Eco Boost F150 for car only application

I hope this thread doesn't get out of line and then the thread closed by the moderator. I think we need to relax a little. Please. I wasn't aware of any issue with the ECO Boost engines but now I am aware there are some.... albeit maybe not very many issues. However, that educates me to ask some specific questions when the time comes to buy about the history of the vehicle and its maintenance records.

I became aware of the Ford 6.0L diesel engine problems in the spring to summer of 2003 which caused me to buy the 2003 7.3L diesel engine version F250 rather than the 6.0L Diesel engine. At 151,000 plus it is still going strong without any major problems. And pulling a 13,000 to 14,000lb 5th wheel from 2006 till now. I know of one Ford F350 owner that went through three 6.0 diesel engine based F350's (1 a year 03, 04, 05) before he finally gave up and bought a Chevrolet Diesel. He has not had any major trouble with his Chevrolet pulling the same or similar heavy 5th wheels. Owning a 5th wheel since 2006 has been very educational as well. Unfortunately, very educational.

wwest wrote:

nipster wrote:
I think the anti-ecoboost hysteria is in full swing in this thread...

The issues reported here affect a very small number of people, in very specific circumstances

But like someone else mentioned, if it's just going to be a daily driver, you probably dont need the EB engine, maybe just the base V6

"very specific circumstances.."

Yes, but Rh (relative humidity) circumstances for which we humans have no sensory perception....

"specific..."

Not really.

High Rh, >90%, short drive in cruise = Condensate pools.

Moderate Rh, 70-90%, long drive in uninterrupted cruise = Condensate pools.

CEL/mis-fires = condensate ingestion.

I think you are grossly overexaggerating this. I live in Florida, where it is > 70% RH 75% of the entire year, with high temps (>80 deg F) roughly 60% of the year, if it was as cut and dry as you state, every ecoboost in the state of Florida would be dead.

As it is, that's not the case...

April to mid-late October, if you are lucky it gets below 80 at night, humidity stays in the 90% range, afternoons are mid 90's with 95% humidity

Personally I dont own one, I have a 2012 with the 5.0, but I know many people with them, many of which tow, they dont have issues. I didnt buy one because I like working on my vehicles and it seemed like too much high tech I wasnt comfortable with and expensive to fix

Fordlover wrote:

wwest wrote:

Fordlover wrote:

wwest wrote:

nipster wrote:
I think the anti-ecoboost hysteria is in full swing in this thread...

The issues reported here affect a very small number of people, in very specific circumstances

But like someone else mentioned, if it's just going to be a daily driver, you probably dont need the EB engine, maybe just the base V6

"very specific circumstances.."

Yes, but Rh (relative humidity) circumstances for which we humans have no sensory perception....

"specific..."

Not really.

High Rh, >90%, short drive in cruise = Condensate pools.

Moderate Rh, 70-90%, long drive in uninterrupted cruise = Condensate pools.

CEL/mis-fires = condensate ingestion.

Also, rare.

There is a fairly wide cross section of Ecoboost owners on this site.
Ranging from early 2011 models all the way up to very recent 2014 models. But complaints about power losses are in the extreme minority. Only one or two have said they've even experienced it.

I understand you are uncomfortable with the Ecoboost, and I say that's ok, you don't have to buy one. But quit trying to convence owners that have driven one for the last 3 years that they have a major problem.

I live on the Gulf Coast, with famously high Rh, often hovering between 90-100%. So of the 4 friends I have who own them, why have they never experienced this design flaw? Perhaps it really is rare?

"..this design flaw? Perhaps it really is rare?"

Rare..?? Not at all, the design flaw is embedded in each and every F-150 EcoBust engine ever built.

Think of it as a form of Russian Roulette, you KNOW the bullet is in one of those chambers, but with a little (LOT?) luck you never hit it.

If you drive "spiritedly", on boost often enough, you never allow a substantive enough level of condensate to accumulate.

Really? comparing a game of russian roulette (1:6 odds) to a condensation issue?

Wow.

You need to read some of the owner experiences.

Note: EVERY GM product equipped with that specific ignition lock HAD THE DEFECT, FACTORY DESIGN FLAW, 100%

Obviously not many, relatively, were victims of the design.

wwest wrote:

Fordlover wrote:

wwest wrote:

nipster wrote:
I think the anti-ecoboost hysteria is in full swing in this thread...

The issues reported here affect a very small number of people, in very specific circumstances

But like someone else mentioned, if it's just going to be a daily driver, you probably dont need the EB engine, maybe just the base V6

"very specific circumstances.."

Yes, but Rh (relative humidity) circumstances for which we humans have no sensory perception....

"specific..."

Not really.

High Rh, >90%, short drive in cruise = Condensate pools.

Moderate Rh, 70-90%, long drive in uninterrupted cruise = Condensate pools.

CEL/mis-fires = condensate ingestion.

Also, rare.

There is a fairly wide cross section of Ecoboost owners on this site.
Ranging from early 2011 models all the way up to very recent 2014 models. But complaints about power losses are in the extreme minority. Only one or two have said they've even experienced it.

I understand you are uncomfortable with the Ecoboost, and I say that's ok, you don't have to buy one. But quit trying to convence owners that have driven one for the last 3 years that they have a major problem.

I live on the Gulf Coast, with famously high Rh, often hovering between 90-100%. So of the 4 friends I have who own them, why have they never experienced this design flaw? Perhaps it really is rare?

"..this design flaw? Perhaps it really is rare?"

Rare..?? Not at all, the design flaw is embedded in each and every F-150 EcoBust engine ever built.

Think of it as a form of Russian Roulette, you KNOW the bullet is in one of those chambers, but with a little (LOT?) luck you never hit it.

If you drive "spiritedly", on boost often enough, you never allow a substantive enough level of condensate to accumulate.

Really? comparing a game of russian roulette (1:6 odds) to a condensation issue?

Wow.

wwest wrote:

fx2tom wrote:
I don't know what your personal issue is with the EB motor but it is out of control. Do you own one that you had issues with or are you just here to slam everyone who does have one and has had zero issues? I have one and have zero problems, I am in the vast majority.

What's the harm in giving potential buyers, or even current owners, the information they might need come the day....

The first time you put it in a thread you are giving information, maybe even the second. When you start trying to debate it with owners who say they have not had a problem you are not giving information you are trying to create a bigger problem than ACTUALLY exists.

We get it, you had the condensation problem. It is real and happened to you. That does not equal 100% defect. You are getting backlash here because empirically that is not the case with those that own the trucks here. Doing a Google analysis does not equal sound research on the actual statistical relevance. Now you could list the actual trucks that had the problem relative to total trucks sold to quantify the problem but until then it is a real issue but not to the extent you claim.

fx2tom wrote:
I don't know what your personal issue is with the EB motor but it is out of control. Do you own one that you had issues with or are you just here to slam everyone who does have one and has had zero issues? I have one and have zero problems, I am in the vast majority.

What's the harm in giving potential buyers, or even current owners, the information they might need come the day....

I don't know what your personal issue is with the EB motor but it is out of control. Do you own one that you had issues with or are you just here to slam everyone who does have one and has had zero issues? I have one and have zero problems, I am in the vast majority.

Not a design flaw per say...it is one of the laws of physics. The design flaw
is NOT addressing it in their first production release. Shame on them for that
as this stuff is elementary 101 engineering

Read up....look up: "condensing condition", dew point

This is also known as 'rain'...

Boy Racers, Hot Rodders, etc have known about this for decades

We used to drill a tiny hole at the lowest collection point in the inter-cooler
'cold' side

Haven't seen Ford's fix, but if as normal for any OEM...over designed and $$$