|
|
Posts: 242
Location: Madison | Anyone using the ecoboost to tow their boat? I was looking for gas mileage and and do they have enough power to tow a glaas boat. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 457
Location: Minneconia | I get around 12 mpg towing my Ranger 619. I think the EcoBoost V6 tows better than any of the V8 half tons I've had...when the turbos kick in you've got all the torque you want, 6 spd sure helps as well. Awesome motor in an awesome truck(and I've always been a Chevy guy...not anymore). |
|
| |
|
Posts: 24
| "EcoBoost V6 tows better than any of the V8 half tons I've had.."
X2. I get 13 to 15 mpg towing my ranger 1860 |
|
| |
|
Posts: 173
Location: Green Bay, Titletown, WI | The ecoboost is the motor that gets the highest towing capacity in the F150. It has more torque than the 6.2l V8, and a way better power band. The 5.0 is still the better choice though. The Ecoboost does not get better gas mileage (even though it's advertised better) , but it does have a lot more power. The 5.0 is no slouch. It still has more horsepower and TQ than the 5.4l. The ecoboost is an $1100 option, and you loose $500-750 in rebates also. So even if you get the advertised 21mpg from the ecoboost, it's only 2mpg better than the 5.0. It would take 6-7 years to make up the cost.
PM me if you want more details. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1202
Location: Money, PA | I have a Chevy Silverado 5.3L...Last summer my buddy towed my Trophy 195 with his Ford Eco boost....I'm sorry guys, that thing was a dog on the hills near my home....Doesn't campare to my V8 Chevy towing my boat. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 349
| ShutUpNFish - 4/3/2014 1:21 PM
I have a Chevy Silverado 5.3L...Last summer my buddy towed my Trophy 195 with his Ford Eco boost....I'm sorry guys, that thing was a dog on the hills near my home....Doesn't campare to my V8 Chevy towing my boat.
Man, that's a pretty bold statement. I have the 5.3 and am a Chevy guy through and through but I wouldn't want to go comparing it to an Ecoboost... they're in a different class. |
|
| |
|
Location: Eastern Ontario | I have Ecoboost guys tell me they have to pull over once a day and syphon gas out of their tank because they worry the local service station will close down if they don't  |
|
| |
|
Posts: 173
Location: Green Bay, Titletown, WI | ShutUpNFish - 4/3/2014 1:21 PM
I have a Chevy Silverado 5.3L...Last summer my buddy towed my Trophy 195 with his Ford Eco boost....I'm sorry guys, that thing was a dog on the hills near my home....Doesn't campare to my V8 Chevy towing my boat.
I have a really hard time believing that. The Ecoboost is incredibly more powerful than a 5.3l. Even with the 3.31 rear end it tows 7000lb campers no problem. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 202
Location: Angola, IN | black_dawg - 3/30/2014 5:24 PM
The ecoboost is the motor that gets the highest towing capacity in the F150. It has more torque than the 6.2l V8, and a way better power band. .
I call BS on that one.
Ford F150 Ecoboost: 365HP, 420 Ft-Lbs. Torque
Silverado 6.2L: 420HP, 460 Ft-Lbs. Torque
And there is NO comparision. The Chevy 6.2L is BY FAR superior for a big gas boat hauler. Nothing worse than turbo-lag when pulling a big boat. Plus, I don't want the trouble/hassle/maintenance of twin turbo's. You know how many uninformed guys run these Eco-boosts with suspect conventional oils, who following their OLM's and change their oil when their truck tells them to, and who will end up with coked up turbo bearing and clogged oil passages? A LOT!!!!
Besides, it's really not that big of a deal anyhow. I mean, come on guys. I pull my big and heavy 18' Starcraft 200 miles on the highway with a 25 year old Chevy truck with the 350TBI engine and can get 13 MPG's. Big deal. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 483
Location: NE PA | SteveHulbert - 4/4/2014 10:23 AM
black_dawg - 3/30/2014 5:24 PM
The ecoboost is the motor that gets the highest towing capacity in the F150. It has more torque than the 6.2l V8, and a way better power band. .
I call BS on that one.
