jeep-N-montero
Expedition Leader
My brother bought his 2011 Eco Boost new and hasn't had a single issue with it, towing is its primary purpose and does it well.
pickup mpg with new engine types
- Thread starter haven
- Start date
My brother bought his 2011 Eco Boost new and hasn't had a single issue with it, towing is its primary purpose and does it well.
Ducky's Dad
Explorer
You want one, then you buy one. I won't get one at this time because it is not the right answer for me and my use.
Don't give me this crap about spouting off without any sort of actual knowledge. Aluminum bodies, for example. I have had five cars with aluminum body panels. I sometimes do my own body and paint work when it is something that can be done in a home shop. I don't like aluminum once it's been damaged, because it's so much more difficult to work than steel. Ford's design is built around the concept of gluing on a new panel when something gets bent. That's not the way I roll. It's purely a practical consideration. Just like the potential failures and repairs costs associated with twin turbos.
Don't give me this crap about spouting off without any sort of actual knowledge. Aluminum bodies, for example. I have had five cars with aluminum body panels. I sometimes do my own body and paint work when it is something that can be done in a home shop. I don't like aluminum once it's been damaged, because it's so much more difficult to work than steel. Ford's design is built around the concept of gluing on a new panel when something gets bent. That's not the way I roll. It's purely a practical consideration. Just like the potential failures and repairs costs associated with twin turbos.
Buliwyf
Viking with a Hammer
Since we're just talking about 1/2tons, I don't want the new engines. The $$$ doesn't add up for me at all. I'm not going to shell out $5000 to save a few bucks in gas. Especially since when the new engines kaboom, they're a fortune.
I'd want an F150 with a bone dead simple, reliable, 16v 4.6L engine. I don't need a fast truck, although the 4.6 seems to do fine. I don't need a complex and unreliable truck that gets a piddly amount better mileage. I just want my truck to get me home, every day, and be as cheap as plausible.
I always wondered why the Ford Superduties and Chevys used diesel V8's instead of a big bore V6 diesel. Seems like it would be easier to package.
I'd want an F150 with a bone dead simple, reliable, 16v 4.6L engine. I don't need a fast truck, although the 4.6 seems to do fine. I don't need a complex and unreliable truck that gets a piddly amount better mileage. I just want my truck to get me home, every day, and be as cheap as plausible.
I always wondered why the Ford Superduties and Chevys used diesel V8's instead of a big bore V6 diesel. Seems like it would be easier to package.
east_tn_81
Adventurer
That diesel will cost more to repair and maintain then the v6 TT. With the extra cost of the upgrade for the diesel is not worth the fuel economy. Yes Ford is using aluminum but Chevy is going to be using more in their next gen half ton so how long until Dodge does?
wanderer-rrorc
Explorer
25000 on my ecodiesel....tow my 14x7 enclosed...towing I usually get 15-17..around town with toolbox and truck cap I get 22-24...freeway 26-28...best tank was 32mpg at 60mph average..
no troubles...no worries...can and have passed on 2lane roads with trailer loaded...
I would be driving a ford...but they wont put a diesel in a half ton...
no troubles...no worries...can and have passed on 2lane roads with trailer loaded...
I would be driving a ford...but they wont put a diesel in a half ton...
east_tn_81
Adventurer
Soon. Ford has been testing their half ton diesel.
wanderer-rrorc
Explorer
They have said that since the mid 90s..I'm die hard blue oval but they didn't make one so I couldn't buy one..
Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
east_tn_81
Adventurer
I know what you are saying but there is actual photos of the truck on the streets.
p nut
butter
How heavy is your trailer (typically)? I have a similar trailer, 12x6 enclosed, and typically weighs in at 4,200lbs. Haven't towed with it in my Ecoboost yet. I'm expecting much worse than what you're getting.
Buliwyf
Viking with a Hammer
Coolant going through the turbo? Sorry, but Fords going to eat that one (again). Just increase the room for oil, add a temp switch, and add a turbo timer to the engine. Problem solved. I wonder how long before those turbo bearing get rot from piss poor coolant service. Most people hardly ever change their coolant.
I was wondering when the steel body Dodge lads would start to speak out. LOLz. That's cute, wave the fanboy flag high. Dodges only last a few years up here before they're rust buckets. Worst rust prevention of all trucks.
