting the door.
I then got into a Super Crew Cab (4 full sized doors) and opened and shut the door several times, with no such phenomena. I chalk this up to the 'cab-and-a-half' having no supporting 'pillar' between the driver and rear half-door. I bought a 2002 Silverado back in the day with this 'extended cab' configuration, and it was a nightmare.... wind noises, complex but poor door sealing system, and rattles galore. I got rid of it and got a 2004 Silverado Crew Cab with 4 full size doors and no issues in that regard at all.
So...I am considering nothing but a Super Crew Cab - - for rigidity, and of course, for more, comfortable room.
- Are seeking information prior to a purchasing decision.
- Have questions regarding functionality of their new vehicle.
- Have a major complaint that they want to A) Vent about, and B) get suggestions how to fix their issue (I have no problem with these folks - I have been one myself and understand the frustration of being 'that guy' that got a lemon.
- Are passionate about their vehicle and want to discuss mods, help others with their questions/issues, and just like chatting about their vehicles.
Thanks to those that are willing to offer sound and objective advice to a potential owner - very generous and kind of you all.
A random thought: Went by a Ford dealer today, and sat in a few trucks that were 'unlocked' on the lot..... one happened to be a 'cab-and-a-half'..... and I noticed that when I got in and shut the driver's door, there was a staccato vibration from shutting the door that literally shook panels throughout the truck for a few seconds after the door was shut... I opened and closed the door several times and noticed the same thing.... almost like body panels were loose everywhere and were affected by the impact of simply shutting the door.
I then got into a Super Crew Cab (4 full sized doors) and opened and shut the door several times, with no such phenomena. I chalk this up to the 'cab-and-a-half' having no supporting 'pillar' between the driver and rear half-door. I bought a 2002 Silverado back in the day with this 'extended cab' configuration, and it was a nightmare.... wind noises, complex but poor door sealing system, and rattles galore. I got rid of it and got a 2004 Silverado Crew Cab with 4 full size doors and no issues in that regard at all.
So...I am considering nothing but a Super Crew Cab - - for rigidity, and of course, for more, comfortable room.
05-27-2018, 12:08 PM
#12
Senior Member
Thread Starter
The 2.7EB was introduced after the 3.5EB. The 2.7 was incrementally improved in 2017. The 3.5 was completely redesigned including a new block in 2017. Direct injection has been added to the 5.0. All have added secondary port injection. All have the 10 speed. These engines have changed so much, whatever you thought was a defect in earlier versions are gone.
05-27-2018, 12:10 PM
#13
Senior Member
Thread Starter
The 3.5 EB is based on the 3.5 NA that has been in production for years and has been a very reliable engine. They share the block, and a few other components, but everything else has been designed to work under the pressures of a turbo. The turbos are water cooled, and the cooling is designed to circulate when the engine is off to continue cooling them after shutdown, so a turbo timer is not needed. The heads use Direct Injection and well as starting in 2017 MPFI. Ford did extensive testing, torturing it under extreme conditions, and with well over 1 million of them made, has shown to be very reliable.
The 2.7 is designed from the ground up using lessons learned from the 3.5, and has shown so far to be a pretty reliable rugged engine.
The 5.0, is a solid NA engine that is one of the most powerful in it's size. It is also built from the ground up.
Each engine has it's purpose and you just can't go wrong with any of them, provided you get the one that will fit what you are looking to do with the truck. If you plan to do heavy towing, the 3.5 is the best, if you just want to drive a pickup every day with occasional light hauling, the 2.7 is the choice, and if you want a general all around truck for hauling and towing, the 5.0 is the choice. Just remember that in a forum, you only hear complaints, and with the huge number made, the complaints will be .000something of the overall perfectly running ones. Even though the truck I got is a royal POS, the 3.5EB in it has been flawless. Now if only the rest of the truck would be.
The 2.7 is designed from the ground up using lessons learned from the 3.5, and has shown so far to be a pretty reliable rugged engine.
The 5.0, is a solid NA engine that is one of the most powerful in it's size. It is also built from the ground up.
Each engine has it's purpose and you just can't go wrong with any of them, provided you get the one that will fit what you are looking to do with the truck. If you plan to do heavy towing, the 3.5 is the best, if you just want to drive a pickup every day with occasional light hauling, the 2.7 is the choice, and if you want a general all around truck for hauling and towing, the 5.0 is the choice. Just remember that in a forum, you only hear complaints, and with the huge number made, the complaints will be .000something of the overall perfectly running ones. Even though the truck I got is a royal POS, the 3.5EB in it has been flawless. Now if only the rest of the truck would be.
05-27-2018, 01:12 PM
#14
The following users liked this post:
Joe Friday (05-27-2018)
05-27-2018, 02:14 PM
#15
Ti-VCT Just Kicked In Yo!
While the naturally aspirated version was released first, the Cyclone was always designed to be turbocharged and direct injected. This link from an early 2006 press release has a lot of information about the development of the Cyclone engine and their future plans for it.
https://www.adandp.media/articles/a-...ord-powertrain
“The 3.5-liter engine has been designed to accept either transverse or longitudinal mounting,” says Barb Samardzich, v.p. of Powertrain Operations, “and the architecture has been put in place for upgrades like hybrid capability, and gasoline direct injection with or without turbocharging.”
