engineermike

You can not simultaneously praise the power and criticize the mileage. Consumer Reports got this wrong also. They went on and on about how the smaller turbo engines out-accelerated their bigger NA counterparts, but then complained because they only got the same mileage. They only get better mileage while you aren't using the increased power.

If you think the stock EB has a lot of low-end, try one with a 5-star tune. It's night-and-day more, to the tune of an extra 120 ft-lb.

prorider17

Good news. It's grease used on the steering column. When it gets hot inside the cabin, I guess excess grease can drip down the pedals onto the floor. My ford dealer figured it out. No worries!

Al Kohalic

Good to hear you got your truck back, and that there was nothing wrong with it.

Billr

iTrader: (1)

Had a 2011 EB and now have a 5.0. Both trucks are/were optioned the same, EB had 3.73 gears and 5.0 has 3.55. Drove EB for 34k miles and have about 2k miles on 5.0, so I'd say I know both trucks.

MY experience:
EB: due to more torque down low it is quicker off the line, tows better in town. I got avg of 15.2 mpg over 34k miles. I was not a fan of the turbo lag (or the quietness of the truck). The lag was always noticable when you don't want lag, like you need to get out of the way of someone! You will not notice lag on test drive or about 65% of driving EB, but it is there! Also, the EB was fairly quick, but doesn't "sound" good. It was also the first Ford vehicle I had issues with. Although I couldn't feel it, a buddy who is a lead tech for 25 plus years told me every time he rode with me that it was missing. So every oil change (3000 miles) I mentioned it. Sure enough, Ford confirmed this and replaced plugs EVERY oil change. (Again I never could feel it) in Jan 2013, it started the shuddering, missing (I could now feel it) and took it in. Ford did TSB where they reprogram ECU and put new CAC on it. That repair made it worse! It would sound like it was running on 3 / 4 cylinders at morning only start ups and I could FEEL it missing driving. Plus the new computer program took what felt like about 1/4 of the power away. It felt like I was now driving a 6 cyl. I know these issues won't happen to everyone, but it did happen to me. I did like EB mostly until Ford did the TSB, but they were stumped as how to fix MY truck, so I traded for same truck but with 5.0.

Now the 5.0:
Down low, off the line the 5.0 feels more sluggish. But rev it to 3000 and it wakes right up. The sound of the motor is simply sweet. I am getting 15.2 mpg, and I "think" I may be driving it a bit harder just to hear the motor. City stop and go driving the 5.0 will drink more fuel than EB, highway it gets much much better mpg than EB. The throttle response is much better because A) it is a V8. B) no turbo lag. The 5.0 tows incredible on the highway and is fine in town, but EB is better towing in town cause of all that torque available so early in RPM. For ME - the day to day drive ability of 5.0 is better. The 5.0 is great in first gear, but in second, it feels like it is kinda bogged down until it hits third, then it picks back up. The EB doesn't feel bogged until 4th gear +. I bought a MPT tuning and am running thier 87 tune; this improves the down low performance drastically as well as overall drive ability of the 5.0. I hear a tuner on EB is pretty good too, but never tried one.

Bottom line - for ME, I prefer the 5.0. I think it is all around better driving than EB, and I sincerely believe some the the EB still have to have some bugs worked out.

Please don't turn this thread into a 5.0 or EB bash fest. The above are my personal experiences with both engines. It is what it is!

wyzguy2001

I looked at both trucks and researched and compared between the eco-boost and the v8. I liked the idea of the power and "supposed" MPG from the eco-boost and after talking to most owners who told me that the best they got was around 18-20 on an average. One Firefighter told me that he was only getting 16! and was going to join a class action suit feeling that he got scammed! that was the final straw for me. I remember back in the 80's the turbos on V6 engines. They were fast but did not last long.
Anyway, I went with the 5.0 and I am realistically getting 20-22 on highway and 15-17 around town. I pulled a 28 foot RV up to maine and got 12-13. I am impressed. This is my first American Truck. I have been a Toyota and German car guy for the last 20 years and this truck is great.. Same gas mileage as my 2008 Tacoma was getting. NICE!! Go with the v8, a proven engine. Eco is nice but why risk the possibility of issues down the road with all the complicated components.

engineermike

BS, BS, and more BS there. Here we go...

ClaySlayer

I believe he said he drove the EB along the same route as the 5.0. You need to clarify if he drove both with the same pedal control before making such a statement. You don't have to romp on an EB or Diesel to notice the low end power.

BTW: Everybody calm down! The OP is simply sharing his experience and people start getting butt hurt over it...

cptbimes

Anybody who says EB has turbo lag should go out and drive ANY turbo diesel truck from the big 3.

Then come back and report your results.

prorider17

I started this thread because I was really impressed by the EcoBoost, but like Billr said, I'm not turning this into a bash thread or a "one's better than the other" thread. It was created to give interested buyers another perspective into engine options, so they're better educated in what they want. I don't think anyone on this thread is trying to disqualify anyone's thoughts and opinions.

For the record, I'm actually a fan of turbocharged vehicles... My step father has a turbo'd Toyota Supra (it rocks). Not trying to throw hate down or the say V8s are better. That's the equivalent of saying no replacement for displacement... yet we all know what the outcome is when a company invests millions to make a sick a** engine lineup.

As engineermike eloquently pointed out in his post - The EcoBoost makes more power and is very efficient, but people are throwing darts at it for it's comparable fuel economy. Someone needs to also pay attention to the fact that my loaner had more options, lariat, 4wd and was a crew cab, compared to my reg cab. I could imagine the extra weight attributed to lower mpg. I'm not throwing a fit about it's average mpg, I was just pointing out what it got for fuel economy. In the end, anything's better than my 2002 Ram 1500 that got 13mpg for a standard cab 2wd pickup with an engine that only had .3 liters less than my 5.0. Kudos to Ford's technology and engineering.

Now all we need is a 3.7 & 6.2L fan to chirp in so everything I say will have become null and void..haha!

jayandsam09

Reliability, highway and towing mpg's are other things that have been advantageous for me with my 5.0 vs my eco