why would anyone not get a ecoboost?
#281
I went with the 5.0. I could have gone eco. I've driven both, and both drive great. I just happened across a great deal on a truck the dealer was motivated to move. I've owned and or operated several turbo charged motors in everything from cars, trucks, to airplanes. In my experience the turbo motors i have owned outperformed their N/A counterparts. But all of them were more expensive to operate than their N/A counterparts. Just because mike Rowe says you get to have your cake and eat it too doesn't mean everyone will make the same choice or get the same result. I for one am thrilled ford gives us some great engine choices. Everyone can get what they want or feel they need and feel good they have made a good choice. I'm pretty sure god doesnt kill a kitten when ford sells a 5.0. It really is a win-win guys.
The following 2 users liked this post by lcchamp:
Billr (08-10-2013),
twotoilets (08-10-2013)
#282
Interesting. I have had now 14 personal vehicles - 4 were DI. None of them were any more expensive to operate due specifically to DI. My Scooby WRX was probably the cheapest to operate vehicle I've owned. My '06 5.4 was the most expensive.
Last edited by jwanck11; 08-10-2013 at 10:11 AM.
#283
Senior Member
It boiled down to two main points-
1. I didn't want to take a gamble with the intercooler condensation issues. Not my idea of fun to end up having problems like that after shelling out $30k+ for a brand new truck.
2. Price. With the 5.0 rebate, the Eco would have been $1800 more. This reason is just more of a bonus, because had there been no track record of problems with the Eco nor had I known about them, I probably would've ended up with one. They are definitely very potent little torque monsters!
1. I didn't want to take a gamble with the intercooler condensation issues. Not my idea of fun to end up having problems like that after shelling out $30k+ for a brand new truck.
2. Price. With the 5.0 rebate, the Eco would have been $1800 more. This reason is just more of a bonus, because had there been no track record of problems with the Eco nor had I known about them, I probably would've ended up with one. They are definitely very potent little torque monsters!
#284
Member
It boiled down to two main points-
1. I didn't want to take a gamble with the intercooler condensation issues. Not my idea of fun to end up having problems like that after shelling out $30k+ for a brand new truck.
2. Price. With the 5.0 rebate, the Eco would have been $1800 more. This reason is just more of a bonus, because had there been no track record of problems with the Eco nor had I known about them, I probably would've ended up with one. They are definitely very potent little torque monsters!
1. I didn't want to take a gamble with the intercooler condensation issues. Not my idea of fun to end up having problems like that after shelling out $30k+ for a brand new truck.
2. Price. With the 5.0 rebate, the Eco would have been $1800 more. This reason is just more of a bonus, because had there been no track record of problems with the Eco nor had I known about them, I probably would've ended up with one. They are definitely very potent little torque monsters!
#285
Inebriated 4 ur safety
Yes, yes, we know. It's like someone saying "I bought the V6 Mustang because it cost less than the GT". Well of course it does and there is a reason why. You had the right frame of mind. Just let it be and move on because it becomes a moot point after trying to explain it so many times.
The following 2 users liked this post by Al Kohalic:
engineermike (08-10-2013),
rdkev (08-10-2013)
#286
Senior Member
Yes, yes, we know. It's like someone saying "I bought the V6 Mustang because it cost less than the GT". Well of course it does and there is a reason why. You had the right frame of mind. Just let it be and move on because it becomes a moot point after trying to explain it so many times.
The following users liked this post:
Mikemeek (08-10-2013)
#287
Member
Yes, yes, we know. It's like someone saying "I bought the V6 Mustang because it cost less than the GT". Well of course it does and there is a reason why. You had the right frame of mind. Just let it be and move on because it becomes a moot point after trying to explain it so many times.
I didn't pass on an Ecoboost because of the cost but rather because of the issues. Did you even read my post????? So people who don't buy the top trim level on a car are idiots because they're cheap and maybe couldn't afford it? If the Ecoboost is touched by the hand of God like all of you fanboys seem to think, then why didn't Ford put it in the Mustang GT as you reference?????
#288
Member
I didn't pass on an Ecoboost because of the cost but rather because of the issues. Did you even read my post????? So people who don't buy the top trim level on a car are idiots because they're cheap and maybe couldn't afford it? If the Ecoboost is touched by the hand of God like all of you fanboys seem to think, then why didn't Ford put it in the Mustang GT as you reference?????
#289
Inebriated 4 ur safety
I didn't pass on an Ecoboost because of the cost but rather because of the issues. Did you even read my post????? So people who don't buy the top trim level on a car are idiots because they're cheap and maybe couldn't afford it? If the Ecoboost is touched by the hand of God like all of you fanboys seem to think, then why didn't Ford put it in the Mustang GT as you reference?????
However, just as the V6 Mustang and the V8 Mustang are not equal in their capabilities, the 5.0L F150 and the EB F150 are not either and there is a reason for the cost difference. You wouldn't say "I got the V6 Mustang because it cost less", because if you needed/wanted more power then you would have spent the money on the GT. If you didn't need or need/want the power of the GT then you get the V6, NOT because it cost less. Same goes with F150. If you don't need/want the power and towing capabilities of EB and the 5.0L is great for your needs/wants then you buy it over the EB, NOT because it cost less. If you needed/wanted the power and towing capabilities of the EB then I am sure you would have forked over the extra money because $1,800 is almost nothing when talking about a $40k+ truck. If you didn't want the EB, but still needed the same power and/or towing capabilities then I am sure you would have spent the extra money for the 6.2L.
So saying that you went with 5.0L over the EB because it cost less is just like someone saying they went with a V6 over the V8 Mustang because it cost less. It sounds kind of idiotic. On the other hand, your other reason made perfect sense.
Last edited by Al Kohalic; 08-10-2013 at 01:38 PM.
The following users liked this post:
rdkev (08-10-2013)
#290
Senior Member
I'm sorry, but I don't understand exactly what point your trying to make. In lots of instances, people's budgets do dictate their decision-making. So according to you, that makes them ignorant? So if someone wants to get into a Mustang but can't afford to get a GT, he is an idiot????