hone eagle wrote:
Hybridhunter wrote:
Are we now judging the inherent goodness of vehicle based on how it burns? What a waste of mental effort and time with such a discussion.
On topic - What CR says on the matter is that in general ecoboost engines don't do so well comparatively, but the 3.5EB gets within 1 mpg of the newer GM 5.3DI engine, while performing very similar. CR strangely has the only test I have seen where the 5.3 slightly edges out the 3.5EB, but they do complain about the lack of response from the GM, which is one way it achieves better mileage, I believe GM euphemistically calls it "electronic coaching".
The eco is not even the direct competitor of the 5.3 ,it is to go up against the 6.2.
How do you figure that? Ford's 6.2 would be the equivalent. In 2015, Ford has no flagship bragging rights engine, but for 2014, the Eco was the direct competitor, as the 3.5EB is the optional volume engine, as is the 5.3, without a doubt. Or do you consider the second from the top engine vs the top engine a fair direct comparison? Or do you need to stack the deck with 55hp more to make it close?
If you need, go back to 2013, and realize that the 3.7/4.3, 5.0/4.6, 3.5eb/5.3, 6.2/6.0 are the comparison engines - Outclassed power wise or not, that was how they line up.
The uprated 5.3 compares well to the 4 model year old 3.5EB, or the 5.0
For 2015, there is no direct comparison again, as the Ford has 1 more option than the GM, and the 5.0 is the horsepower engine. GM has nothing that compares to the 2.7Eb, and the 3.5 bas engine in the Ford seems like a bad joke to push folks into the 2.7
