Finally! The answer to 5.0 vs EB debate
07-04-2017, 11:25 AM
#21
This plus.......the other day some douch in a F150 5.0 with an aftermarket exhaust kept messing with me on the interstate in an attempt to race or just wanted to hear his pipes, as he kept flooring in.
Finally had enough of him once traffic cleared and he pulled next to me at 70mph and hit it again. I said **** it, spooled the birds and pulled away from him like I sat on a hot plate. Just hands down embarrassed his ***.
Normally I do not go around trying to race anyone with my Truck and this was a single event but non the less in that situation the 3.5TT dominated....
Finally had enough of him once traffic cleared and he pulled next to me at 70mph and hit it again. I said **** it, spooled the birds and pulled away from him like I sat on a hot plate. Just hands down embarrassed his ***.
Normally I do not go around trying to race anyone with my Truck and this was a single event but non the less in that situation the 3.5TT dominated....
Spooled the birds.......
07-04-2017, 11:41 AM
#22
Old Fart
I am always getting the crap from the Dodge boys, they keep telling me how the Hemi can eat a 5.0, although they won't mess with the Ecoboost, especially the Tremors with the 4.10 gears at the track. I asked them how they did against the Raptor and pointed to my door, shuts them right up 
07-05-2017, 10:01 AM
#23
Senior Member
I have owned three Ecoboost engines now, one in an F-150 (sig), one in our 2014 Flex (same 3.5 EB) and one in a Fusion. Not one of them has needed a day in service for engine issues with the exception of the 2012 F-150 because it had the water condensation issue the early 3.5 had. It was an issue you wouldn't have in a non-boosted vehicle, but there hasn't been an engine released yet that hasn't had SOME early production problems so it's irrelevant overall. The 5.0 has had its share of problems in Mustang and F-150 configurations, especially in the initial model year(s).
Anyway, the argument I see often, and even saw already here, aside from reliability is that the EB doesn't offer better fuel economy than the V-8. That's BS.
Just because a 5.0 and 3.5 EB may have equivalent real world MPG, doesn't mean the 3.5 isn't kicking the 5.0s *** in fuel usage. The reason being that the 3.5 is doing WAY more with that same fuel economy, which is the ONLY thing Ford promised with the EB. The EB gets 6.2L V8 performance while returning better fuel economy than the 6.2L ever had. That's why it replaced the 6.2L as the halo engine at the top of the F-150 line.
It's that convenient little tidbit that the 5.0 guys leave out every damn time. It's like when they talk HP or Torque numbers (oh it's only 15 HP blah blah), yeah, at the roof of the RPM window and only for a short period. The EBs make their torque from 2000 RPM and don't let up.
Over and over it's those little tidbits that the 5.0 guys never bring up in these comparisons, but they make all the difference.
Line up two identical 2000lb vehicles side by side. Let one makes 300HP/TQ at 2000 RPM and one make 315HP/TQ at 5000 RPM, all other things being equal, and sit there in amazement as the lower HP/TQ vehicle just destroys the vehicle that makes more power (but only for a split second right before a gear change).
Since we have no solid statistics showing that per 100,000 F-150s, the 5.0 is without a doubt significantly more problem free than either EB, the reliability argument is just fluff with no backing. Even this video with the techs would never be considered a scientific study because the EBs wildly outsell the 5.0. If you sell 500,000 EBs with a 1% failure rate, and 100,000 5.0s with a 2% failure rate, you would STILL see more EBs in the service center. But the EB is more reliable. Please note the above failure rates are just for the sake of example, as are the sales figures. The EB engines are the highest sellers by a wide margin though, so it's why I bring it up. So yeah, the techs may be like, "Man, look at these EBs always in service!", and that may be, but as a percentage of vehicles sold the EB problem rate may be no worse, at least to any statistical significance, than the 5.0 or 3.5 NA rate.
Every single solid figure we have, (Tow rating, HP/TQ per liter, HP/TQ per MPG, HP/TQ power band, 0-60 times, 1/4 and 1/8th mile times, etc), shows the 3.5 EB dominates the 5.0. The only check box you get from the 5.0 is that it's louder. It's a sexy sound, there is no taking that away, it sounds better stock than any 3.5 EB I have heard with any exhaust config.
But I don't care about people hearing my truck, I don't crave attention, if I want something that sounds good that I drive I would just have it in a fun side vehicle or just "enjoy" the fake engine noise because again, it doesn't matter.
Anyway, the argument I see often, and even saw already here, aside from reliability is that the EB doesn't offer better fuel economy than the V-8. That's BS.
Just because a 5.0 and 3.5 EB may have equivalent real world MPG, doesn't mean the 3.5 isn't kicking the 5.0s *** in fuel usage. The reason being that the 3.5 is doing WAY more with that same fuel economy, which is the ONLY thing Ford promised with the EB. The EB gets 6.2L V8 performance while returning better fuel economy than the 6.2L ever had. That's why it replaced the 6.2L as the halo engine at the top of the F-150 line.
