RV.Net Open Roads Forum: Tow Vehicles: Ecoboost vs. V8 - Can you explain?

RV Blog

  |  

RV Sales

  |  

Campgrounds

  |  

RV Parks

  |  

RV Club

  |  

RV Buyers Guide

  |  

Roadside Assistance

  |  

Extended Service Plan

  |  

RV Travel Assistance

  |  

RV Credit Card

  |  

RV Loans

Open Roads Forum Already a member? Login here.   If not, Register Today!  |  Help

Newest  |  Active  |  Popular  |  RVing FAQ Forum Rules  |  Forum Posting Help and Support  |  Contact  

Search:   Advanced Search

Search only in Tow Vehicles

Open Roads Forum  >  Tow Vehicles

 > Ecoboost vs. V8 - Can you explain?

Reply to Topic  |  Subscribe  |  Print Topic  |  Post New Topic  | 
Page of 8  
Prev  |  Next
Sponsored By:
ShinerBock

SATX

Senior Member

Joined: 02/22/2015

View Profile



Posted: 09/03/19 02:19pm Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

JRscooby wrote:

ShinerBock wrote:

JRscooby wrote:

Where is it written that gas engines must be V whatever? What would happen if they put modern fuel and spark control, and a turbo on a 5 L I 6?


They probably don't do it because of the cost associated with re-engineering a whole new motor/supporting systems and completely re-tooling the factories. It is much easier and more cost effect to re-scale and take away cylinders for various displacement sizes of a certain block configuration versus having two block configurations.


Cost associated with re-engineering a whole new motor/supporting systems and completely re-tooling the factories? IMHO, they did that.
Had a engine that was pretty cheap to run, and real dependable back when using points and carb. Instead of putting Fuel Injection on that when needed to clean the exhaust everything had to go V. Ford put throttle body on the 302 V8, and made big improvement in power and economy. Why not the 300 inch 6? If they had, then would not take much to add the turbo


It is not just about re-engineering an engine. You have to re-engineer everything that is attached to it as well like accersory drives, engine mounts and so on. Inline engines are also longer so you have re-engineer the cooling system too.

Then there is the re-tooling of the factories that are based on Ford's modular engine designs and other V engines. If you have ever been in an engine factory with all sorts of specialized equipment, tools, and jigs just for one engine configuration, then you know how much of an undertaking it would be to change all of them.

Not saying it can't be done, and would in fact love to see an inline 6 Ecoboost engine. I am just saying that the reason why they probably didn't go that route is the added cost versus just re-utilizing what they already have.

* This post was edited 09/03/19 02:29pm by ShinerBock *

Grit dog

Black Diamond, WA

Senior Member

Joined: 05/06/2013

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 09/03/19 02:44pm Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

liberty02, cmon bud. I get it you like the Ecoboost. So do I, so does he, so does everyone....well maybe almost everyone.
But think about it. If it was really just that easy and lobbed up like a grapefruit to hit, do you not think that someone would have made a big forced induction gas truck motor by now?
If anyone could do it, it would be Ford because you can get a 48 gal tank in them. And you'd need it. It would shame a whole bar full of sailors with it's drinking problem! Add 50% more power across the board to set it firmly above big new NA gassers, but still less torque than the diesels but way more hp and 4mpg pulling that big 5th wheel up a mountain or across the great plains.

He!!, my buddy could get single digit fuel mileage with his blown TRD Tacoma in the mountains pulling an open sled trailer. But it was very peppy.


"Yes Sir, Oct 10 1888, Those poor school children froze to death in their tracks. They did not even find them until Spring. Especially hard hit were the ones who had to trek uphill to school both ways, with no shoes." -Bert A.

bikendan

Camano Island, Wash.

Senior Member

Joined: 11/21/2005

View Profile



Good Sam RV Club Member

Offline
Posted: 09/03/19 02:52pm Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

noteven wrote:



Wouldn’t they simply lose that market share because spark engines are gutless compared to diesels so buyers will look elsewhere?


Another person that hasn't kept up with modern gas engine technology.[emoticon]


Dan- Firefighter, Retired">, Shawn- Musician/Entrepreneur">, Zoe- Faithful Golden Retriever(RIP">), 2014 Ford F150 3.5 EcoboostMax Tow pkg, 2016 PrimeTime TracerAIR 255 w/4pt Equalizer and 5 Mtn. bikes and 2 Road bikes


rjstractor

Maple Valley, WA

Senior Member

Joined: 01/20/2003

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 09/03/19 08:53pm Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

JRscooby wrote:

Cost associated with re-engineering a whole new motor/supporting systems and completely re-tooling the factories? IMHO, they did that.
Had a engine that was pretty cheap to run, and real dependable back when using points and carb. Instead of putting Fuel Injection on that when needed to clean the exhaust everything had to go V. Ford put throttle body on the 302 V8, and made big improvement in power and economy. Why not the 300 inch 6? If they had, then would not take much to add the turbo


