Whats the fuss over the ecoboost?
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 457
Likes: 5
From: canada
It's the first year for the engine in the f150. They would not release the engine at it's full potential in the first year. Or they would have to redesign after a year or so. Even the supra twin turbo wasn't released with 300 hp in the first model
Member
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
From: Wettern Washington
So this is my first post here, and ill be honest ive never been a fan of ford trucks. I think the 5.4 is what really turned me off of them, and ive always been a Ram guy. But, i was quite impressed by the new v8's ford is putting out. But i cant wrap my head around the new ecoboost.
Dont get me wrong, im sure it performs great along side other larger engines. But the numbers dont add up for me. A twin turbo 3.5 v6 putting out 365bhp and 420 tq just doesnt make sense. N/a v6's today can easily put out 300hp and im sure with some reworking (like done on the ecoboost compared to the other applications its in) some good torque could be produced. So to me adding 12 psi of boost via tt should produce better numbers on a 3.5.
For comparison, and i know this is different, an 18 year old toyota supra twin turbo puts out 326hp and 305 tq via less boost and a 3.0 displacement. It seems to me that stroking the 3.0 and reworking the motor could easily attain the hp figures and come close to the tq figures. Remember the 18 year difference.
It seems to me that with todays standards and tech, this new "premium" motor should put out some better numbers. I totally agree with fords direction
on this new engine, but i think its lackluster.
Am i missing something or what? Any thoughts are apreciated.
Dont get me wrong, im sure it performs great along side other larger engines. But the numbers dont add up for me. A twin turbo 3.5 v6 putting out 365bhp and 420 tq just doesnt make sense. N/a v6's today can easily put out 300hp and im sure with some reworking (like done on the ecoboost compared to the other applications its in) some good torque could be produced. So to me adding 12 psi of boost via tt should produce better numbers on a 3.5.
For comparison, and i know this is different, an 18 year old toyota supra twin turbo puts out 326hp and 305 tq via less boost and a 3.0 displacement. It seems to me that stroking the 3.0 and reworking the motor could easily attain the hp figures and come close to the tq figures. Remember the 18 year difference.
It seems to me that with todays standards and tech, this new "premium" motor should put out some better numbers. I totally agree with fords direction
on this new engine, but i think its lackluster.
Am i missing something or what? Any thoughts are apreciated.
When you put our 115 more Ft lbs of torque on the Toyota
to get close to the torque numbers as you say on the STOCK Toyota motor wouldn't have very much drive-ability or IMO Longevity of the motor.I never have seen the apples and oranges comparisons very helpful.
my 2Cents.
Last edited by BS Racing; Mar 14, 2011 at 01:41 PM.
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 507
Likes: 54
From: Suffolk, VA
Since you compared the peak tq and hp numbers from the EB to a twin turbo supra, compare the hp and torque curves, and rpms where the peak numbers are. Big difference in the lower rpms. Sure they could bump the timing up and make us all run 93 octane and get 20 more hp, but who the hell wants to pay $.40 more/gallon for 20 hp?
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,144
Likes: 26
Exactly. The technology is there but only sold in increments. This is why the 5.0 is not direct injected just yet. Probably will get it when the F-150 gets a face-lift in 2 years.
This goes for the EB. If it was more powerful then it would cannibalize 6.2 sales. EB is all about V8 power at V6 MPG so making it too powerful would undermine its purpose. Also I never understood people trying to make sports cars out of trucks...lol.
This goes for the EB. If it was more powerful then it would cannibalize 6.2 sales. EB is all about V8 power at V6 MPG so making it too powerful would undermine its purpose. Also I never understood people trying to make sports cars out of trucks...lol.
5 Year Member
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,582
Likes: 486
From: Maine
I think the OP is missing the fact that 90% of the torque is available at 1700rpm. The turbos are not large, they are designed to produce low end torque.
This guys reaction is exactly what makes me think they are underrating the hp on the 5.0 btw. Too many people will look at just peak hp or peak tq but not the curve. If the 5.0 was rated 380-390hp (which I think is closer to reality), a lot of people wouldnt even consider the EB (of course, now I've probably offended the EB supporters which isnt what I intended, just saying, a lot of people dont do the research. The EB is a fine motor I'm sure). FWIW, I've seen quite a few opinions that the 5.0 in the Mustang is underrated by about 30hp.
And yes, I went 5.0 for my own reasons.
This guys reaction is exactly what makes me think they are underrating the hp on the 5.0 btw. Too many people will look at just peak hp or peak tq but not the curve. If the 5.0 was rated 380-390hp (which I think is closer to reality), a lot of people wouldnt even consider the EB (of course, now I've probably offended the EB supporters which isnt what I intended, just saying, a lot of people dont do the research. The EB is a fine motor I'm sure). FWIW, I've seen quite a few opinions that the 5.0 in the Mustang is underrated by about 30hp.
And yes, I went 5.0 for my own reasons.
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,225
Likes: 169
It's not about peak torque or peak horsepower. It's about area under the curve...
The F150 EcoBoost engine was engineered and optimized for a truck... Broad, flat, torque curve starting low and staying strong. Different from how you might optimize an engine for other applications.
Furthermore, Ford's engineering challenge was to achieve and balance many different design goals, including:
Ford seems to have done a great job achieving and balancing these goals.
THAT is what the big deal is about...
The F150 EcoBoost engine was engineered and optimized for a truck... Broad, flat, torque curve starting low and staying strong. Different from how you might optimize an engine for other applications.
Furthermore, Ford's engineering challenge was to achieve and balance many different design goals, including:
- Strong, marketable top horsepower
- Lots of broad, flat torque starting at very low RPM's
- Comparatively high fuel efficiency
- Ability to use non-premium fuels
- Compact size and weight
- Comparatively low manufacturing cost
- Extremely high reliability
- Easy serviceability
Ford seems to have done a great job achieving and balancing these goals.
THAT is what the big deal is about...
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
From: Canada
It's not about peak torque or peak horsepower. It's about area under the curve...
THAT is what the big deal is about...
- Strong, marketable top horsepower
- Lots of broad, flat torque starting at very low RPM's
- Comparatively high fuel efficiency
- Ability to use non-premium fuels
- Compact size and weight
- Comparatively low manufacturing cost
- Extremely high reliability
- Easy serviceability
THAT is what the big deal is about...
x 2 ..
why are we comparing a sport tuned Supra to a truck.....I'm sure you can get more horsepower out of the 3.5 engine if you really wanted to...but most truck owners are concerned with three manin things:
Horsepower
Fuel economy
reliability
I think Ford hit the nail on the head with all three...
BTW before you question the engine go out and actually take an Ecoboost for a test drive...
And never put Supra and F150 in the same sentence again on here......thats just wrong!
Last edited by Flama Blanca; Mar 14, 2011 at 02:02 PM.