Ford F150 Ecoboost: 365HP, 420 Ft-Lbs. Torque
Silverado 6.2L: 420HP, 460 Ft-Lbs. Torque
And there is NO comparision. The Chevy 6.2L is BY FAR superior for a big gas boat hauler. Nothing worse than turbo-lag when pulling a big boat. Plus, I don't want the trouble/hassle/maintenance of twin turbo's. You know how many uninformed guys run these Eco-boosts with suspect conventional oils, who following their OLM's and change their oil when their truck tells them to, and who will end up with coked up turbo bearing and clogged oil passages? A LOT!!!!
Besides, it's really not that big of a deal anyhow. I mean, come on guys. I pull my big and heavy 18' Starcraft 200 miles on the highway with a 25 year old Chevy truck with the 350TBI engine and can get 13 MPG's. Big deal.
I beg to differ. Turbos create a plateau of trq when under load. Numbers are much more than peak numbers or number on a piece of paper... with turbos of that size there is very minimal lag. Watch this....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eq05bNUaBnU
Edited by lennyg3 4/4/2014 9:45 AM
|
|
| |
|
Location: Northern Illinois | Eco boost is more economical then the 6.2. It gets better gas mileage for what it puts out on paper. Not to mention that 420lb of torque is at a measly 2500rpm. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 202
Location: Angola, IN | Obviously lennyg3 and muskyhunter07 are current Ford owners who have Ecoboost engines. Please, don't be so defensive.
I was just pointing out a few things like the following:
The Ecoboost MAY get 2-3 mpg's better than the 6.2L GM. However, you get the added benefits of lower gas mileage...
1.) Muskyhunter 07 pointed out 420 ft-lbs torque for Ecoboost at 2500 RPM's....if you're going 2500 RPM's in the GM 6.2L....you're going 90+ MPH. The GM engine has to work a lot less harder, which means it will last a lot longer.
2.) Most Americans are not real concerned or experienced about what it takes to properly maintain a turbo, let alone, a twin-turbo engine. Do either of you guys know what specific oil spec Ford requires for this engine? Do either of you know the benefits of running a Group V oil vs. a Group III in a turbo? Can any of you name a Group V oil and tell me how much more expensive it is? My point being.....most of you guys will have MAJOR engine trouble at 100-150k miles. Major. Why? Because they ran their oil change intervals WAY too long and they didn't want to spend $80 for an oil change that they had to do in their own driveway.
Any knowledgeable guy who really understand trucks, how they are built, and what it will take to maintain them....would run for the Ecoboost Ford. Unless of course, you're rich enough to pay $50k for a new truck, and keep getting a new one every few years because you have no interest in keeping anything you drive. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 165
Location: tHe LaKe Of PrIoR, mN | thanks lenny!!! what a time suck that was I ended up watching all kinds of videos on the ecoboost... I just picked up a left over brand spanky new fully loaded 13 fx4 eco boost 4 door w/ max tow package 6.5 ft bed... all the videos it seems the ecoboost is the best for towing which is about all i will be doing with mine
cant wait to hook the 620 to it I think I will be happy. My worn out 03 f 150 with the 5.4 feels gutless compared to this new truck |
|
| |
|
Posts: 165
Location: tHe LaKe Of PrIoR, mN | SteveHulbert - 4/4/2014 12:34 PM
Obviously lennyg3 and muskyhunter07 are current Ford owners who have Ecoboost engines. Please, don't be so defensive.
I was just pointing out a few things like the following:
The Ecoboost MAY get 2-3 mpg's better than the 6.2L GM. However, you get the added benefits of lower gas mileage...
1.) Muskyhunter 07 pointed out 420 ft-lbs torque for Ecoboost at 2500 RPM's....if you're going 2500 RPM's in the GM 6.2L....you're going 90+ MPH. The GM engine has to work a lot less harder, which means it will last a lot longer.
2.) Most Americans are not real concerned or experienced about what it takes to properly maintain a turbo, let alone, a twin-turbo engine. Do either of you guys know what specific oil spec Ford requires for this engine? Do either of you know the benefits of running a Group V oil vs. a Group III in a turbo? Can any of you name a Group V oil and tell me how much more expensive it is? My point being.....most of you guys will have MAJOR engine trouble at 100-150k miles. Major. Why? Because they ran their oil change intervals WAY too long and they didn't want to spend $80 for an oil change that they had to do in their own driveway.
Any knowledgeable guy who really understand trucks, how they are built, and what it will take to maintain them....would run for the Ecoboost Ford. Unless of course, you're rich enough to pay $50k for a new truck, and keep getting a new one every few years because you have no interest in keeping anything you drive.
