Thinking of Purchasing Ford F-150 - Some Questions

[Diamondpilot]

How many did you build from the castings up, direct injection, variable valve timing, etc? I guess you are saying the ford engineers figured out something you couldn't in "hundreds" of attempts.

You are completely WRONG in your HP and torque comparison. You have it completely backwards. Maybe now I understand why you are often misquoting and not grasping this. A dyno measures torque. HP is calculated from this torque number. The formula is HP = (torque * rpm) / 5252. If you look at a dyno printout, HP and torque are always equal at 5252 rpms. This is why your beloved hemi makes more HP but less torque than the ecoboost. The hemi is revving high to produce HP and the ecoboost is producing torque at much lowers revs. The hemi will benefit with the new 8 speed by allowing the engine to stay at high rpms but who wants to listen to an engine run at high rpms towing all day. I am surprised you don't understand torque is measured and HP is calculated after your "hundreds" of engine builds.

The HP formula also explains why diesel engines HP to torque spread is so wide, very few can rev up to 5252 rpms. Diesel engines benefit from many gears because of their narrow rpm range. Torque at low rpms is good for towing and torque at high rpms is good for racing.

Here is a copy of the two dynos on the same scale. Unfortunately, the dyno isn't showing the hemi below 3700 rpms because that is where it flounders and the ecoboost shines.

He still wont get it. lol. Either way, I dont hate the Hemi. Nothing would make me happier today than to walk into my garage and see a brand new Challenger Hemi sitting there. I had a 2500 Dodge 4x4 with a Hemi and it was just as you said, reving to beat all to pull 8,000#. My 01 F-150 with its wimpy 5.4 producing 260HP back then did just as good pulling the same load. Yes, the Hemi sounded great, just as Norm at my local gas station, I visited him 30% more often then the other trucks I owned getting 12 mpg as my best tank.

I know mpg is not all to talk about. Back in 08 when I bought my Titan in my eyes it was the best truck on the market but its weak spot is mpg rating. Put a load behind it though and your forget its a 14mpg machine. Just yesterday I towed a 7,000# Foton Tractor on my car hauler and at 65mph it was getting 11 mpg.

Chris
Chris

 

[jejeosborne]

He still wont get it. lol. Either way, I dont hate the Hemi. Nothing would make me happier today than to walk into my garage and see a brand new Challenger Hemi sitting there. I had a 2500 Dodge 4x4 with a Hemi and it was just as you said, reving to beat all to pull 8,000#. My 01 F-150 with its wimpy 5.4 producing 260HP back then did just as good pulling the same load. Yes, the Hemi sounded great, just as Norm at my local gas station, I visited him 30% more often then the other trucks I owned getting 12 mpg as my best tank.

I know mpg is not all to talk about. Back in 08 when I bought my Titan in my eyes it was the best truck on the market but its weak spot is mpg rating. Put a load behind it though and your forget its a 14mpg machine. Just yesterday I towed a 7,000# Foton Tractor on my car hauler and at 65mph it was getting 11 mpg.

Chris
Chris

Are you saying I am bad teacher? Lol. After all these HP and torque disputes, I now know why. He had them backasswards.

I am with you. I never hated my Dakota. Just the mileage vs capability numbers. It only needed a couple oxygen sensors during my 10 years. Somebody needs to snuff out his bad information though.
Jeff

 

[deerefan]

Everyone knows the early version of these trucks motors made just that but the last versions made 300HP plus. While not at the top of the market it was respectable and always held the claim of making about 80% of the torque below 2,000 rpm.

As for the claim I am a Ford Guy, that is partially true. Right now today if I were to buy a 1/2 ton it would be a F-150, hands down. I currently own 3 vehicles and only one is a Ford and its 7 years old. Been trouble free. The other is a 2 year old BMW which is fun to drive but far from Trouble Free. The other is a 5 year old Nissan that has been 100% trouble free. Not even a light bulb in just about 60,000 miles.