The Fords are selling like hot cakes in Ohio. I'm actually getting sick of seeing new F150's. Noones touching the Dodges, if you want a sweet deal on a Dodge, you might want to drive out here to the rust belt.
So far the Al bodes seem to take a hit quite well. But even if it damages less when you back into something, to get them 100% new again, is going to cost extra. But I spend $500-1000 on rust prevention and repair every year, not on dings and dents. If I wasn't saving fo a down payment to move with, I'd trade my truck in for the new Superduty. But even if I have to paint and weld every year, it's still a paid off, perfectly functional truck.
I was wondering when the steel body Dodge lads would start to speak out. LOLz. That's cute, wave the fanboy flag high. Dodges only last a few years up here before they're rust buckets. Worst rust prevention of all trucks.
The Fords are selling like hot cakes in Ohio. I'm actually getting sick of seeing new F150's. Noones touching the Dodges, if you want a sweet deal on a Dodge, you might want to drive out here to the rust belt.
So far the Al bodes seem to take a hit quite well. But even if it damages less when you back into something, to get them 100% new again, is going to cost extra. But I spend $500-1000 on rust prevention and repair every year, not on dings and dents. If I wasn't saving fo a down payment to move with, I'd trade my truck in for the new Superduty. But even if I have to paint and weld every year, it's still a paid off, perfectly functional truck.
Last edited:
wanderer-rrorc
Explorer
She's typically 4000 but I have dragged 7500 from Detroit to Columbus Ohio without issue..I did install airlift 1000 airbags for squat ($90)..tows justfine
Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
drewactual
Adventurer
gentlemen, I own a turbo... a compound turbo to be exact... i've owned many of them- but none as complex as the current one.
they are not going to last the life of most the engines other parts, plain and simple... how could you ever expect them to? they twirl at ridiculous rpm's and provide (in my case) up to 55psi (3 3/4 additional atmospheres) and have variable geometries on top of all that, and absorb silly hot temperatures by nature... so... a consumer can expect a turbo (or turbo set) to last between around 150k to 250k miles on a non-commercial engine.
i use nano phosphorate oil additive (archoil 9100) and have a 20qt sump on my engine (with additional cooling), along with a bypass 2um oil filter- and it's just to protect the turbo shafts/seals for the most part. it's not like I'm not doing everything I can to protect them, but it's just the facts of the matter that those turbos are expected to outlive the longest of the available factory warranty's only by a few thousand miles. I even wait until exhaust gas temperatures are below 280* before killing the engine because i know that oil that is lubricating and cooling those bearings is going ot stop flowing as soon as that engine dies, and I don't want it sitting in there getting hotter than the EGT's displayed for minutes after killing the engine...
on top of this, the EPA forces by-pass gas to reenter the intake- where it is ingested into the combustion process- on many if not most turbo'd engines, this happens just before the turbo- which means it's blades are being slapped with acidic gasses and vaporized oil, and where is cokes if not defended (coking being residue, really hard black film that grows in this condition)... so- you can reroute your crank case vents to NOT go there, or leave them and hasten issue with not only turbos but with boots and intercoolers... I cleaned my intercooler last fall, which took most the night to do, and it was absolutely filthy from the ccv/pcv gulping.... and you can respond "but there isn't that much blow-by" and I will retort "there ought to be, especially on a turbo'd and cold (just started) engine", which is where most of it happens.
then you have the engine itself having air crammed into it- a single predetonation on a gasser, under a full atmosphere of boost, can totally wipe that engine out... a ruptured boot allowing boost to escape prior to delivery yet the engine trimming fuel all the same on a diesel turns those injectors into tiny torches- and can and will melt pistons or burn holes through them with a quickness and a blink of an eye.
there are things you can do to mitigate threats, but that is about it... diesels have mucho practice than gassers with boosting via turbo's... it's a fairly recent event that engines in US domestic vehicles are powered by an engine designed for boost from the factory... so... it's something worth watching to be certain- but there is no way I would expect one of these engines to go 150k miles w/o some sort of major (look at the price of turbo's- it defines major) fixes... I hope for you fellas that have them I'm wrong. I'll stick with the tried and true until that happens... I went out on a limb with the engine I'm running now, and I'm in the midst of seeing how that's working out for me... sometimes i'm happy, but I haven't hit the magic milestone of having a major repair yet, so... jury is still out.
