shipsgunner

Actually, Back in December, I wrecked my $60k Acura RL and nearly totalled it. They said they only had a pickup to rent since I wanted something bigger than a POS Dodge product... I looked at the pickup and it was an 2012 XLT Ford with 5.0L and 400 miles on it. It was reasonably loaded for XLT. I drove it for a month and a half and was very happy with it. It sounded really nice when I got on it and had quite a bit of pep for a SCREW 4X2. It had quite a few features in it including the tailgate step and some other power features optional on XLT. I was hooked on the truck. So much so that I decided to trade the Acura as soon as I got it back from the body shop.

I went shopping and when I was talking to the salesguy, he mentioned the ecoboost. So not wanting to miss out on something cool, I test drove it. It was noticeably different. More power without flooring it, the torque is addicting (I used to own a 7.3L F250) and it seemed too good to be true. I was terrified that twin turbos would leave me high and dry and it would become a spensive POS after about 60k miles. so the salesguy said to go home and think about it and google this. "Mike Rowe Ecoboost Torture Test".

I went home and watched all 6 of them and I went in at 9am the next morning and bought my Lariat Long SCREW 4X2 with Ecoboost and 3.15 gears. The truck was nearly a year old on the lot this April30th when I bought it. Salesguy said most folks wanted either short bed with SCREW or 4x4 with Lariat so it didn't sell. The sticker was 47+ and I got is for 34 and change.

I have owned it for 9 weeks now and have 9,000 miles on it. Took it on a 2 week vacation to Montana from Virginia "6200 miles". Spent 4 days in Black Hills and 3 Days in Glacier National Park and almost a week in the rockies. Total mileage for the vacation (nearly all interstate miles were at 80 on cruise) was 19.5mpg. My Acura didn't get that kind of mileage.

All in all, I prefer the ecoboost to the other choices. LOVE the V8 sound and all but the ecoboost was perfect for me and what I do.

Hope this helps
SG

iFord

Good report, ships. Wow, I didn't know you could even get 3.15 gears! That should put the mpg a bit better I'd think. I'm still driving my '02 5.4, just arrived tonight from a 400 mile very rainy trip. I'm also researching the engines. And so far, here's what I've decided - I like all Ford's engines so much, I'm just going to get whichever truck I get the best deal on when I do finally buy! For a similarly equipped truck I mean. I only tow a lightweight travel trailer (4,500 lbs), so, for me, towing shouldn't be an issue for even the 3.7. And, I'll get that engine if it comes in a truck equipped like I want.

I know our problem here: we just have GREAT choices, boys!

Matt6951

i havent read ahead of this post, im sure someone has already said this, but you are dead wrong on the 5.4 being better than either 5.0 or ecoboost.. i wanted to call you an idiot, but that wouldnt be nice, but please dont open your mouth and spout out **** like you just posted.

EcoboostKev

The biggest misconception a few of you have is that you keep comparing the Ecoboost to the 5.0. In reality it is the 6.2L V8 that everyone should be comparing to the Eco. Especially when it comes to towing, it's these two motors that are similar in performance not the 5.0..
So now that we have a realistic comparison(Eco vs. 6.2L) lets compare fuel mileage empty and towing between these two motors!! Ecoboost wins hands down!! End of discussion....

carnut

Was one of the 1st with the ecoboost when they came out. Had a 2011 Lariat 2WD and drove it for 49k. Used for in town, towing, etc. It was a fantastic truck.

Traded it for a new (13) FX4 5.0 3 months ago, and have nearly 7,000 miles on it now. Used the same as the eco... also a fantastic truck.

Don't lose any sleep over this decision. The 5.0 sounds better (I installed an exhaust system) and feels like it has more umph from idle. The eco had more power mid-range, and turbos sound great when winding up. Really does not matter as these are trucks and both engines have more than enough power. Strange thing is that thus far, I'm getting better mpg's with the 5.0.
I went with the 5.0 b/c it was $1500 less $$, and from what I could tell the mpg's were very close so I'd never recover that $$. Also a little concerned that the problems people were having with eco could effect resale value.

NASSTY

So far the Ecos still have better resale value. This may or may not change in the future??

Azuri

My statement is generalized. For the less savoy that are shopping for their fist truck for example just V6 over V8 throwing away any liter size would naturally think 2 less cylinders drinks less fuel. I did not by my motor in my truck based on fuel economy it wasn't even a factor but I'd imagine it is for many.

HunterSmitty

Where did you grab compare the numbers on? Not saying it isn't true, but I can't see an equally equipped used Ecoboost costing $2600 more than a 5.0L here in Canada. That is the difference when you add the $1350 price of the engine, and the $1250 extra in rebates on the 5.0L that has been offered the last few months.

NASSTY

You may not recoup all of your rebates but should recoup the original EB upcharge plus a little. Rebates are different in different areas and are always changing. But from looking on KBB, NADA and similar websites the Ecoboost is getting about $1875 more in trade value on FX4s (this may vary on different models). When I bought my '11 EB in early 2011 there were no added rebates for buying a 5.0, just a $750 upcharge for the EB.

HunterSmitty

Same when I bought my Eco. Just the $1200 upcharge if I remember correctly. It seems quite common to see big rebates now on the 5.0L's now though which is making it the "better buy" for people who don't need the torque of the EB.