Chris

I am not strictly bound to any brand myself. I prefer some brands over another, but that does not mean I won't give the other brands a fair shake. I have owned 4 Fords since 1997. Two were F150s, two were F250s. All of them were virtually trouble free. I tend to do a lot of research when making a decision, especially with the purchase of a vehicle. I owned two 6.0l diesels, eventhough the research turned up less than stellar reviews. Neither gave me any major problems. After reading this thread and going back through my years of research, one thing stood out. Most of the complaints against Ford were engine related, dating back to the coveted 7.3 with the cavitation issue and cps issue. Then there was the spark plug blow out issue on the mod motors. Next, the 6.0 and head gaskets. I could go on but I believe the point is made. In researching the other brands, such as Nissan, Toyota, GM and Dodge, I found very, very few issues related to catastrophic damage such as engine failure. It seems to be the dominant complaint against Ford, which leads me to believe they cannot come up with a solid design, hence several motor changes over just the past decade. When I purchased my 2011 Silverado, I looked very hard, and came very close to buying, a comparable Eco Boost truck. The only reason I did not was it was the first year this engine was in the F150 and, giving Ford's recent history with new motor designs, I decided to play it safer and went with the GM. Better warranty, proven drivetrain. That was the only deciding factor. I say this with the upmost sincerity, I hope the EB engine becomes what it seems to have started out to be- a reliable, powerful and effecient engine. Until more reviews pile up and the engine has been in the F150 for at least 2 years, I just cannot comfortably buy one right now. Especially with only a 60k mile warranty. As for the op, 13-14 mpg in your truck is bad and I stand by my prior statement- either it will get better with more drive time or there is an issue that the service department needs to address. To give you a comparison, one of our work trucks is 10 years old, has the gas 6.0 (GM), and empty gets 14.

 

[deerefan]

I wouldn't call that slip, but I understand what you mean. Semantics I guess. For a moment, I thought Ford had reinvented the wheel or come up with a better idea.



:thumbsup:



The 289, 300 and a few others were solid designs. The recent stuff is just too much innovation. :laughing:

I definitely agree. The 300 is one of my favorite motors. The 302, 351 and the gas-hog 460 were pretty reliable too. It seems around 1998 or so things started to go south.

 

[Dmace]

You are completely WRONG in your HP and torque comparison. You have it completely backwards. Maybe now I understand why you are often misquoting and not grasping this. A dyno measures torque. HP is calculated from this torque number.

Guess I need to word this differently as I'm talking about actual hp as in work performed not a dyno sheet for your friends to compete with...
A dyno measures torque but torque is nearly a calculation of rotational mass where-as horsepower is a formula of work performed over a given time which is more indicative of overall power output. Power (hp) = Force (f) x Velocity (v). Force would be the Measured Work produced by a given engine regardless or gearing where Torque is simply a calculation or rotational force which can be manipulated with gearing.

Torque will show you how much force the engine turns the wheel at where Horsepower shows you well that engine can perform that work over a given time and distance. TQ gets you moving, HP keeps it going.

Either way, go on and enjoy your Ecoboost. I'm sure Ford will replace it in 3-5 years like most of their other engines falling to catostraphic failure. I'll stick with proven (9+ year run), simple (NA, pushrod, low compression, indirect injection, cast iron block, etc...) V8's.

15 mpg average? :laughing:
So much for V6 efficiency.

I wouldn't call that slip, but I understand what you mean.

You wouldn't call a Torque Converter a device designed to "slip"? Have you ever seen one work, they use fluid to allow "slip". On most vehicles they "lock-up" at low rpms so the engine does the work but turbo-charged engines like the Ecoboost need high rpms for boost so it needs to constantly "slip" to allow the rpms to raise to a point where boost is made since they can't make power without it.

 

[jejeosborne]

He still wont get it. lol. Chris
Chris

You called it, but I am going to try to explain it one more time.

Guess I need to word this differently as I'm talking about actual hp as in work performed not a dyno sheet for your friends to compete with...
A dyno measures torque but torque is nearly a calculation of rotational mass where-as horsepower is a formula of work performed over a given time which is more indicative of overall power output. Power (hp) = Force (f) x Velocity (v). Force would be the Measured Work produced by a given engine regardless or gearing where Torque is simply a calculation or rotational force which can be manipulated with gearing.

Torque will show you how much force the engine turns the wheel at where Horsepower shows you well that engine can perform that work over a given time and distance. TQ gets you moving, HP keeps it going.

You are defending your mistake instead of admitting your were incorrect? I see.

