Jump to content

Ford 3.5 eco boost


Missouri Mule
 Share

Recommended Posts

Sorry your having bad luck.

     We drove the Sho to Utah on vacation 1 year and on a long drive it would do 27, 28 even now n then. That's by the dash. Sometimes real world can be as much as 1 mpg less for me. Your vehicle sounds larger so probably be sum less but it shouldn't be terrible.  Average daily driving with town driving and a 45 mile drive to work every other day I usually average 22mpg a tankful. Warmer weather 23mpg.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Missouri Mule said:

 

The #1 engines used for retro/classic car swaps are the LS 5.3 and 6.0 GM engines. They are simple and reliable. After all the years of reading about people complaining about their 302/351's getting 10mpg on a good day. Triton's blowing spark plugs, cam phasers and getting 10mpg on a good day. 6.0/6.4 diesels having every conceivable problem an engine could have and getting 10mpg on a good day. Now reading 3.5's may or may not blow up depending on the phases of the moon that Ford still can sell a pickup. My Suburban's 5.3 has over 250,000 miles. My 3 2500HD with 6.0's have 170,000 256,000 and 315,000 miles and have never been touched.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, cedar farm said:

The #1 engines used for retro/classic car swaps are the LS 5.3 and 6.0 GM engines. They are simple and reliable. After all the years of reading about people complaining about their 302/351's getting 10mpg on a good day. Triton's blowing spark plugs, cam phasers and getting 10mpg on a good day. 6.0/6.4 diesels having every conceivable problem an engine could have and getting 10mpg on a good day. Now reading 3.5's may or may not blow up depending on the phases of the moon that Ford still can sell a pickup. My Suburban's 5.3 has over 250,000 miles. My 3 2500HD with 6.0's have 170,000 256,000 and 315,000 miles and have never been touched.

Same reason I don't like them. Boy has an ecoboost in an escape. 65000 and already replaced the transmission and the motor. Wont be another one. I've had a few through the years. Alot of guys say they like a motor but not the packaging. Would have to say I'm just the opposite when it comes to fords. They look good but I don't care for whats underneath. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, cedar farm said:

The #1 engines used for retro/classic car swaps are the LS 5.3 and 6.0 GM engines. They are simple and reliable. After all the years of reading about people complaining about their 302/351's getting 10mpg on a good day. Triton's blowing spark plugs, cam phasers and getting 10mpg on a good day. 6.0/6.4 diesels having every conceivable problem an engine could have and getting 10mpg on a good day. Now reading 3.5's may or may not blow up depending on the phases of the moon that Ford still can sell a pickup. My Suburban's 5.3 has over 250,000 miles. My 3 2500HD with 6.0's have 170,000 256,000 and 315,000 miles and have never been touched.

LS manual trans swap is on my bucket list for C1500 1/2 ton reg cab 8 foot bed pickup. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ecoboost 3.5 be pretty sweet in there.  

(sorry.,I couldn’t help myself)


 I put a 40hp “tune” in my ‘11 3.5.   Mind you, I’m an adult, and I was accidentally lighting the 34” tires up way too much especially on damp roads.  I took the programmer back off.  I’ll admit,I was concerned about my aluminum driveshaft and t-case at the time.
Wish I could plug 40hp into my ‘18 GM 5.3 though, because it needs it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, stronger800 said:

Ecoboost 3.5 be pretty sweet in there.  

(sorry.,I couldn’t help myself)


 I put a 40hp “tune” in my ‘11 3.5.   Mind you, I’m an adult, and I was accidentally lighting the 34” tires up way too much especially on damp roads.  I took the programmer back off.  I’ll admit,I was concerned about my aluminum driveshaft and t-case at the time.
Wish I could plug 40hp into my ‘18 GM 5.3 though, because it needs it. 