Steve, I like i said above I recently picked up a eco boost I fully intend on using mobil 1 in it for oil I have used this oil in my old built up mustang and have many friends using it in turbo/tt 6.0 chev motors is mobil 1 a group 4 oil? also the dealer said 7500 mile oil changes I cant wrap my head around why would I go that long I think I will do 5k and if it looks somewhat clean think about going longer |
|
| |
|
Location: Northern Illinois | Whatever you say Mr.Stevehulbert.
I would have to agree to disagree on your assumption that a turbo vehicle wont last as long as non turbo vehicle.. lets just say, look at my fathers cummins TURBO diesel still running strong with over 300k miles not an issue with the turbo. And not to mention. I seem to be able to pull plenty 8-10k loaded bobcats up hills w/ my work truck that is an ecoboost at 2500rpm while only going 20-25 mph not 90mph. All depends what gear your in. My ecoboost gets 24 all day long with out a trailer. All depends on how you drive it. |
|
| |
|
Location: Northern Illinois | Mobil 1 primarily uses IV base stocks. It will run just fine in your ecoboost. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 202
Location: Angola, IN | crix,
To answer your question, Mobil 1 (Exxon) makes their own base stock called Visom, which is a highly refined Group III+.
Your Ecoboost turbo's are both oil and water cooled, so they aren't as hard on oil as other turbo's can be. Your truck specs for a 30 weight. Since you live in MN, I'd run Mobil 1 0w30. It will give you the 30 weight you need/require once up to temp, but its very thin when cold (compared to a 5w30 or a 10w30) so it gives you better start up oil flow (important).
Mobil's best oil is their Mobil 1 0w40. You can get it at any Walmart as well. $25 for 5.1 quarts. It's the factory fill for many exotic sport cars (domestic and foreign). It has multiple turbo-specific certifications that are hard to meet. It's really a thicker 30 weight oil than a 40 weight as well. You can run this oil in your truck without any problems. If it were my truck, this is the oil I'd run.
From all the UOA's (used oil analysis reports) I've seen, it appears that 5k mile oil change intervals return great reports. Some go to 7k miles, but around 7k and beyond, there tends to be spike in wear metals found in the oil. Not good. Stick with 5-6k miles between oil changes.
Another great oil to use in your truck is called "German Castrol". It's Castrol Edge 0w30 (black bottle). It's made in Germany and Germany is the only country that requires "synthetic" oil really be synthetic (Group IV and Group V). This oil is made for all kinds of cars, and is thoroughly tested in the US and Europe as be a VERY stout oil that can provide great protection for high performance and turbo/SC engines. It's a little harder to find though. Sometimes Autozone and Advanced Auto parts type stores carry it...but it's also more expensive than Mobil 1 0w30 or M1 0w40 found at EVERY Walmart.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 202
Location: Angola, IN | muskyhunter07 - 4/4/2014 2:36 PM
Whatever you say Mr.Stevehulbert.
I would have to agree to disagree on your assumption that a turbo vehicle wont last as long as non turbo vehicle.. lets just say, look at my fathers cummins TURBO diesel still running strong with over 300k miles not an issue with the turbo. And not to mention. I seem to be able to pull plenty 8-10k loaded bobcats up hills w/ my work truck that is an ecoboost at 2500rpm while only going 20-25 mph not 90mph. All depends what gear your in. My ecoboost gets 24 all day long with out a trailer. All depends on how you drive it.
Easy Tiger. A turbo-charged diesel is quite a bit different beast than a twin-turbo charged gasoline engine. Completely different animals. Lots of cars out there for sale with over 200k miles....good look finding one that runs with a turbo charger on it that hasn't already been completely rebuilt/repowered.
muskyhunter07 - 4/4/2014 2:42 PM
Mobil 1 primarily uses IV base stocks. It will run just fine in your ecoboost.
Wrong. Absolutely not right. It uses a basestock called Visom. Which is a highly refined Group III, or sometimes referred to as Group III+.
Edited by SteveHulbert 4/4/2014 2:53 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 173
Location: Green Bay, Titletown, WI | SteveHulbert - 4/4/2014 9:23 AM
black_dawg - 3/30/2014 5:24 PM
The ecoboost is the motor that gets the highest towing capacity in the F150. It has more torque than the 6.2l V8, and a way better power band. .
I call BS on that one.
