Ecoboost Expedition up the Ike

[ShinerBock]

3.5L Ecoboost Expedition 10-speed towing 7k up the Ike.

Apparently Ford fixed the grade shifting on the 10-speed making down hill descents better with the Ecoboost. Up hill was what you would expect with the 3.5L Ecoboost easily holding the speed limit with power to spare at relatively low rpm for a gas engine. Not a bad occasional tow vehicle and family hauler.

New 2018 Ford Expedition takes on the World's Toughest Towing Test!

[Grit_dog]

TurnThePage wrote:

RSD559 wrote:
You don't think people are pushing these engines in their F-150s? Pulling way more than they should every day? I'm more inclined to believe that they have spent tons of money developing the diesel engines and don't want to risk having a different engine platform knock the diesels off their pedestal. And, EcoBoost engines are way less expensive than their diesel brethren. So I think it's money.
Or it could be how much of a gas hog the EcoBoost can be when it is boosting. A heavier Super Duty truck may have the turbo spinning all of the time. Unless it's in a much larger engine.

I tend to agree that there would be very little "eco" when the small engine would always be in boost just to move even an empty super duty along. The current 3.5 might work just fine for that duty but it wouldn't be economical.

Bingo. It would be more Boost and Less Eco and they already have a stone reliable big V8 posting similar numbers (although the EcoB will still mop up a 6.2 easily).

[travelnman]

Buy now before the new steel and aluminum price hikes go in. It should be interesting to see what a new truck will cost a year from now. Lets hope we can convince these governments to have some common sense but I have never seen congress make any sense out of anything.

[We_ll_See]

I like it but 65,000 is a whole lotta dough for an XLT or any trim level for that matter.

[RSD559]

A larger EcoBoost would be more economical for day to day driving than a larger normally aspirated engine, but it would even out when towing. But if you're towing at elevation, it would be worth it. I agree with those saying that Ford doesn't want competition for their diesels.

[Bionic_Man]

People have been clamoring for a EcoBoost type engine in the Super Duty since the EB came out. There has to be a strong business reason that Ford hasn't done so far. Heck, the 3.5 produces more than enough power to be a viable engine in that class, so my gut says that it probably has to do with duty cycle why they are resisting.

And, despite endless rumors, I don't think you will see a larger EB anytime soon. As good of a towing engine as the EB is, there is no advantage to it for MPG, especially when towing. It gets the same MPG as comparable V8 engines. So, if Ford were to add displacement (or cylinders), you would have a very good towing engine that would likely drink more fuel under load than their old V10, and have no MPG advantage when not towing. This speaks nothing to where they would be as a corporation on profitability vs a diesel that they already have made a huge investment in.

[spoon059]

RSD559 wrote:
A heavier Super Duty truck may have the turbo spinning all of the time. Unless it's in a much larger engine.

Great point. I would think a larger engine 4.5 or slightly larger with turbo engines would be comparable to the 3.5 in the half ton series. I'm sure that Ford has down their homework on this and there is a reason it hasn't happened yet. I'd like to see more options though.

[TurnThePage]

RSD559 wrote:
You don't think people are pushing these engines in their F-150s? Pulling way more than they should every day? I'm more inclined to believe that they have spent tons of money developing the diesel engines and don't want to risk having a different engine platform knock the diesels off their pedestal. And, EcoBoost engines are way less expensive than their diesel brethren. So I think it's money.
Or it could be how much of a gas hog the EcoBoost can be when it is boosting. A heavier Super Duty truck may have the turbo spinning all of the time. Unless it's in a much larger engine.

I tend to agree that there would be very little "eco" when the small engine would always be in boost just to move even an empty super duty along. The current 3.5 might work just fine for that duty but it wouldn't be economical.

[RSD559]

You don't think people are pushing these engines in their F-150s? Pulling way more than they should every day? I'm more inclined to believe that they have spent tons of money developing the diesel engines and don't want to risk having a different engine platform knock the diesels off their pedestal. And, EcoBoost engines are way less expensive than their diesel brethren. So I think it's money.
Or it could be how much of a gas hog the EcoBoost can be when it is boosting. A heavier Super Duty truck may have the turbo spinning all of the time. Unless it's in a much larger engine.

[danrclem]

I just have to wonder why Ford hasn't put one of these into a Superduty yet. Everyone that I know that has one loves it... including the new 2.7 EB. Either Ford doesn't trust the engine in a Superduty setting or they don't want to eat into their diesel sales.

I'd say that they don't trust the engine in a Superduty setting would be right. While it would probably be OK for the most of us using one in a Superduty as long as we didn't try to pull it too hard it might not hold up to pulling heavy loads everyday.

[jerem0621]

Bionic Man wrote:
And what is up with the pulsating head and tail lights?

Much like video recording a CRT monitor/TV.

Many LED’s actually flicker on and off quicker than the human eye can see but the cameras can.

Thanks!

Jeremiah

[Fordlover]

SidecarFlip wrote:

FishOnOne wrote:
Went back and watched the entire video and was really impressed that the EcoBoost pulled that load at 3k rpm's and held 60mph. Very diesel like performance and something the V8 gas engines couldn't do without serious rpm's.

I'm wondering what the engine failure rate will be in the real world. It's obviously taking a loot of boost to do that at 3K rpm.

I know there has been an ongoing issue with the eco-boost engine in the Focus RS because of the excessive boost required to make the high power requirement of the engine..

Time will tell I guess. I'll stick with my diesel.

Nah. I remember the many prognostications when the Ecoboost debuted in 2010 about how we'd see these things lining the side of the interstates with blown up guts. Never came to fruition, but I suppose 8 years isn't enough proof for some.

The Focus RS issues have been traced to an incorrectly spec'd head gasket, if you believe the sources and internet sleuths.
wrong head gasket

[FishOnOne]

ShinerBock wrote:

FishOnOne wrote:

And the last round I was correct that the rear frame section on a ram 2500 is different than a 3500 SRW truck.

:R

:B

[spoon059]

ShinerBock wrote:

FishOnOne wrote:

And the last round I was correct that the rear frame section on a ram 2500 is different than a 3500 SRW truck.

:R

Why do you even bother Shiner? He just can't help himself. He just keeps going and going and going and going and going...

[ShinerBock]

FishOnOne wrote:

And the last round I was correct that the rear frame section on a ram 2500 is different than a 3500 SRW truck.

:R