they are not going to last the life of most the engines other parts, plain and simple... how could you ever expect them to? they twirl at ridiculous rpm's and provide (in my case) up to 55psi (3 3/4 additional atmospheres) and have variable geometries on top of all that, and absorb silly hot temperatures by nature... so... a consumer can expect a turbo (or turbo set) to last between around 150k to 250k miles on a non-commercial engine.
i use nano phosphorate oil additive (archoil 9100) and have a 20qt sump on my engine (with additional cooling), along with a bypass 2um oil filter- and it's just to protect the turbo shafts/seals for the most part. it's not like I'm not doing everything I can to protect them, but it's just the facts of the matter that those turbos are expected to outlive the longest of the available factory warranty's only by a few thousand miles. I even wait until exhaust gas temperatures are below 280* before killing the engine because i know that oil that is lubricating and cooling those bearings is going ot stop flowing as soon as that engine dies, and I don't want it sitting in there getting hotter than the EGT's displayed for minutes after killing the engine...
on top of this, the EPA forces by-pass gas to reenter the intake- where it is ingested into the combustion process- on many if not most turbo'd engines, this happens just before the turbo- which means it's blades are being slapped with acidic gasses and vaporized oil, and where is cokes if not defended (coking being residue, really hard black film that grows in this condition)... so- you can reroute your crank case vents to NOT go there, or leave them and hasten issue with not only turbos but with boots and intercoolers... I cleaned my intercooler last fall, which took most the night to do, and it was absolutely filthy from the ccv/pcv gulping.... and you can respond "but there isn't that much blow-by" and I will retort "there ought to be, especially on a turbo'd and cold (just started) engine", which is where most of it happens.
then you have the engine itself having air crammed into it- a single predetonation on a gasser, under a full atmosphere of boost, can totally wipe that engine out... a ruptured boot allowing boost to escape prior to delivery yet the engine trimming fuel all the same on a diesel turns those injectors into tiny torches- and can and will melt pistons or burn holes through them with a quickness and a blink of an eye.
there are things you can do to mitigate threats, but that is about it... diesels have mucho practice than gassers with boosting via turbo's... it's a fairly recent event that engines in US domestic vehicles are powered by an engine designed for boost from the factory... so... it's something worth watching to be certain- but there is no way I would expect one of these engines to go 150k miles w/o some sort of major (look at the price of turbo's- it defines major) fixes... I hope for you fellas that have them I'm wrong. I'll stick with the tried and true until that happens... I went out on a limb with the engine I'm running now, and I'm in the midst of seeing how that's working out for me... sometimes i'm happy, but I haven't hit the magic milestone of having a major repair yet, so... jury is still out.
I've been discussing this turbo-gasoline-engines for about a year with most of my enthusiasts friends. I currently only have Chevy's V8, but are really interested in how this turbo-gasoline engine will evolve. Most european car brands are using turbos on their gas engines now (BMW, MB, VW, Audi, Porsche), and now Ford has it's own fleet of turbos.
We have the same questions: how long before turbos start giving trouble? how good it's the fuel economy? is it worth it?
I think the best answers have come from friends that have owned turbo-gasoline engines, like audis or vw, volvos, and all have had trouble with turbos. For some it's been easy fix, for some new turbos (pricey). I can talk for myself about owning a volvo 2000 s80 2.9 (non turbo), vrs a 2001 s80 T6 (double turbo). Prices on T6 have gone down the drain because of expensive repairs, and the regular 2.9 has kept it's price and it's a car I sold fairly easy. Yes, the T6 was a beast for it's time, but I got a hard hit with mainteinance and sold price.
I understand that turbos have gotten better over the last 4-5 years, and give that extra HP and torque to small engines, without compromising to much mpg. It sounds really nice. But on the long run I'm sure repair costs are going to be expensive.
It really depends on how long are you planning on keeping your vehicle. I would suggest that if you change your car every 4-5 years, or before 100K miles you will be doing fine with turbos. I think turbos will start giving problems (as mention above), around 100-125K miles, which, by the way, is a lot of miles. But I usually run most of my truck more than that before letting them go.
