OH48Lt wrote:
Both the 3.5 Eco and the 5.0 V8 are good engines. Both will perform well. However, having driven both quite a bit, I certainly do not agree that the 5.0 can outrun the Eco at any speed contest, from a dead stop or 20-up or 50-70, or whatever, pick one. 90% of the Eco's torque is available at less than 1900 RPM, and its over 100 ft lb more than the 5.0 at that engine RPM. If anyone feels their "seat-of-the-pants" dyno gives the nod to the 5.0 either isn't running similar trucks (rear end ratio, weight, or those power-consuming 20 inch wheels), or doesn't know how to drive the Eco.
The 5.0 sure sounds better while doing it though, you just can't get the Eco to sound good. You can make it louder, you can maybe make it a bit quicker, but you can't make it sound like a V8.
I only spent 10 minutes driving the 5.0, so I haven't put anywhere near the analysis that Mike Up has put in to this project, but those are my sentiments exactly. After a drive in the EB, the 5.0 felt rather flat and, well, just like my GM 5.3's. I had no desire to test drive another one. I admittedly do like turbo charged vehicles, and greatly prefer the power delivery characteristics of the EB. But I can't really imagine the 5.0 out-performing the EB in any performance test.
I've been driving turbo charged vehicles for 10 years now, so maybe I'm just used to it, but rolling in to the throttle like you're supposed to, I don't perceive any lag. Yes, if you're doing 30 and stomp on it, or trying to cause some lag, you can do it! But I bet ya that even trying to induce some lag, the EB is faster from 30-whatever than the 5.0.
As far as the sound, well, no doubt, a nice-sounding V8 is a thing of beauty. But over the years, I've gained an appreciation for a vehicle sounding a certain way as long as it has something a little special under the hood. Big diesels, Porsche flathead 6's, even Subaru's WRX, I've come to like the sound just because I know what they can do. I put the EB in the same category as far as the 'sound' is concerned!