With the Eco doing so well and loved by many and bragged about by Ford. Why is it not offered in the F250 ? I love mine but I'm curious.

They can't make em fast enough now.

My guess, and it's only a guess:It's a light duty truck with a light duty engine with a low, light duty cycle. My drag engine can put out a lot of power but it's duty cycle is VERY short and low. There is a reason truck engines with high duty cycles are very heavy.

Turtle n Peeps wrote:My guess, and it's only a guess:It's a light duty truck with a light duty engine with a low, light duty cycle. My drag engine can put out a lot of power but it's duty cycle is VERY short and low. There is a reason truck engines with high duty cycles are very heavy.Your guess sounds pretty reasonable.

That combo is what I'm waiting for. The 3.5 Eco may not be a good fit due to the extra weight of the SuperDuty vs the F150. Like most turbo-charged engines, the 3.5 is weight-sensitive, as far as fuel mileage goes. It responds nicely to any increased need for power, whether its caused by increased weight of whats being moved by the engine or by increased weight on the go-pedal, but at the expense of fuel mileage. I've noticed that if I hook up even a small low-drag trailer, like my open ATV aluminum trailer with 2 ATV's on it, total weight of less than 2000 pounds, fuel mileage suffers. I suspect the same thing would happen in the heavier SuperDuty. As an example of that, look at the little 2.0 Eco 4-banger. In the Focus ST, that engine is very, very, quick for 2 liters. The same engine in the much heavier Explorer is a dog. While there may be a bit of difference in the engine programming in those 2 platforms, it's mainly all about the weight difference. What I'm hoping for is a turbo'ed version of the 5.0. That would have considerably more power than the 6.2, and fuel mileage should be much greater. Ford is introducing 10 new models for 2014, maybe that will be one of them. I'd be in the ordering line if that happened.Hard to believe the 3.5 EcoBoost is almost 5 years old. It was offered in the Flex starting in March, 2009.

OH48Lt wrote:What I'm hoping for is a turbo'ed version of the 5.0. That would have considerably more power than the 6.2, and fuel mileage should be much greater. Ford is introducing 10 new models for 2014, maybe that will be one of them. I'd be in the ordering line if that happened.I have a theory with zero knowledge behind it... Perhaps Ford is working on a larger turbo gas engine to put in its 3/4 and 1 ton trucks. I agree that the 3.5 will probably lack fuel efficiency and power in a F250 with a GVWR of 10,000, compared to the F150 with a GVWR of 8,800.I **THINK** the Ecoboost was a new engine from the ground up. If that is the case, I don't think they just slap a couple turbo's on an existing engine... I think they design a whole new engine from the ground up.With all my experience in Ford R&D (none, for those wondering...) I think they probably wanted to see how the truck buying public would respond to the turbo gas engine before they went all in.It seems like Ford is pretty happy with the engine, and from this forum and talking to owners at the campground it sure sounds like the customers are happy with it too. Time will tell, but it seems like a winner for Ford.

Ecoboost engine question | Good Sam Community

blt2ski
Moderator
Dec 31, 2013
Me Again wrote:
mich800 wrote:
Me Again wrote:
"Do you have any idea why Ford does not put their big beast 400 freeking HP fire breathing 6.7 in a class 8 truck? I do. It's called duty cycle............or lack there of."

And what diesel goes in the F650? That's right a midium duty Cummins 6.7. Both the PS and Duramax are consided light duty engines.

Chris

Why wouldn't they? They own them.

Ford owns Cummins, NOT! At one point they owned a small percentage, but sold it!

Not sure I would want ANY of the diesels that are put in pickups in a class 8 truck. A class 2-6 yes, but not an 8 or even a 7 for that matter. Then again, the idi7.3 I have in my navistar was designed like the gas V8's at the time, a 100K mile throwaway motor! So some motors are designed for a given duty cycle, and then the motor is rebuilt or tossed. This can be from around 100K miles to upwards of a million. And the B6.7 or B5.9 before it was NOT designed as a million mile motor. 400K yes, but 1 million......some have done it........that was never the intent of the B series motor!

marty
Me_Again
Explorer III
Dec 31, 2013
mich800 wrote:
Me Again wrote:
"Do you have any idea why Ford does not put their big beast 400 freeking HP fire breathing 6.7 in a class 8 truck? I do. It's called duty cycle............or lack there of."

