mileshuff wrote:
jus2shy wrote:
For Ford, the Ecoboost is the tow monster to have. A 10k 5th is really nothing to a modern gas motor until you get above 4 or 5,000 feet.
Currently the ONLY gasser in a 1/2 ton with enough power for a large trailer is Fords 6.2L. All others are far too weak. But that 6.2L is a $3500 add on to an already expensive truck. It makes no sense to spend that kind of money on a gasser 1/2 ton when you can get a diesel 3/4 ton.
We'll have to disagree that a gasser 1/2 ton is fine for 10K under 5,000 feet. The 6.2L's cost is not a good value and you still end up with a 1/2 ton.
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. But just one last argument, the Cummins Turbo Diesel only had 350 horsepower from 2010 to 2012 and made its peak torque of 800lbft at around 1600rpm. The ecoboost has 365 horsepower and 420 lbft of torque @ 2500rpm. My current Cummins has 370 horsepower and 800lbft at around 1600rpm. 09 and earlier cummins had 305 horsepower and 610 lbft of torque. That ecoboost is in good company rating wise and has way more stump pulling power than the 6.2 earlier in the power curve (the 6.2 achieves peak torque at around 4,000 rpm and it's very peaky where as the 3.5 hits peak torque at 2,500rpm and holds peak torque all the way up to 5,500rpm).
To move any load at any speed, it's all horsepower as horsepower is basically torque multiplied over time. Having lots of torque down low means the engine doesn't have to rev to achieve the same horsepower (which is why diesels achieve high horsepower at ridiculously low rpms) but given the gearing of the 6R80, the Ecoboost has the gearing necessary to put down power earlier than the 6.2 can manage. Also, by stating the ecoboost is weak, wouldn't that make my Cummins a weak motor as well? Along with any previous iteration of the ISB? Or even power stroke or dura max? Or even the ISL's we use at work to drive around a 40,000 lbs loaded bus with only 280HP? Turbo-charged pulling is much different than naturally aspirated.
However, a gasser still makes more of its power in the upper parts of the RPM band and will ultimately consume more fuel pulling because of the inherent inefficiencies of a gas motor. He