They added fuel injection to the 300 as well in 1987 and it was the standard F150 engine until 1996 when the truck was completely redesigned. Even with EFI the 300 had only 145 hp.

parker.rowe

Delaware

Senior Member

Joined: 09/14/2015

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 09/04/19 06:00am Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

rjstractor wrote:

JRscooby wrote:

Cost associated with re-engineering a whole new motor/supporting systems and completely re-tooling the factories? IMHO, they did that.
Had a engine that was pretty cheap to run, and real dependable back when using points and carb. Instead of putting Fuel Injection on that when needed to clean the exhaust everything had to go V. Ford put throttle body on the 302 V8, and made big improvement in power and economy. Why not the 300 inch 6? If they had, then would not take much to add the turbo


They added fuel injection to the 300 as well in 1987 and it was the standard F150 engine until 1996 when the truck was completely redesigned. Even with EFI the 300 had only 145 hp.


And physically was a monster. They would have been better off to design a new straight six then continue with the 300. It didn't even have a crossflow head.


2015 Starcraft TravelStar 239TBS 6500 GVWR
1997 GMC Suburban K2500 7.4 Vortec/4.10 Gears
1977 Kawasaki KZ1000


4x4ord

Alberta

Senior Member

Joined: 12/23/2010

View Profile



Posted: 09/04/19 07:11am Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

A major problem with putting a large displacement boosted gasoline engine in a truck designed for towing is that you'd never keep it cool. A 6.7 EcoBoost could easily make over 700 hp. A 700 hp towing truck would require a radiator larger than the one behind the grill of a Peterbilt.


2017 F350 SRW Platinum short box 4x4.
B&W Companion
2008 Citation Platinum XL 34.5

JRscooby

Indepmo

Senior Member

Joined: 06/10/2019

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 09/04/19 07:33am Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

parker.rowe wrote:



And physically was a monster. They would have been better off to design a new straight six then continue with the 300. It didn't even have a crossflow head.


Back in the early '80s I had a couple of trucks from the late '60s. Both 2-stroke diesels, same rears, same transmissions, doing the same work. The I 6 was more power full and used less fuel than the V 6. Put new bearings, rebuilt head, new pistons and liners in the V 6. Cut oil consumption, but still could not work with the I 6. IMHO, inline is a better design...

srt20

Wisconsin

Senior Member

Joined: 02/15/2009

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 09/04/19 08:21am Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

Inline maybe a better design, but they just dont fit in vehicles well anymore. Curved down hoods, shorter front ends, etc. The V block engines barely fit now. Look under the hood of a V8 diesel with turbos. Its shoved way under the cowl, and all the way to the radiator support. Then add 2 more cylinders to that length...

BTW I have a 3.5L Ecoboost. And either I have a bad one or there's alot of people that fib about their mpg. I got 7.9mpg towing a 30ft enclosed all aluminum 7.5ft wide trailer that weighed about 5000lbs loaded. And I havent seen 20mpg on the EVIC (which always reads high) in a LONG time.

Turbocharged gas engines need fuel.

Grit dog

Black Diamond, WA

Senior Member

Joined: 05/06/2013

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 09/04/19 08:51am Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

"BTW I have a 3.5L Ecoboost. And either I have a bad one or there's alot of people that fib about their mpg."

Well theres that. I maintain there's 3 things most men fib about. The size of the fish they caught, the size of their ____ and the fuel mileage of their truck. The internet is the king of outlandish fuel mileage claims (and a few people who literally drive so slow and miserly that they get passed by a stiff breeze).

APT

SE Michigan

Senior Member

Joined: 06/09/2010

View Profile



Posted: 09/04/19 09:39am Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

[image]

Area under the torque curve is what most drivers notice. The green line shows how much torque is available under about 4500rpm than any other compared engine.


A & A parents of DD 2005, DS1 2007, DS2 2009
2011 Suburban 2500 6.0L 3.73 pulling 2011 Heartland North Trail 28BRS
2017 Subaru Outback 3.6R

Reply to Topic  |  Subscribe  |  Print Topic  |  Post New Topic  | 
Page of 8  
Prev  |  Next

Open Roads Forum  >  Tow Vehicles

 > Ecoboost vs. V8 - Can you explain?
Search:   Advanced Search

Search only in Tow Vehicles


New posts No new posts
Closed, new posts Closed, no new posts
Moved, new posts Moved, no new posts

Adjust text size:

© 2019 CWI, Inc. © 2019 Good Sam Enterprises, LLC. All Rights Reserved. | Terms of Use | PRIVACY POLICY | YOUR PRIVACY RIGHTS