It's likely that Ford isn't done with the Cyclone yet. They accomplished their goal of direct injection with turbocharging (1st and 2nd gen 3.5 EcoBoost) and without turbocharging (3.3 N/A). I would put good money on the possibility that the upcoming hybrid F-150 will have a Cyclone-based engine since they have already designed it to be incorporated into a hybrid drivetrain. If anything, the 3.5 EcoBoost is an older engine than the Coyote since it's been in continuous development for the last 13+ years.
https://www.adandp.media/articles/a-...ord-powertrain
“The 3.5-liter engine has been designed to accept either transverse or longitudinal mounting,” says Barb Samardzich, v.p. of Powertrain Operations, “and the architecture has been put in place for upgrades like hybrid capability, and gasoline direct injection with or without turbocharging.”
It's likely that Ford isn't done with the Cyclone yet. They accomplished their goal of direct injection with turbocharging (1st and 2nd gen 3.5 EcoBoost) and without turbocharging (3.3 N/A). I would put good money on the possibility that the upcoming hybrid F-150 will have a Cyclone-based engine since they have already designed it to be incorporated into a hybrid drivetrain. If anything, the 3.5 EcoBoost is an older engine than the Coyote since it's been in continuous development for the last 13+ years.
The following users liked this post:
Joe Friday (05-27-2018)
05-27-2018, 02:20 PM
#16
Senior Member
I'm digging my 2018 F150 Lariat 3.5eb coming from a Toyota Tundra SR5 - broke it in taking a trip to the OBX 4x4 beach for a week.
25 mpg's on the flats - I'm a believer!
25 mpg's on the flats - I'm a believer!
The following users liked this post:
Joe Friday (05-27-2018)
05-27-2018, 02:22 PM
#17
Senior Member
Thread Starter
While the naturally aspirated version was released first, the Cyclone was always designed to be turbocharged and direct injected. This link from an early 2006 press release has a lot of information about the development of the Cyclone engine and their future plans for it.
https://www.adandp.media/articles/a-...ord-powertrain
“The 3.5-liter engine has been designed to accept either transverse or longitudinal mounting,” says Barb Samardzich, v.p. of Powertrain Operations, “and the architecture has been put in place for upgrades like hybrid capability, and gasoline direct injection with or without turbocharging.”
It's likely that Ford isn't done with the Cyclone yet. They accomplished their goal of direct injection with turbocharging (1st and 2nd gen 3.5 EcoBoost) and without turbocharging (3.3 N/A). I would put good money on the possibility that the upcoming hybrid F-150 will have a Cyclone-based engine since they have already designed it to be incorporated into a hybrid drivetrain. If anything, the 3.5 EcoBoost is an older engine than the Coyote since it's been in continuous development for the last 13+ years.
https://www.adandp.media/articles/a-...ord-powertrain
“The 3.5-liter engine has been designed to accept either transverse or longitudinal mounting,” says Barb Samardzich, v.p. of Powertrain Operations, “and the architecture has been put in place for upgrades like hybrid capability, and gasoline direct injection with or without turbocharging.”
It's likely that Ford isn't done with the Cyclone yet. They accomplished their goal of direct injection with turbocharging (1st and 2nd gen 3.5 EcoBoost) and without turbocharging (3.3 N/A). I would put good money on the possibility that the upcoming hybrid F-150 will have a Cyclone-based engine since they have already designed it to be incorporated into a hybrid drivetrain. If anything, the 3.5 EcoBoost is an older engine than the Coyote since it's been in continuous development for the last 13+ years.
05-27-2018, 05:43 PM
#19
Ti-VCT Just Kicked In Yo!
05-30-2018, 11:01 PM
#20
Ford really did a good job with the cyclone engine by engineering it with future technology in mind. The reason they did this was because they were going to downsize their entire engine lineup and only wanted one V6 engine for multiple applications. With this in mind the cyclone V6 was going to be the only V6 in the entire Ford lineup so it had to be good and have a long production life (the new 3.3 is also part of the cyclone family). The engine was co-developed with Mazda and was in their vehicles too.
Ford then did the the same thing with the 5.0 V8. The engineers were told that they had to come up with one V8 to replace two previous V8's (4.6 and 5.4) and the only thing they were limited to was that it had to fit in the Mustang, had to use the same V8 production line and had to have a 8-10 year production life with no significant engineering changes. Other than that they could do whatever they wanted. This is why the 5.0 was engineered for direct injection from the beginning and why the block is built with significant webbing for strength to be able to handle supercharging.The engineers designed the engine to be supercharged. Previous modular engines had coolant lines in the valley of the V but the 5.0's valley is clean so a supercharger can be easily dropped in. Even the crank pulley is designed to accept a supercharger belt.
Little known fact. The engineers had the entire Ford parts bin at their disposal and could have come up with their own but they decided the piston design of the Cyclone Ecoboost was the best for performance. So the 5.0 V8 and the 3.5EB V6 pretty much use the same pistons.
Ford then did the the same thing with the 5.0 V8. The engineers were told that they had to come up with one V8 to replace two previous V8's (4.6 and 5.4) and the only thing they were limited to was that it had to fit in the Mustang, had to use the same V8 production line and had to have a 8-10 year production life with no significant engineering changes. Other than that they could do whatever they wanted. This is why the 5.0 was engineered for direct injection from the beginning and why the block is built with significant webbing for strength to be able to handle supercharging.The engineers designed the engine to be supercharged. Previous modular engines had coolant lines in the valley of the V but the 5.0's valley is clean so a supercharger can be easily dropped in. Even the crank pulley is designed to accept a supercharger belt.
Little known fact. The engineers had the entire Ford parts bin at their disposal and could have come up with their own but they decided the piston design of the Cyclone Ecoboost was the best for performance. So the 5.0 V8 and the 3.5EB V6 pretty much use the same pistons.
The following 2 users liked this post by RL1990:
JDMCyclone3.5F150_ML (05-30-2018),
tuckr2 (05-30-2018)