Topic Sponsor
2011+ Engine Related Questions Sub-Forum to the new engines that debuted in 2011.
View Poll Results: 5.0 vs ECO
5.0
38.52%
EcoBoost
61.48%
Voters: 244. You may not vote on this poll

Pure power 5.0 vs Turbo power ECO

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 11-09-2011, 01:54 PM
  #71  
Senior Member
 
bubbabud's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Tonopah. AZ.
Posts: 3,380
Received 502 Likes on 324 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by Samrow
Does anyone replying to this actually have an Eco and can give me some real decent info? Not looking for bs cause I will not give you any about the 5.0 I have. I am really trying to decide if I made the right decision based on common sense not hype?....
I have a eco xlt sc i picked up on may 30 2011 I now ha just over 7000 miles i was shoping for a v8 when the dealer talked me into a eco test drive I never looked back. Ibought my truck as a daily driver and to pull my jeep on a flatbed trailer. in the 7k miles it has averaged 20.7 mpg including about5% towing. I have had no isues with this truck and it continues to amaze me. with its almost diesel like low end torque but it just keeps pulling up to 5000 rpm. If it will stay glued together its a hit only time will tell.Bubbabud 2011XLT SC EEEKoboost
Old 11-09-2011, 02:22 PM
  #72  
Senior Member
 
02themax's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Calgary, AB Canada
Posts: 543
Received 15 Likes on 15 Posts
Default

After 6 failed fuel injectors and 3 dead fuel pumps not to mention excessive carbon build up in the intake valves I'll pass on Direct Injection technology for now. If the Eco got at least 5+ mpg more I might have considered taking another chance on DI. For now I'll enjoy my 5.0 and in a few years I'll trade up if these common DI issues are not as problemtic for the F150.

BG did a test on the Eco (in the Taurus I think) and the amount of gunk on those intake valves was scary. MPG and HP dropped considerably. Valve deposit cleaning should be covered under warranty though.

I believe once these wrinkles are ironed out and Ford can get noticeably more mpg's the Eco will truly shine. Only time will tell and once its proven I'll be stepping into one.
Old 11-09-2011, 05:25 PM
  #73  
Eco-5.0-Eco again
 
BlueFlameMetallicFX4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Hazard County MD.
Posts: 275
Received 15 Likes on 10 Posts

Default

Bit of an old thread but here goes...

As a hardcore Ford owner/racer, V8's have been the only thing I know. When I test drove the 5.0 and ECB, the ECB had a pull to it similar to my former 04' Lightning, the 5.0 did not. It took alot for me to go with the ECB but for now, I'm glad I did. I've put this truck through some very steep trails, towed a couple of medium weight loads and so far, this engine is very impressive to say the least...and the gas mileage is more than acceptable.

I'm sure if I would have purchased the 5.0 I'd be just as happy...I do miss that V8 rumble.
Old 11-09-2011, 05:43 PM
  #74  
Senior Member
 
troutspinner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 554
Received 34 Likes on 31 Posts

Default

Put them both on the line. Once with a real towing load and once without. What wins both?

As for quality and longevity. Both engines are just as suspect, it's the first year either engine has landed in an F150 and not a passenger car. Do you really think Ford is going to put out something unproven and have to recall billions of dollars worth of engines?
Old 11-09-2011, 05:47 PM
  #75  
Senior Member
 
02themax's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Calgary, AB Canada
Posts: 543
Received 15 Likes on 15 Posts
Default

Google bgfueltest seems their fuel system cleaner works well, its worth a look.
Old 11-10-2011, 09:01 AM
  #76  
Senior Member
 
bubbabud's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Tonopah. AZ.
Posts: 3,380
Received 502 Likes on 324 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by d23_boarder
I have a 2011 fx4 5.0 and I love it. I decided on the 5.0 due to it's simplicity(less parts to go wrong). The EB has alot of extra parts that could fail. It has two wastegates two blowoff(recirculation) valves, intercoolers, boost controllers, etc. Plus the direct injection injectors are usually alot more expensive. With the boost all of the intake piping is pressurized which could cause boost leak problems. Not to mention the EB runs much higher cylinder pressures causing access wear. I believe turbos belong on performance vehicles not big heavy trucks.
When is the last time you saw a Peterbuilt without a turbo? Bubbabud 2011 XLT SC EEEEK oboost
Old 11-10-2011, 10:24 AM
  #77  
Senior Member
 
Loki 5.0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 605
Received 32 Likes on 22 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by bubbabud
When is the last time you saw a Peterbuilt without a turbo? Bubbabud 2011 XLT SC EEEEK oboost
Just because they stick them on big trucks does not mean they don't break. I have sat for more than one day due to a bad turbo.
Old 11-11-2011, 02:45 AM
  #78  
Senior Member
 
11FX4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: North Vancouver BC
Posts: 172
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I don't get all the debate about the "extra parts" that make up an ecoboost motor. The 5.0 is hardly a simple engine with fewer parts.

Keep on beating the dead horse...........!!!!!
Old 11-11-2011, 10:47 AM
  #79  
Member
 
SpoolinF150's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by 11FX4
I don't get all the debate about the "extra parts" that make up an ecoboost motor. The 5.0 is hardly a simple engine with fewer parts.

Keep on beating the dead horse...........!!!!!
It is pretty funny, lol. It's like they completely forgot the 5.0 has two extra pistons and the dozens of parts that go along with them..
Old 11-11-2011, 08:31 PM
  #80  
Senior Member
 
smgfx4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 503
Received 36 Likes on 29 Posts

Default

There is no replacement for displacement!


Quick Reply: Pure power 5.0 vs Turbo power ECO



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:42 AM.