So, in conclusion, for some people turbo-gas engines will work perfect, and for some other people regular V8 will work perfect, as it has been with diesels or gasoline.I've seen diesel-turbo engines run for 250-300K miles without any trouble, but diesel engines are another story.
Please keep up the information about reliability, maintainance, and mpg, so we all can have a better opinion about turbos, and who knows, maybe in the future I'll have one.
Thanks.
We have the same questions: how long before turbos start giving trouble? how good it's the fuel economy? is it worth it?
I think the best answers have come from friends that have owned turbo-gasoline engines, like audis or vw, volvos, and all have had trouble with turbos. For some it's been easy fix, for some new turbos (pricey). I can talk for myself about owning a volvo 2000 s80 2.9 (non turbo), vrs a 2001 s80 T6 (double turbo). Prices on T6 have gone down the drain because of expensive repairs, and the regular 2.9 has kept it's price and it's a car I sold fairly easy. Yes, the T6 was a beast for it's time, but I got a hard hit with mainteinance and sold price.
I understand that turbos have gotten better over the last 4-5 years, and give that extra HP and torque to small engines, without compromising to much mpg. It sounds really nice. But on the long run I'm sure repair costs are going to be expensive.
It really depends on how long are you planning on keeping your vehicle. I would suggest that if you change your car every 4-5 years, or before 100K miles you will be doing fine with turbos. I think turbos will start giving problems (as mention above), around 100-125K miles, which, by the way, is a lot of miles. But I usually run most of my truck more than that before letting them go.
So, in conclusion, for some people turbo-gas engines will work perfect, and for some other people regular V8 will work perfect, as it has been with diesels or gasoline.I've seen diesel-turbo engines run for 250-300K miles without any trouble, but diesel engines are another story.
Please keep up the information about reliability, maintainance, and mpg, so we all can have a better opinion about turbos, and who knows, maybe in the future I'll have one.
Thanks.
drewactual
Adventurer
what I meant to say in my earlier post but missed the mark is: US makers are just starting to boost (gas) engines that were designed around the concept of boost, and not retrofitting/tuning existing engines to simply force induction.... I'm not the smartest man (in my best forest gump accent) but that says quite a bit- much of the issues with boost prior to recent years was due to pushing components outside their design envelope and those parts failing...
i mentioned oil above, and it's important in this discussion believe it or not. oils today are light years above oils of even ten years ago. advancement in nano technologies and use of certain compounds that were avoided like the plague in earlier iterations are becoming common place. Tolerances of moving parts is actually lessening in most cases of high grade engines as the concepts of allowing oil to fill those gaps and reduce friction/heat tremendously are the order of thought- which coupled with boost (and accounting for that blowby mentioned earlier) protects the bearings and seals of the turbo- this requires a higher volume oil pump, but not necessarily a higher pressure oil pump.
computers and direct injection, especially with piazioelectric actuated injectors (capable of as many as five injection events per intake stroke), and then the wicked fast reaction of non-filament based oxygen sensors allows a sensitivity of air:fuel ratios sensed to a extremely increased level over prior applications... short term fuel trims have to be logged now to actually watch the adjustments of lambda taking place- it happens real time now as opposed to adjusting off of ten second snapshots... so- when boost is cramming an entire atmosphere into an engine (14.7# at sea level or one full bar; which is a fancy way of saying the dynamic (based on valve events) displacement is DOUBLED, making a 2.4L engine behave like a 4.8L engine) the concerns about over fueling and washing cylinders (while tainting the oil with wash past rings, or worse- hydro stacking the cylinder) is greatly reduced, as well as underfueling and creating a condition for the mother of all predetonations is also reduced... this was accomplished prior by addressing the points such events attacked- now it's focus is addressing the source of the cause itself... that demonstrates a huge gain in application of the technology.
what I'm getting at is these things are coming to be reliable and solid... and they MAY be there, but the data has yet to be collected real world on these mass produced engines... not a knock on them, just a bit of caution until more is known...
meanwhile, there are less moving parts and extreme documentation on the good ol' SBC and other v8's out and about... parts are abundant, and most shops anywhere on the planet are familiar enough with them... you can scrap down a SBC with a 178pc Craftsman 'suitcase' tool-set, and not have to send off for specialty tools... the science behind even MPI (logic of ECU/PCM's) is such that they rarely break and seldom fail to perform adequately...