I will try to explain it again using a simpler, mopar example so you might get the point. The current ram cummins engine produces 350 HP and 800 lb/ft of torque. Compare this to the current Hemi at 390 HP and 407 lf/ft of torque. You would say the Hemi is a better engine for a truck because it makes more HP. That is your flawed logic! AGAIN, HP is not measurable! It is Calculated! Torque is Measurable! Another example would be a small radio controlled airplane motor similar to what I own. Here is a good link to how a small displacement motor can make big HP at 40,000 rpms. Information about Nitro RC Engines, Basics of RC Nitro Engines

Here is another link that is very well written. http://www.vettenet.org/torquehp.html

Another example that is similar is a riffle bullet. It has a lot of energy because of the speed but has little mass. Compare this to a cannon ball hitting your head at just 5 MPH, same energy with less speed and both used the same amout of gun powder to get the work done. That is the rpm equilevant.
Your Hemi is the speeding bullet and the cummins is the cannon ball.

Do you find torque important now?

15 mpg average? :laughing:
So much for V6 efficiency.

Last time I checked, you were not in the passenger seat of my truck seeing the conditions in which I am achieving my 15.7 MPG. I would challenge the hemi to achieve more than 12-13 MPG under these circumstances, that is what my dakota was getting. I posted this for you back in April but I will refresh your memory:
Ford ecoboost: 16/22 365hp/420lbft

Ford 6.2 liter 13/18 advantage ecoboost 411 hp/434 lbft
Ram 5.7 liter 14/20 advantage ecoboost 390 hp/407 lbft
GMC 6.2 liter 13/18 advantage ecoboost 403 hp/417 lbft
Nissan 5.6 liter 13/18 advantage ecoboost 317 hp/385 lbft
Toyota 5.7 liter 14/18 advantage ecoboost 381 hp/401 lbft
Average all 13.4/18.4 380.4 hp/408.8 lbft

Now for the V6 engines

Ford 3.7 liter 17/23 disadvantage ecoboost 302 hp/278 lbft
Dodge 3.7 liter 14/20 advantage ecoboost 215 hp/235 lbft
GMC 4.3 liter 15/20 advantage ecoboost 195 hp/260 lbft
Toyota 4.0 liter 16/20 advantage ecoboost 270 hp/278 lbft
Average all 15.5/20.75 245 hp/262.75 lbft

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/pdfs/guides/FEG2011.pdf

So it gets 2.6/3.6 better than the average V8 and .5/1.25 better than the average V6. In fact, the only engine that bested the ecoboost was Fords 3.7 liter V6 so it actually gets better EPA ratings than a typical V6.

You wouldn't call a Torque Converter a device designed to "slip"? Have you ever seen one work, they use fluid to allow "slip". On most vehicles they "lock-up" at low rpms so the engine does the work but turbo-charged engines like the Ecoboost need high rpms for boost so it needs to constantly "slip" to allow the rpms to raise to a point where boost is made since they can't make power without it.

I would bet a steak dinner that the ecoboost torque converter is locked for MUCH more time than the Hemi combo. I bet a lot fewer downshifts as well again because of the low end torque.

Oh and yes, I am enjoying my ecoboost and the whisper quiet cabin even when towing. Enjoy shouting over your hemi at 4000+ RPMS and your 13 MPG!

 

[Dmace]

Like I said, semantics. I what you described, I simply consider the torque converter as unlocked.

Many will say it's just another torque convertor and nothing new BUT it is new-ish in the way it's actively locking and unlocking to maintain boost. There's already plenty of problems with this system as well...
http://www.f150forum.com/f70/ecoboost-turbocharger-missfires-132499/

 

[Dmace]

AGAIN, HP is not measurable! It is Calculated! Torque is Measurable!

Well there's your problem, you don't even understand what Horsepower is! Not measurable huh? James Watt is turning in his grave. Once again, Horsepower is a measure of work over time (1 HP = 550 foot-pounds per sec) which is approx 33,000 lb-ft per min or 745 watts. It all began by measuring the amount of work a horse could perform over a given period of time. It's MEASURED and not just calculated.
Torque is a measurement of rotational force on an object, where HP is the measurement of that Torque over a period of time (work). HP being a linear measurement is very difficult to measure in an automotive sense which is why TQ is measured on dynos. Getting back to my earlier comment: Torque is a CALCULATION of FORCE on an object in a rotational motion where-as Horsepower is a MEASUREMENT of that FORCE over a period of TIME. Not talking dynos here but actual work being performed in the real world. So HP is more important to me as it's directly related to the WORK being performed.