Ford F150 Ecoboost: 365HP, 420 Ft-Lbs. Torque
Silverado 6.2L: 420HP, 460 Ft-Lbs. Torque
And there is NO comparision. The Chevy 6.2L is BY FAR superior for a big gas boat hauler. Nothing worse than turbo-lag when pulling a big boat. Plus, I don't want the trouble/hassle/maintenance of twin turbo's. You know how many uninformed guys run these Eco-boosts with suspect conventional oils, who following their OLM's and change their oil when their truck tells them to, and who will end up with coked up turbo bearing and clogged oil passages? A LOT!!!!
Besides, it's really not that big of a deal anyhow. I mean, come on guys. I pull my big and heavy 18' Starcraft 200 miles on the highway with a 25 year old Chevy truck with the 350TBI engine and can get 13 MPG's. Big deal.
I was talking about the Ford 6.2L. Chevy's were not brought up until later in the thread.
You obviously have yet to drive an ecoboost. Turbo lag? Not on that motor. Look at power bands. Not just hp and tq numbers. Look where PEAK hp and tq start and finish. And Ford designed the ecoboost and it's turbo set-ups to be low maintenance. No special requirements for oil, gas or additives. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 483
Location: NE PA | SteveHulbert - 4/4/2014 1:34 PM
Obviously lennyg3 and muskyhunter07 are current Ford owners who have Ecoboost engines. Please, don't be so defensive.
I was just pointing out a few things like the following:
The Ecoboost MAY get 2-3 mpg's better than the 6.2L GM. However, you get the added benefits of lower gas mileage...
1.) Muskyhunter 07 pointed out 420 ft-lbs torque for Ecoboost at 2500 RPM's....if you're going 2500 RPM's in the GM 6.2L....you're going 90+ MPH. The GM engine has to work a lot less harder, which means it will last a lot longer.
2.) Most Americans are not real concerned or experienced about what it takes to properly maintain a turbo, let alone, a twin-turbo engine. Do either of you guys know what specific oil spec Ford requires for this engine? Do either of you know the benefits of running a Group V oil vs. a Group III in a turbo? Can any of you name a Group V oil and tell me how much more expensive it is? My point being.....most of you guys will have MAJOR engine trouble at 100-150k miles. Major. Why? Because they ran their oil change intervals WAY too long and they didn't want to spend $80 for an oil change that they had to do in their own driveway.
Any knowledgeable guy who really understand trucks, how they are built, and what it will take to maintain them....would run for the Ecoboost Ford. Unless of course, you're rich enough to pay $50k for a new truck, and keep getting a new one every few years because you have no interest in keeping anything you drive.
Has nothing to do with brand loyalty, and I was not being defensive. Simply stating an opposing viewpoint with documentation to back it up. This is after all a discussion board. I have built several turbo cars and love the way they perform.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v643/ljinx23/trackduty002.jpg
The beauty of a turbo car is that their boost is not rpm dependent and therefor would not need to downshift to accelerate the truck because of the broad trq band, where as a naturally aspirated engine needs to raise rpm much higher (almost 5k rpms to see 460ft. lbs in the chevy 6.2 IIRC) to get in the trq band.
And as far as the question of oil requirements, you are overthinking it. While Amsoil does seem to be the best in tests, A mobil 1 full synthetic or equivalent will work just fine. Just change oil and filter at regular 5k mile intervals and earlier if you take a long trip hauling the boat/car/camper...ect. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 483
Location: NE PA | crix - 4/4/2014 3:21 PM
thanks lenny!!! what a time suck that was I ended up watching all kinds of videos on the ecoboost... I just picked up a left over brand spanky new fully loaded 13 fx4 eco boost 4 door w/ max tow package 6.5 ft bed... all the videos it seems the ecoboost is the best for towing which is about all i will be doing with mine
cant wait to hook the 620 to it I think I will be happy. My worn out 03 f 150 with the 5.4 feels gutless compared to this new truck
I've been in a few and am really impressed with how good the truck feels. The power delivery was great, and they respond very well to a tuner. 50hp/100+tq at the wheels IIRC. That's diesel power gains! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 165
Location: tHe LaKe Of PrIoR, mN | lennyg3 - 4/5/2014 12:07 AM
crix - 4/4/2014 3:21 PM
thanks lenny!!! what a time suck that was I ended up watching all kinds of videos on the ecoboost... I just picked up a left over brand spanky new fully loaded 13 fx4 eco boost 4 door w/ max tow package 6.5 ft bed... all the videos it seems the ecoboost is the best for towing which is about all i will be doing with mine
cant wait to hook the 620 to it I think I will be happy. My worn out 03 f 150 with the 5.4 feels gutless compared to this new truck
I've been in a few and am really impressed with how good the truck feels. The power delivery was great, and they respond very well to a tuner. 50hp/100+tq at the wheels IIRC. That's diesel power gains!