Could just take an Ecoboost F-150 same config, I assume the Mustang 6-speed would bolt up in place of the 6R80. Don't know about pedals. I did read the newer GMC/Chev will still take the Clutch pedal assemblies from the older gen trucks.  Doubt I could shift it faster that the 6R80, D and stomp go pedal, sideways you go. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Missouri Mule said:

Our expedition EL is a big vehicle. 6" longer than a suburban I think. We had a Tahoe LTZ before that. I like the Ford overall better. It drives better, rides better,has more power, gets better fuel mileage, and is just more comfortable to me. I understand the Tahoe is on a truck chassis and probably will be more robust in the end. Ours had air suspension and still rode worse than the ford. The 5.3 was basically a gas guzzling gutless turd. That thing got about 15 on the highway and 12 town  with the lower gears I had. The ford in town gets 16 mpg. I haven't went on a long trip but I was looking forward to it. That little v6 was fun to drive. So yah we both love it but dang why me? Lol

It's getting a OEM motor with a 3 yr unlimited mile warranty and turbo's and were gonna see if the rest of the car is any good. That's gonna hurt. 

well nutz, that stinks!!!! Former ford mechanic gone private with own shop calls them eco BOOMs not sure why he said that is what all the guys in their shop call them. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, cedar farm said:

The #1 engines used for retro/classic car swaps are the LS 5.3 and 6.0 GM engines. They are simple and reliable. After all the years of reading about people complaining about their 302/351's getting 10mpg on a good day. Triton's blowing spark plugs, cam phasers and getting 10mpg on a good day. 6.0/6.4 diesels having every conceivable problem an engine could have and getting 10mpg on a good day. Now reading 3.5's may or may not blow up depending on the phases of the moon that Ford still can sell a pickup. My Suburban's 5.3 has over 250,000 miles. My 3 2500HD with 6.0's have 170,000 256,000 and 315,000 miles and have never been touched.

I have heard great things about the chevy 6.0 - no knocking them for sure. 

I would have to stand behind my 6.0 Ford experience - 350K for me - dumped 6K in egr cooler/oil cooler/headgaskets/standpipes - one full set of injectors - a couple that cracked after that ( cant fault injectors they are wearables in my opinion on any diesel )  - pulled like a Percheron, sipped fuel empty - 18/19 empty  - 10mpg GVWR/Trailer dragging my skidsteer with assorted attachments. 

Drug Skid Steer from Newbury Port, MA back to KC area and averaged just over 12mpg loaded - empty 14+ going out. 

6.4 were worse than 6.0 I will give you that. 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Missouri Mule said:

Our expedition EL is a big vehicle. 6" longer than a suburban I think. We had a Tahoe LTZ before that. I like the Ford overall better. It drives better, rides better,has more power, gets better fuel mileage, and is just more comfortable to me. I understand the Tahoe is on a truck chassis and probably will be more robust in the end. Ours had air suspension and still rode worse than the ford. The 5.3 was basically a gas guzzling gutless turd. That thing got about 15 on the highway and 12 town  with the lower gears I had. The ford in town gets 16 mpg. I haven't went on a long trip but I was looking forward to it. That little v6 was fun to drive. So yah we both love it but dang why me? Lol

It's getting a OEM motor with a 3 yr unlimited mile warranty and turbo's and were gonna see if the rest of the car is any good. That's gonna hurt. 

Well i hope for the best for you here on out.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/1/2021 at 8:46 AM, cedar farm said:

The #1 engines used for retro/classic car swaps are the LS 5.3 and 6.0 GM engines. They are simple and reliable. After all the years of reading about people complaining about their 302/351's getting 10mpg on a good day. Triton's blowing spark plugs, cam phasers and getting 10mpg on a good day. 6.0/6.4 diesels having every conceivable problem an engine could have and getting 10mpg on a good day. Now reading 3.5's may or may not blow up depending on the phases of the moon that Ford still can sell a pickup. My Suburban's 5.3 has over 250,000 miles. My 3 2500HD with 6.0's have 170,000 256,000 and 315,000 miles and have never been touched.

I'm behind you 100% except let's not pretend a 5.3 with DOD is a good engine either. There's been just as many of not more lose a good engine over a stupid lifter and wipe a cam shaft etc. Piston slap etc. 

Good engine? Yah until gm screwed it up. Only real difference is a 5.3 can be had for a lot less money 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Missouri Mule said:

I'm behind you 100% except let's not pretend a 5.3 with DOD is a good engine either. There's been just as many of not more lose a good engine over a stupid lifter and wipe a cam shaft etc. Piston slap etc. 