It's that convenient little tidbit that the 5.0 guys leave out every damn time. It's like when they talk HP or Torque numbers (oh it's only 15 HP blah blah), yeah, at the roof of the RPM window and only for a short period. The EBs make their torque from 2000 RPM and don't let up.
Over and over it's those little tidbits that the 5.0 guys never bring up in these comparisons, but they make all the difference.
Line up two identical 2000lb vehicles side by side. Let one makes 300HP/TQ at 2000 RPM and one make 315HP/TQ at 5000 RPM, all other things being equal, and sit there in amazement as the lower HP/TQ vehicle just destroys the vehicle that makes more power (but only for a split second right before a gear change).
Since we have no solid statistics showing that per 100,000 F-150s, the 5.0 is without a doubt significantly more problem free than either EB, the reliability argument is just fluff with no backing. Even this video with the techs would never be considered a scientific study because the EBs wildly outsell the 5.0. If you sell 500,000 EBs with a 1% failure rate, and 100,000 5.0s with a 2% failure rate, you would STILL see more EBs in the service center. But the EB is more reliable. Please note the above failure rates are just for the sake of example, as are the sales figures. The EB engines are the highest sellers by a wide margin though, so it's why I bring it up. So yeah, the techs may be like, "Man, look at these EBs always in service!", and that may be, but as a percentage of vehicles sold the EB problem rate may be no worse, at least to any statistical significance, than the 5.0 or 3.5 NA rate.
Every single solid figure we have, (Tow rating, HP/TQ per liter, HP/TQ per MPG, HP/TQ power band, 0-60 times, 1/4 and 1/8th mile times, etc), shows the 3.5 EB dominates the 5.0. The only check box you get from the 5.0 is that it's louder. It's a sexy sound, there is no taking that away, it sounds better stock than any 3.5 EB I have heard with any exhaust config.
But I don't care about people hearing my truck, I don't crave attention, if I want something that sounds good that I drive I would just have it in a fun side vehicle or just "enjoy" the fake engine noise because again, it doesn't matter.
Last edited by vulnox; 07-05-2017 at 10:06 AM.
07-05-2017, 08:39 PM
#24
Lets dispel this Eco 
5.0 BS
Food for thought, how confident are you when the dealer tech would rather not work on the 3.5TT? Because A) It's more difficult to work on, B) If it's warranty work the tech is going to get the "real screw" ? Hmmmm Y'all just think about that for a bit next time your eco goes in for repair under warranty or at a higher cost if out of warranty.
Now shut the hell up about it!
.
5.0 BSFood for thought, how confident are you when the dealer tech would rather not work on the 3.5TT? Because A) It's more difficult to work on, B) If it's warranty work the tech is going to get the "real screw" ? Hmmmm Y'all just think about that for a bit next time your eco goes in for repair under warranty or at a higher cost if out of warranty.
Now shut the hell up about it!
.
07-05-2017, 10:41 PM
#25
Oh RlY? I smell BS there. The EB is no more difficult to work on than any other engine. Maybe diagnosing it might be a pain, the only difference between the 5.0 and the EB are the turbos, which hang off the sides of the block, unlike years past when the turbo sat on top of the engine and had to be removed to do various work, like on Subarus, or some of the piece of crap dodges from the late 80's, early 90's when I spun a wrench.
If an EB is too difficult, your not a mechanic then. I have worked on engines that make the EB look like a lawn mower engine, and would have loved to work on them instead.
Oh but its direct injection! So what, so are diesels, and I have worked on a few of those as well.
Master techs my @$$.
If an EB is too difficult, your not a mechanic then. I have worked on engines that make the EB look like a lawn mower engine, and would have loved to work on them instead.
Oh but its direct injection! So what, so are diesels, and I have worked on a few of those as well.
Master techs my @$$.
07-05-2017, 10:53 PM
#26
Oh RlY? I smell BS there. The EB is no more difficult to work on than any other engine. Maybe diagnosing it might be a pain, the only difference between the 5.0 and the EB are the turbos, which hang off the sides of the block, unlike years past when the turbo sat on top of the engine and had to be removed to do various work, like on Subarus, or some of the piece of crap dodges from the late 80's, early 90's when I spun a wrench.
If an EB is too difficult, your not a mechanic then. I have worked on engines that make the EB look like a lawn mower engine, and would have loved to work on them instead.
Oh but its direct injection! So what, so are diesels, and I have worked on a few of those as well.
Master techs my @$$.
If an EB is too difficult, your not a mechanic then. I have worked on engines that make the EB look like a lawn mower engine, and would have loved to work on them instead.
Oh but its direct injection! So what, so are diesels, and I have worked on a few of those as well.
Master techs my @$$.
They are a royal PITA to work on, the specialty tools, specialty training, etc.. don't think for one minute it's easier to work on than a naturally aspirated engine.
Now top that off with barely out of high school kids now trying to learn and it's a recipe for disaster. I've worked on these machines for over 30 years, 11 with Ford so I am pretty sure I have a better bead on things than you might think.
You will do well to learn in-depth the real world and what happens at dealers today before you start talking crap.
.