I have been very impressed with the eco boost my uncle has a 12 eco and we took it out to wyoming on 3 sled trips this year also had a diesel ford and chev on different trips pulling a enclosed trailer in the mtns the eco avg was 11-12 mpg for the complete trip but guess what the diesels got 11-12 too! that alone sold me I never felt the eco boost to be lacking power up the steep grades in elevation honestly forget sometimes your pulling in a 1/2 ton truck
the last trip we took a week and a half ago at the jackson hole hill climbs I talked to the bully dog guys about their tuner Im just not sure i want to run a tune in it while its under full bumper to bumper warranty but the 50hp and 100tq would make this truck a BEAST
by the way lenny that sn95 is awesome!!! makes me wish I still had my old 88 fox body coupe 408 stroker
Edited by crix 4/5/2014 7:26 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 483
Location: NE PA | crix - 4/5/2014 8:23 PM
lennyg3 - 4/5/2014 12:07 AM
crix - 4/4/2014 3:21 PM
thanks lenny!!! what a time suck that was I ended up watching all kinds of videos on the ecoboost... I just picked up a left over brand spanky new fully loaded 13 fx4 eco boost 4 door w/ max tow package 6.5 ft bed... all the videos it seems the ecoboost is the best for towing which is about all i will be doing with mine
cant wait to hook the 620 to it I think I will be happy. My worn out 03 f 150 with the 5.4 feels gutless compared to this new truck
I've been in a few and am really impressed with how good the truck feels. The power delivery was great, and they respond very well to a tuner. 50hp/100+tq at the wheels IIRC. That's diesel power gains!
I have been very impressed with the eco boost my uncle has a 12 eco and we took it out to wyoming on 3 sled trips this year also had a diesel ford and chev on different trips pulling a enclosed trailer in the mtns the eco avg was 11-12 mpg for the complete trip but guess what the diesels got 11-12 too! that alone sold me I never felt the eco boost to be lacking power up the steep grades in elevation honestly forget sometimes your pulling in a 1/2 ton truck
the last trip we took a week and a half ago at the jackson hole hill climbs I talked to the bully dog guys about their tuner Im just not sure i want to run a tune in it while its under full bumper to bumper warranty but the 50hp and 100tq would make this truck a BEAST
by the way lenny that sn95 is awesome!!! makes me wish I still had my old 88 fox body coupe 408 stroker
I like a lot about the tt v6 but I will say that I do not care for the exhaust note of the eco very much
I think as long as you stick to the 5-6k lb range the truck is in its comfort zone. 12 isn't bad towing a boat. I'm not sure that I could leave well enough alone with that kind of potential on the table.
love the sound of a cammed Windsor!
Edited by lennyg3 4/6/2014 12:27 AM
|
|
| |
|
| lol...there's opinion and then there's evidence.
Consumer Reports tested both the F150 V8 and F150 V6 ecoBoost in crew cab XLT versions:
- they both get the exact same gas mileage in real-world testing: 10 city, 22 highway, 15 mpg overall.
- the V8 had 9300lbs towing capacity, the ecoBoost 11,200...both way above boat towing needs.
- the ecoBoost was quicker to 30mph, the V8 quicker to 60mph and also quicker from 45mph to 60mph.
- the V8 has average reliability and the ecoBoost has below average reliability.
- the purchase price of the ecoBoost is quite a bit more expensive than the V8.
just wait for the arguing over the RAM V6 eco-diesel once it becomes more widely available...
Edited by M Winther 4/6/2014 9:24 AM
|
|
| |
|
| All I can is add is that when my brother told me he bought a V6 F150 last year I laughed at him... but having now driven and ridden in it around town and pulling trailers up north- I would never guess that motor is not a V8 without knowing it. At the end of the day, its very comparable in power and mpg... But is it worth paying more for? I don't know. Will it have turbo issues past 100k miles as someone else here said? I don't know. It's a nice truck and with the government making fuel regulations more and more strict, we should get used to turbo V6's and the like. I believe that automakers have done all they can with a V8, and turbo V6's or even hybrid technology are going to be where automakers focus to meet these regulations. The old V8 engine is going to be phased out in my opinion, like it or not... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 483
Location: NE PA | M Winther - 4/6/2014 10:23 AM
lol...there's opinion and then there's evidence.
