Whats the fuss over the ecoboost?
03-14-2011, 03:15 PM
#32
Go Broncos
The only time its illegal to publish false ratings is if you're padding your numbers... see 2000-2001 Cobra. IIRC, it was rated to make 320hp and when people started to dyno them, they were making somewhere in the neighborhood of 290 after the drivetrain loss calculations. This either went full on class action suit or nearly ended up in one since Ford not only recalled ALL Cobras sold in that time frame and retuned the ECU, but IIRC they had to change all of their advertisements.
IDK, some of that numbers information could be slightly inaccurate since I'm going off memory of when my neighbor went thru it when he purchased one new. Bottom line is that they can under-rate their numbers all they want, over rate them and you have a problem.
IDK, some of that numbers information could be slightly inaccurate since I'm going off memory of when my neighbor went thru it when he purchased one new. Bottom line is that they can under-rate their numbers all they want, over rate them and you have a problem.
I would assume there are DOT regulations somewhere that forces a manufacturer to disclose actual numbers and provide proof. All in the interest of safety and not misleading the public of course.
I tried a regulations search but that's like looking for a needle in a haystack. I'd be interested to find out more on this so if anyone's an expert please explain.
03-14-2011, 03:17 PM
#33
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alright fair enough, i see your argument. I still think if i were to buy the truck i would opt for one of the v8's. And for the supra comparison, i only used that because it was a tt engine that i know the numbers on. I guess ford is probably holding back on the engine for the future, so i suppose they are carrying out some sort of plan.
03-14-2011, 03:43 PM
#34
Recently Upgraded
Your frame of reference seems to be engines that are turbocharged for passenger car/boy-racer/race-wannabe applications. This engine's application is completely different. It's a pickup. We're not looking to go fast (after letting the turbo spin up for a while). We're looking for gobs of torque for towing and hauling, decent fuel economy, and doing it all without having to pay for high octane fuel -- which is simply not available in lots of places. If you think every gas station has 91 or 93 octane fuel, try taking a Harley on a non-Interstate road trip. Out in farm country and in small towns, it's not unusual to find 87 is as good as you're going to get -- 89 if they sell 10% ethanol blend.
So, the reasoning is pretty simple. It's a pickup. Pickups are very often driven where you can't get 91 octane fuel, and going fast is not important -- but towing & hauling is. The engine is built and tuned accordingly.
03-14-2011, 05:24 PM
#35
Senior Member
Alright fair enough, i see your argument. I still think if i were to buy the truck i would opt for one of the v8's. And for the supra comparison, i only used that because it was a tt engine that i know the numbers on. I guess ford is probably holding back on the engine for the future, so i suppose they are carrying out some sort of plan.
03-14-2011, 06:15 PM
#36
misleading chart btw, look at how big the gap is between the 380ft-lb and the 420 ft-lb (small), now look at the gap between 420ft-lb and 434 ft-lb (bigger). it would help the comparison if there was a scale up the left side but there isnt and that means they are not necessarily being accurately represented.
The chart does seems to exaggerate the difference in peak torque between the 3.5 and the 6.2, but shows that flat, broad torque curve of the EcoBoost well.
Here's another version of the EcoBoost torque curve. This time with scale, but without comparison to other Ford engines...
Last edited by pfbz; 03-14-2011 at 06:20 PM.
03-14-2011, 06:54 PM
#37
all the engines have there own place but the EB is the next phase in truck evolution. The old V8s are dead and just barely hanging on.......... it sucks I know but get with the times the V8 is going to die sooner or later but I bet with in the next decade. I like all the new engines I finnaly have a choice when buying a truck, its great before I had the 5.4 or the................. yeah I know just the 5.4. Now I have 5.0, 3.5, 6.2, 3.7 each one with its pros and cons. I like the EB for its versitility. I like the 5.0 for its mid range power and mpg numbers. Can we tune these trucks to make gobs more power yes but stock for stock the 5.0 is the BASE engine nothing more. The EB is the mid tier engine nothing more and the 6.2 is the premium engine.
03-14-2011, 07:27 PM
#38
Senior Member
The ecoboost also has the political and image issue of being the first v8 replacement in a full size truck. Regardless of its potential (and I think it's fair to say it has plenty, wait till the chip tuners get onto this) it won't be allowed to outperform the 6.2l until the public has accepted it.
03-14-2011, 08:58 PM
#40
Senior Member
True... but if anything, it would make the EcoBoost look BETTER, especially in comparison to the 6.2!
The chart does seems to exaggerate the difference in peak torque between the 3.5 and the 6.2, but shows that flat, broad torque curve of the EcoBoost well.
Here's another version of the EcoBoost torque curve. This time with scale, but without comparison to other Ford engines...
The chart does seems to exaggerate the difference in peak torque between the 3.5 and the 6.2, but shows that flat, broad torque curve of the EcoBoost well.
Here's another version of the EcoBoost torque curve. This time with scale, but without comparison to other Ford engines...
(and no, I'm not knocking the EB by saying that, just saying they have incentive to make the EB look like it has a wider margin over the 5.0)