And what diesel goes in the F650? That's right a midium duty Cummins 6.7. Both the PS and Duramax are consided light duty engines.

Chris

Why wouldn't they? They own them.

Ford owns Cummins, NOT! At one point they owned a small percentage, but sold it!
mich800
Explorer
Dec 31, 2013
Me Again wrote:
"Do you have any idea why Ford does not put their big beast 400 freeking HP fire breathing 6.7 in a class 8 truck? I do. It's called duty cycle............or lack there of."

And what diesel goes in the F650? That's right a midium duty Cummins 6.7. Both the PS and Duramax are consided light duty engines.

Chris

Why wouldn't they? They own them.
Bmach
Explorer II
Dec 31, 2013
Anyone ever watch the Ford Eco torture test video they put out? If not it is worth the time.
Engineer9860
Explorer
Dec 31, 2013
Me Again wrote:
"Do you have any idea why Ford does not put their big beast 400 freeking HP fire breathing 6.7 in a class 8 truck? I do. It's called duty cycle............or lack there of."

And what diesel goes in the F650? That's right a midium duty Cummins 6.7. Both the PS and Duramax are consided light duty engines.

Chris

Chevrolet used their small block 350 V8 gas engine in the C60. So the Cummins has some pedigreed company.
Groover
Explorer II
Dec 31, 2013
"Wonder what kind of MPG that 534cu/in beast got fully loaded?!

Of course, gas wasn't $3+/gal back then either..."

My father ran a service station in 1962 and he priced his gas around 31 cents per gallon. New cars ranged from $2,000 to $4,000 in that era so wages have gone up by about a factor of 10 as well so the real cost of gasoline has not really changed.

Back to the op's question, I think that it is just a matter of Ford not being able to make enough of the Ecoboost engines so they put the ones they have where the EPA hounds them the most on efficiency. I would do the same thing. As for durability, I have not heard anything that would discourage me from having one in an F250. It would be the pants off of my 460 in power and torque (230hp and 390lb-ft). I would be much more likely to by a 250 if an Eco-boost option was available. Right now I am waiting to see what the 2015 F150's have under the skin and I will probably go with one of them.
hone_eagle
Explorer
Dec 31, 2013
If you guys think the 3.5 is overworked,We soon will see the 2.7 (nano) ecoboost in the F150.
Gutsy move on Fords part ? Or folly?
Hannibal
Explorer
Dec 30, 2013
I'd rather see a hybrid 5.4L F250. More power towing as well as much better city mileage non towing.
johndeerefarmer
Explorer III
Dec 30, 2013
jerem0621 wrote:
johndeerefarmer wrote:
Turtle n Peeps wrote:
johndeerefarmer wrote:
3.5 eco is not maxed out power wise. Lots and lots of guys are running tunes with 80 or more extra hp and 120 ft lbs of torque.
Ford overbuilt the 3.5 block so it can handle this extra power. I have heard of no tranny's failing but one guy lost a rear end probably becaus he towed 15k

That's like saying my blown SBC is not maxed out at 600 HP. I could always go 40% over on the blower and make 1,000 HP. :R

This is an easy formula:

When power goes up, duty cycle goes down.
When power goes down, duty cycle goes up.

How high of a duty cycle do you want? How much power you want?

There are guys with 40k tuned miles and no issues other than having to change spark plugs. How's that? :)

That's nothing. About 6 months of driving around my house between my wife and I. 40k miles proves nothing. :D

The guy that I am speaking of did over 10k of those miles towing a 10k+ fiver and with a tune. He didn't melt anything. Mike at 5 star has did extensive testing with the ecoboost with a 12k trailer.
Face it, the ecoboost was purposely overbuilt by Ford- nuff said.

And if you don't know it the Raptor will have the same ecoboost but with more power. No numbers yet but the Ford employee in the engine plant was allowed to say that "the exhaust temps are considerably higher" ;) Sounds like Ford thinks the 3.5 TT can handle more too!
noteven
Explorer III
Dec 30, 2013
Me Again wrote:
"Do you have any idea why Ford does not put their big beast 400 freeking HP fire breathing 6.7 in a class 8 truck? " ...

Chris

Teacher! Teacher! I know! I know! ummm... because compared to a 13 to 15 litre class 8 tuck engine making 1650 to 2050 lb-ft of torque it is gutless?