Consumer Reports tested both the F150 V8 and F150 V6 ecoBoost in crew cab XLT versions:
- they both get the exact same gas mileage in real-world testing: 10 city, 22 highway, 15 mpg overall.
- the V8 had 9300lbs towing capacity, the ecoBoost 11,200...both way above boat towing needs.
- the ecoBoost was quicker to 30mph, the V8 quicker to 60mph and also quicker from 45mph to 60mph.
- the V8 has average reliability and the ecoBoost has below average reliability.
- the purchase price of the ecoBoost is quite a bit more expensive than the V8.
just wait for the arguing over the RAM V6 eco-diesel once it becomes more widely available...
I was with you until you got to the reliability line. where did that "evidence" come from?
The purchase price of an ecoboost over the 5.0 is $1400 which equates to roughly 25-30 more per month over the course of a 60mo term.
The ram eco diesel is similar to the ecoboost in it's trq band, but gives up 120hp and has a fuel cost that is nearly $1 more per gallon. I don't believe they have released fuel economy estimates for the ram, but I would expect it to be very close to 30 highway mpg which would be very nice. I think that either of the aforementioned trucks would be a good choice, and much of the final decision will come down to price and personal preference. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 165
Location: tHe LaKe Of PrIoR, mN | I have heard rumors flying of a 29 mpg on the new ram I am interested to see what comes of it and how people like them for towing I know that jeep has that motor in there line up already I saw that show lenny posted above do a 0-60 pulling that boat with the jeep and it was ok i guess
I still get employee pricing from ford for my 7 years donated on the line when I sat down with employee pricing the eco boost option was 800 dollars they had some very good incentives on random things like pay for navigation get the sunroof on 2013 only though trying to get them gone I guess
Lenny I will never put exhaust on this v6 they sound horrible!!!
In my mind there will never be anything that replaces that sound of the huge cam idling almost dying just chugging away then you just tap the throttle it wakes up sounding just nasty !!!
I will always miss that car but then again I got a ranger 620 now!
Edited by crix 4/6/2014 2:59 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | when comparing gas vs. diesel consider the cost of diesel and after the past winter consider the cost of not being able to use your truck due to cold weather (doesn't happen all that much, but did in spades this past winter). give me all your plug it in stories and all the i ran mine all all winter without a problem stories cuz that's what they would be = stories. i've had a diesel since '97, at around 2008 it started to really cost more to run a diesel and for some reason it's never returned to pre-08 gaps in cost vs. gas.
there are benefits to owning a diesel, but not what they used to be … if you run it forever then it's a good thing but most don't enjoy running vehicles when the body rusting off of them and the motor is still good.
the one guy i know who owns a jeep with the eco-diesel got stranded on his 1000 mile trip with a turbo that puked … sounds like it's a good idea but not built to do the work. |
|
| |
|
| lol...see what i mean? just mention diesel and the fish start snapping. anyone know the moonphase?  i'll be sticking with Godzilla and my HEMI.
just pointing out that most people form strong self-serving opinions in favor of whatever it is they own, and "i know this guy.." or "one time when i had a..." stories are just single stories in a sea of thousands. Ford has done a banner job of convincing the world that their V6 turbo is fuel efficient, mostly by calling it "eco" and making the claims. the bottom line is that testing shows it's not more fuel efficient than the V8 and it costs more to own. how is that a good thing? if you want real data, try to find as many objective sources as possible.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 13688
Location: minocqua, wi. | i drove the eco-boost in a ford taurus sho … impressive there.
interested in the eco-boost in the F150 but the truck i'd drive is $44k so can't see where that would be a "smart" buy. truck pricing is pretty ridiculous these days.
appreciated your experience on the eco-diesel dodge … tell us more about them, i'm curious … so-far they aren't getting very good reports.
nicest trucks i've seen are the mid-sized diesels (ford, toyota) but you can't buy them in the U.S.. we have a company truck in Honduras that is a mid-sized super crew diesel. wish i could have one here ... |
|
| |