07-05-2017, 11:19 PM
#27
I have dealt with Ford and their lack of being able to diagnose issues with cars. I would do it myself if I had the equipment. I worked on things much more complicated than what is in a car back in the early 80's and it just irks me that the "techs" in the dealerships can't figure things out on their own without Ford holding their hands.
Only reason I stopped turning a wrench is due to arthritis, and a bad back. Leaning over fenders took its toll. I've worked on Macks, Cat's, Subarus, GM, Dodge/chrysler/plymouth, Ford, Toyota, Honda, Mazda(remember the 12A and 13B, yep did those too), Datsun/Nissan, AMC, Cadillac, and even a Rolls Royce. I have done everything from replace a light bulb, to rebuilding the engines, transmissions, rear ends, front ends, brakes, hell I even rewired an entire car once that a mouse chewed up, and also did a fair share of body work and repaint. Had several ASE certifications as well in the early 90's. No job was too small or too hard, the harder it was, the more of a challenge it was. I didn't whine about it, I dug in and got my hands dirty and figured out what the issue was.
Like I said, the EB would be a blast for me to work on, it's different, yet very familiar after working on the 7.3 Powerstrokes. My greatest challenge was getting a 13B balanced and ported to where it could spin 13K RPM and be smooth as glass.
Only reason I stopped turning a wrench is due to arthritis, and a bad back. Leaning over fenders took its toll. I've worked on Macks, Cat's, Subarus, GM, Dodge/chrysler/plymouth, Ford, Toyota, Honda, Mazda(remember the 12A and 13B, yep did those too), Datsun/Nissan, AMC, Cadillac, and even a Rolls Royce. I have done everything from replace a light bulb, to rebuilding the engines, transmissions, rear ends, front ends, brakes, hell I even rewired an entire car once that a mouse chewed up, and also did a fair share of body work and repaint. Had several ASE certifications as well in the early 90's. No job was too small or too hard, the harder it was, the more of a challenge it was. I didn't whine about it, I dug in and got my hands dirty and figured out what the issue was.
Like I said, the EB would be a blast for me to work on, it's different, yet very familiar after working on the 7.3 Powerstrokes. My greatest challenge was getting a 13B balanced and ported to where it could spin 13K RPM and be smooth as glass.
07-05-2017, 11:31 PM
#28
Senior Member
This plus.......the other day some douch in a F150 5.0 with an aftermarket exhaust kept messing with me on the interstate in an attempt to race or just wanted to hear his pipes, as he kept flooring in.
Finally had enough of him once traffic cleared and he pulled next to me at 70mph and hit it again. I said **** it, spooled the birds and pulled away from him like I sat on a hot plate. Just hands down embarrassed his ***.
Normally I do not go around trying to race anyone with my Truck and this was a single event but non the less in that situation the 3.5TT dominated....
Finally had enough of him once traffic cleared and he pulled next to me at 70mph and hit it again. I said **** it, spooled the birds and pulled away from him like I sat on a hot plate. Just hands down embarrassed his ***.
Normally I do not go around trying to race anyone with my Truck and this was a single event but non the less in that situation the 3.5TT dominated....
07-06-2017, 12:00 AM
#29
5.0 DOHC V8
Join Date: Apr 2017
Location: The southern California sardine can
Posts: 3,354
Received 1,587 Likes
on
974 Posts
And while we're in the middle of this latest dog-pile... 
...I'll add that I wanted the 5.0 for two reasons, mainly.
1. I prefer the linear power delivery of a naturally-aspirated engine.
2. If you're at all enthusiastic of motor sports, you'll appreciate the Ford Cosworth DFV, one of the most successful Formula 1 engines of all time... dual overhead cams, four valves per cylinder, alloy construction, etc, and so forth and so on ad nauseum... the Mustang Coyote V8's architecture draws it's essence from that amazing racing engine.
I will agree, as I have before, here, that the 3.5 Eco is a beast. It has almost the torque of a big rig in a nice, tidy package... I only prefer to drive everyday the musical instrument of this state-of-the-art, dohc 302.
...I'll add that I wanted the 5.0 for two reasons, mainly. 1. I prefer the linear power delivery of a naturally-aspirated engine.
2. If you're at all enthusiastic of motor sports, you'll appreciate the Ford Cosworth DFV, one of the most successful Formula 1 engines of all time... dual overhead cams, four valves per cylinder, alloy construction, etc, and so forth and so on ad nauseum... the Mustang Coyote V8's architecture draws it's essence from that amazing racing engine.
I will agree, as I have before, here, that the 3.5 Eco is a beast. It has almost the torque of a big rig in a nice, tidy package... I only prefer to drive everyday the musical instrument of this state-of-the-art, dohc 302.
07-06-2017, 12:20 AM
#30
These techs make all sort of excuses about less parts to break on a v8 or they would rather have a normally aspirated v8 without a turbo to break.
Ask them which engine they will pick on a new f250. Im willing to bet they would not pick a normally aspirated 6.2 V8 against the twin turbo v8 powerstroke.
Ask them which engine they will pick on a new f250. Im willing to bet they would not pick a normally aspirated 6.2 V8 against the twin turbo v8 powerstroke.