elfiero

I didn’t make that post to start an argument. I really do hope it lasts you for many years. MY 2013 hasn’t even turned 21,000 miles yet, so I’m in no position to have an opinion about your truck. The most I’ve ever gotten out of a vehicle for miles is about 200,000. So keep us posted!

mass-hole

Everyone knows ecoboost are highly unreliable and couldn’t possibly go 300k miles and explode in less than 100k. OP must be a troll.

mass-hole

I’ve never driven a hole in my 2014 CAC and never once had a problem in 55k miles. I did just buy an AFE intercooler though which has a plug, so that’s it for me.

Lee308

Why do you want the additional problems $$$$$$$ a turbo brings with it?
I Want simple.
There are enough high repair cost items in this truck w/o adding more. (Fuel filter in tank, EAPS, etc.
5.0 does what I need it to do with less moving parts than Eco boost.

5.0nly

My last 5.0L had 375,000 miles on it. I also owned a 6.2L with around 260,000 miles. Figured I'd give an Eco a chance and so far I love it minus the reliability. Hopefully new plugs will fix the misfiring at high RPM.

nerdh3rd

iTrader: (1)

mass-hole

I am pretty sure the extra 8 valves, 2 pistons, 2 rods, and 2 bearings in the 5.0 makes up for all the moving parts added by turbos on an ecoboost. Turbos are pretty simple machines.

RL1990

I think you forgot to add intercooler, charge air plumbing, additional oil lines waste gates, and auxillary brake booster in addition to the two turbos that come with a turbo charged engine. Although a turbo charged engine also has valves, pistons, rods and bearings no NA engine will have the additional parts a turbo charged engine requires. I don't think it's fair to gloss over the fact that turbo charged engines have more things that can go wrong. Not will but can.

Now with that said the OP's truck proves that turbo charged engines are capable of being just as reliable as any NA engine. It also proves that if you maintain your truck as required and leave it like it came from the factory it will serve you well for many years and miles.

bassJAM

I wonder if these same discussions went on for years on ancient message boards in the 90's when Ford/GM/Dodge went to turbo-diesels? Because those 5.9 Cummins and 7.3 Powerstrokes were sure known for being unreliable because of being turbocharged.....

BC119

You just quoted like six non moving things.