point being, it's never as easy as we want it to be, is it? Boost is pushing us closer to better fuel economy and far more power per cube, and simply because it equates, in essence, to 'displacement on demand'... more power needed? boost responds and squirts precision volumes matching the added air.. need less? boost zero's...
on an aside, has anyone here seen the developmental engine Ferrari is working on? this actually is worth mentioning.. the engine is a push rod type, and the valley cam has a compound angle on its lobes- a tiny electric motor rests on the back of the block and drives a gear which pushes the cam forward or draws it aft while the engine is running, and the compound angle of the lobe actually actuates dormant valves... it can be used to provide more power to all cylinders- or, and more interestingly, it can be used to initiate cylinders that are totally dormant until needed... those dormant cylinders receive no fuel (from direct injection) and they have a wide open valve (disallowing compression and reducing parasitic loss of power)... it's pretty freakin' amazing... if that engine makes its way out of development, and it hits the street and incorporates boost- NOW we're talking extreme amounts of power 'on demand', and silly high economy................ but we're also talking a lot more moving parts, and intricacies galore.
again, it's never as easy as we want it to be.
i mentioned oil above, and it's important in this discussion believe it or not. oils today are light years above oils of even ten years ago. advancement in nano technologies and use of certain compounds that were avoided like the plague in earlier iterations are becoming common place. Tolerances of moving parts is actually lessening in most cases of high grade engines as the concepts of allowing oil to fill those gaps and reduce friction/heat tremendously are the order of thought- which coupled with boost (and accounting for that blowby mentioned earlier) protects the bearings and seals of the turbo- this requires a higher volume oil pump, but not necessarily a higher pressure oil pump.
computers and direct injection, especially with piazioelectric actuated injectors (capable of as many as five injection events per intake stroke), and then the wicked fast reaction of non-filament based oxygen sensors allows a sensitivity of air:fuel ratios sensed to a extremely increased level over prior applications... short term fuel trims have to be logged now to actually watch the adjustments of lambda taking place- it happens real time now as opposed to adjusting off of ten second snapshots... so- when boost is cramming an entire atmosphere into an engine (14.7# at sea level or one full bar; which is a fancy way of saying the dynamic (based on valve events) displacement is DOUBLED, making a 2.4L engine behave like a 4.8L engine) the concerns about over fueling and washing cylinders (while tainting the oil with wash past rings, or worse- hydro stacking the cylinder) is greatly reduced, as well as underfueling and creating a condition for the mother of all predetonations is also reduced... this was accomplished prior by addressing the points such events attacked- now it's focus is addressing the source of the cause itself... that demonstrates a huge gain in application of the technology.
what I'm getting at is these things are coming to be reliable and solid... and they MAY be there, but the data has yet to be collected real world on these mass produced engines... not a knock on them, just a bit of caution until more is known...
meanwhile, there are less moving parts and extreme documentation on the good ol' SBC and other v8's out and about... parts are abundant, and most shops anywhere on the planet are familiar enough with them... you can scrap down a SBC with a 178pc Craftsman 'suitcase' tool-set, and not have to send off for specialty tools... the science behind even MPI (logic of ECU/PCM's) is such that they rarely break and seldom fail to perform adequately...
point being, it's never as easy as we want it to be, is it? Boost is pushing us closer to better fuel economy and far more power per cube, and simply because it equates, in essence, to 'displacement on demand'... more power needed? boost responds and squirts precision volumes matching the added air.. need less? boost zero's...
on an aside, has anyone here seen the developmental engine Ferrari is working on? this actually is worth mentioning.. the engine is a push rod type, and the valley cam has a compound angle on its lobes- a tiny electric motor rests on the back of the block and drives a gear which pushes the cam forward or draws it aft while the engine is running, and the compound angle of the lobe actually actuates dormant valves... it can be used to provide more power to all cylinders- or, and more interestingly, it can be used to initiate cylinders that are totally dormant until needed... those dormant cylinders receive no fuel (from direct injection) and they have a wide open valve (disallowing compression and reducing parasitic loss of power)... it's pretty freakin' amazing... if that engine makes its way out of development, and it hits the street and incorporates boost- NOW we're talking extreme amounts of power 'on demand', and silly high economy................ but we're also talking a lot more moving parts, and intricacies galore.
again, it's never as easy as we want it to be.