I would bet a steak dinner that the ecoboost torque converter is locked for MUCH more time than the Hemi combo. I bet a lot fewer downshifts as well again because of the low end torque.

Oh and yes, I am enjoying my ecoboost and the whisper quiet cabin even when towing. Enjoy shouting over your hemi at 4000+ RPMS and your 13 MPG!

I have no problem taking that bet! Just read the article I posted from the F150 forum. Members are having tons of problems with the torque converter causing a "shudder" when slowing or accelerating and some were the actual front pump in the trans going out. Obviously, this premature failure is due to it's constant over-use with an active torque converter. Good luck when it's out of warranty.
And my HEMI's sweet spot for towing is 2400 rpms and it sounds like a good ole' big block V8 vs some high strung V6 gasping for air. 13 mpg is only when towing, 15-16 empty.

 

[RollingsFarms]

I can honestly say my gmc 6.2 with 3.73 gears is only getting 1-2mpg worse then what I have been seeing reported here by the ecoboost. I average 17-18 all day long with the mix driving I do. When I tow it's about 11-13. I'm being as honest as I possibly can about it too! Its really worth the upgrade over the 5.3 and now I see why GM plans to stick one of these in the hd's next year.

 

[jejeosborne]

Well there's your problem, you don't even understand what Horsepower is! Not measurable huh? James Watt is turning in his grave. Once again, Horsepower is a measure of work over time (1 HP = 550 foot-pounds per sec) which is approx 33,000 lb-ft per min or 745 watts. It all began by measuring the amount of work a horse could perform over a given period of time. It's MEASURED and not just calculated.
Torque is a measurement of rotational force on an object, where HP is the measurement of that Torque over a period of time (work). HP being a linear measurement is very difficult to measure in an automotive sense which is why TQ is measured on dynos. Getting back to my earlier comment: Torque is a CALCULATION of FORCE on an object in a rotational motion where-as Horsepower is a MEASUREMENT of that FORCE over a period of TIME. Not talking dynos here but actual work being performed in the real world. So HP is more important to me as it's directly related to the WORK being performed.


I have no problem taking that bet! Just read the article I posted from the F150 forum. Members are having tons of problems with the torque converter causing a "shudder" when slowing or accelerating and some were the actual front pump in the trans going out. Obviously, this premature failure is due to it's constant over-use with an active torque converter. Good luck when it's out of warranty.
And my HEMI's sweet spot for towing is 2400 rpms and it sounds like a good ole' big block V8 vs some high strung V6 gasping for air. 13 mpg is only when towing, 15-16 empty.

I appreciate your schooling me on James Watt but I am already very familiar with a watt. I am a NERC (North American Electric Reliability Corporation) Certified Reliability Coordinator for an electric utility. I monitor your electric grid and use the word Watt (MegaWatt) daily. I do appreciate the refresher coarse though because I only average 100 hours of training on the subject each year. We use 746 watts per HP because we round up the .6999.

So your answer to my question is that you believe the Hemi is a better truck engine than the cummins because it makes more HP?

I have been a member of the F150 forum for more than a year and there are not tons of problems with the ecoboost torque converter, in fact, there is much praise for the engine. Do a google search on any engine/transmission and you can find problems. Including plenty on the Hemi. LOL

You would loose the bet. Even the souce you quoted with the dyno said and I quote "Furthermore, although the Ram's downshift-happy transmission means no data below ~3700 rpm, there's little chance it can touch the Ecoboost at revs below this point -- torque curve breadth is a specialty of turbo gas engines." My truck locks up starting in third gear and requires significant acceleration to unlock in 6th gear. In fact, it chuggs along at 950 RPM up hills holding speed without downshifting. Does your hemi even start moving at 950 RPMS? It is downshift happy because it requires revs to make any power.

Big block sound out of a small block hemi? Interesting..... Maybe back in high school I would have enjoyed the sound of the hemi but I have since evolved into enjoying silence. That is a reason why I have a driveway that is 1/4 of a mile long so that I don't have to listen to people proud of their loud vehicles. Why would a turbo engine sound like it is gasping for air? It is being force fed air, no gasping happing. Keep your "good ole" sound and I will keep my "good new" sound. I do enjoy your choice of descriptive wording though.