6michaud

1st sorry for my french. Today I went to my dealer for my 1st oil change,I have a 5.0 FX4 with a 5 star tune since almost day one. The tune is on 91 Performance. When I arrived they where late, so they asked me if i wanted a car and to come back later. I said sure give me an Screw ecoboost. I test drove it, and I can honneslty say that my tuned 5.0 is a lot faster than a stock Ecoboost. I am not BS. It probably would be a diffrent story with a tuned Eco. But stock, no comparison.
Please I dont want to start nothing between the 2 motors. Just wanted to share.

engineermike

If you didn't want to start anything, then why would you post something that's obviously very controversial.

That said, a tune may have made up the hp difference (but not beat, especially not "a lot faster") but it did not make up for a 40 ft-lb deficit.

Brad92

I think the Ecoboost feels slower to some because of the turbo lag compared to a N/A motor.

But I agree with the above post.

geabis

The EB is only making power during boost. I've driven turbo diesels for what seems to be forever. And if you aren't under load, your not making boost. So if you want to unleash the EB you need to boost your launch and once the turbos are spooled and making pressure you don't let up. That's where you'll feel the pull. If you back off and get back on it. You will need to deal with the lag again. Trust me if you were to run side by side with the EB boosting at launch it will run away from the 5.0. If you were loaded the same and were pulling the same hill the EB would out pull the 5.0 . But for seat of the pants fun, you'll enjoy the 5.0 a lot more. Because when you hit the throttle is there without the lag and waiting to boost.

Jaws1

Seat of the pants impressions mean nothing, especially when comparing na to fi engines.

engineermike

These numbers are from the Motor Trend full line test:

F150 EB: 316 rwhp, 347 ft-lb
F150 5.0: 286 rwhp, 287 ft-lb

PUT.com had the EB at a 17 hp and 75 ft-lb advantage.

These numbers are from 5 Star's website:

5.0 stock: 271 rwhp
5.0 w/93 octane tune: 291 rwhp

So, if the EB has a 20-30 rwhp advantage base case, and the tune picks up 20 rwhp on the 5.0, how could the tuned 5.0 possibly be "a lot faster than a stock ecoboost"?

amascio

Uh, a steady diet of Premium fuel could get costly over the lifetime of driving the truck.
Having said that, congratulations on what sounds like a great truck!

TexasTexas95

Im sorry, but I honestly think they are all sweet engines. Heck even the 3.7 non turbo is actually kind of impressive. The truth of the matter is that some guys just hate the fact that a v-6 can run (and alot of the time outrun) the big boys. But then again, v-6 deisels have been doin it forever right?

zx12-iowa

Feels faster and IS faster are two different things. I have no doubt the 5.0 tune could feel faster but is it actually faster? Maybe, maybe not. And what are the gear ratios - did you check the rental? No?

But lets say the 5.0 tune is a tad faster then...but "a lot faster" Not a chance. Nor is the Eco "a lot faster" than the 5.0 or 6.2....

Tunes do make vehicles feel faster due to shift points, throttle position, etc.... and could FEEL a lot faster, but it isnt. No doubt a 5.0 will always sound faster.

MT-Ford

With a higher gear ratio on the eb and not broke in yet, along with a 5.0 that shifts gears faster...I'd say the op can claim a lot faster.