Can somebody please explain to me the point of the 3.5L EcoBoost V6 motor?

2016 Cadillac Escalade weighs 5,815 lbs

It has a 420-HP, 460 lb-ft torque, 6.2L Vortec V8.

It gets 23-25 MPG on the freeway.

The 5,815 lb Escalade does 0-60 in 5.8 seconds.

This same motor is found in the Silverado 1500, which does 0-60 in 5.6 seconds.

Why is it that Ford has an all-aluminum F-150 with the EcoBoost 3.5L V6, and has much worse performance and worse gas mileage then the V8? Hell, even the 390-Horsepower 5.0 V8 that ford offers in the F-150 gets better MPG and is just as powerful as the 3.5L EcoBoost V6 - they both have nearly identical 0-60 times.

Then you add in the fact that the EcoBoost turbos are prone to failure and generally are a higher-maintenance motor then the NA V8 5.0. And don't even think about turning up the boost unless you want a new truck with no warranty.

Towing figures are also identical, with a slight edge to the 5.0 V8 (when towing 5,500 lbs, the V8 has the edge with MPG and 0-60 times).

My theory is that Ford has marketed the EcoBoost so well to reflect the image of a 'greener' company, knowing that the average person won't realize the discrepancy in numbers compared to the V8...and they certainly don't want you to know that GM has built a NA V8 that is far more efficient and more powerful.

Don't take my word for it, do your own research. I'm a Ford fan, by the way - but that doesn't mean I drink the EcoBoost koolaid

:dnftt:

DR_ said:

:dnftt:

Click to expand...

What he said

Drive the cars and decide for yourself. Personally I like the EB, but I haven't bought one.

DR_ said:

:dnftt:

Click to expand...

doulos4jc said:

What he said

Click to expand...

hmm, do objective facts scare you? You both are a reflection of modern society.

Environmentally conscious power.

SpeedLu said:

Environmentally conscious power.

Click to expand...

Ok.

How?

I would say that fords promises on fuel consumption are done with the expectation that EB drivers would not be sitting in boost everytime they touch the gas pedel. I doubt there is much of an argument that a 3.5L 6 would sip fuel compared to 5.0L 8 given that both were driven steady state in vacuum. The problem is that people get used to riding that torque wave in turbo powered vehicles so they tend to tip into pedal more often than they should. We all know with a 2nd atmosphere crammed into the engine the EB guzzles gas. That's why the huge disparity between real world and projected figures from ford. Or at least my take on it.

Do we really have that many EB failures bone stock? I thought it was mostly people who decided to dial up the boost with bolt ons etc.

I do agree that for all the complexity I would choose the V8 for overall peace of mind if i had to get a truck that would do real work. Otherwise I'd buy an EB and toss it when the warranty expired.

SneakySteed said:

I would say that fords promises on fuel consumption are done with the expectation that EB drivers would not be sitting in boost everytime they touch the gas pedel. I doubt there is much of an argument that a 3.5L 6 would sip fuel compared to 5.0L 8 given that both were driven steady state in vacuum. The problem is that people get used to riding that torque wave in turbo powered vehicles so they tend to tip into pedal more often than they should. We all know with a 2nd atmosphere crammed into the engine the EB guzzles gas. That's why the huge disparity between real world and projected figures from ford. Or at least my take on it.

Do we really have that many EB failures bone stock? I thought it was mostly people who decided to dial up the boost with bolt ons etc.

I do agree that for all the complexity I would choose the V8 for overall peace of mind if i had to get a truck that would do real work. Otherwise I'd buy an EB and toss it when the warranty expired.

Click to expand...

Fair enough, a reasonable response.

I don't know the point. I would buy a GM 6.2 liter, max tow 1/2 ton over a Taurus engine equipped Ford half ton all day long. If I bought 1/2 tons.

I have a 2013 F-150 crew cab with 61/2' and the 3.5 ecoboost. Average fuel is 15. Highway only is 26. Both of those numbers are easily obtainable in a 5.0 pp Mustang. Where the motor shines is pulling trailers. I have a 12' dump trailer and have pulled some heavy stuff. That motor develops its power at a lower rpm just like a diesel.

redneck ron said:

I don't know the point. I would buy a GM 6.2 liter, max tow 1/2 ton over a Taurus engine equipped Ford half ton all day long. If I bought 1/2 tons.

Click to expand...

For me, I won't switch to GM (doesn't mean they are not a great vehicle), but I'd opt with a 6.2L V8 F250 or even the Powerstroke 6.7L. I think the 5.0 F-150 is formidable as well, but no EcoBoost for me.

CB said:

Where the motor shines is pulling trailers.

Click to expand...

This...

I did a lot of research on the 3.5 EB. From what I gathered, just a lot of expectations not met from people who owned one. Nothing bad really IMHO, few turbo & water pump failures did not detract me from buying one. I really like the N/A 3.5 motor on our old 07 EDGE AWD, it was plenty powerful at that time. With the EB, more than enough power when I need to tap it. Mileage be damned; we have a bucket Accord if I wanted mileage..

Low rpm, not enough exhaust gas to spin the turbo efficiently, you end up with worse gas millage than a torquey low spinning V8.

I bought the 5.0 for my shop this past Friday. Biggest reason is I plan on keeping it for a long, long time. Aluminum truck with no turbos = longevity and lower maintenance IMO. 3.5 Eco sure felt faster according to the seat of my pants but the 5.0 seemed like the way to go for me. It is plenty fast. No idea on mileage yet. First trip in it will be tomorrow.