Good engine? Yah until gm screwed it up. Only real difference is a 5.3 can be had for a lot less money 

I dunno, got millions of combined miles on GM engines here, one major failure that GM covered 25k out of warranty.... only 2 fords in the fleet always had engine issues. They all have quirks.. I would say GM has a pretty solid reputation for reliable engines. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Missouri Mule said:

I'm behind you 100% except let's not pretend a 5.3 with DOD is a good engine either. There's been just as many of not more lose a good engine over a stupid lifter and wipe a cam shaft etc. Piston slap etc. 

Good engine? Yah until gm screwed it up. Only real difference is a 5.3 can be had for a lot less money 

It sounds like the 2014 and earlier AFM 5.3s were the most troublesome.  Also sounds like beside deactivating the AFM, the best way to avoid trouble with the 5.3 in general and the 2014 and earlier AFM 5.3s is to change the oil more frequently than what the oil life indicator calls for.   When I was reading up on this it sounds like one of the bigger problems these engines have is the oil control rings getting gummed up, sticking, and not doing their job.  Seems to me that in addition to more frequent oil changes, working the engine harder sometimes would be in order.  I think a lot of automotive engine problems come about because the engines never or too seldom get worked hard for a long period.  

We have a ’15 Suburban with the 5.3 and I have been impressed with that engine. Good fuel economy and power compared to the other gas V-8s I’ve had which were a Dodge 5.7 in a 1500 MegaCab and a Nissan 5.6 in an Armada.  The GM 5.3 just makes that 5.6 look silly.

I just kinda shake my head about the turbo charged gassers.  Turbo charging a diesel is pretty straight forward, turbo charging a gasser is a whole other kettle of fish. Kid I know of used a Ford 3.5 EcoBoost to haul a round baler from out of state to here, got a whooping 3 mpg loaded.  He did have a heavy foot.  I can’t even get my chipped 5.9 Cummins that low.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to hijack the thread, but I wonder how the Coyote 5.0L would hold up with an EcoBoost style induction..... Super Duty EB V8.... I wonder why Ford hasn't tried it yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ve been saying it for ten years. Not the 5.0, but a specific v8 built to handle a turbo or two. Seems very logical. Even if the jus add the cylinders to the 3.5, that would be what, all of 500hp and 600 lbs 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Gearclash said:

I just kinda shake my head about the turbo charged gassers.  Turbo charging a diesel is pretty straight forward, turbo charging a gasser is a whole other kettle of fish. Kid I know of used a Ford 3.5 EcoBoost to haul a round baler from out of state to here, got a whooping 3 mpg loaded.  He did have a heavy foot.  I can’t even get my chipped 5.9 Cummins that low.

Saab turbo charged gas engines for decades with few issues and Subaru has for some time, probably others.. i think a big issue is they were relatively simple engines with relatively moderate boost. They were up to the task of powering the vehicle without the turbo to begin with. The new trend of minuscule engines that are way too complex for their own good having wayyyy too much boost crammed in trying to do the job of an HD truck with a big gas engine, and do it with fewer cylinders and half the displacement is asking for trouble and as evidenced by the stories of failure it seems to hold true. 
inthink the same could be applied to some modern diesels turning out massive horsepower compared to their reliable predecessors. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, vtfireman85 said:

Saab turbo charged gas engines for decades with few issues and Subaru has for some time, probably others.. i think a big issue is they were relatively simple engines with relatively moderate boost. They were up to the task of powering the vehicle without the turbo to begin with.

I would say that is the biggest part of it.  The problem with boosting the charge pressure of gasoline engines becomes the management of preignition and detonation, which is in itself a problem albeit not by any means insurmountable.  The real problem becomes managing preignition and detonation and still maintaining a proportional fuel economy for the hp generated.  Diesels don’t have that preignition/detonation/fuel economy tightrope to walk.

Just for comparison.  Let’s think of boost pressures as atmospheres of pressure and in absolute pressure vs gauge pressure.  A naturally aspirated engine runs at 1 atm (14.7 psi) of intake manifold pressure.  My ’99 Dodge Cummins will run up to 3 atm of pressure, and a great many older turbo diesels run 2-2.5 atm pressure.  The Saab engines you mention and others like it will run more like 1.5 atm pressure.   Gasoline engines can certainly be made to run at insane boost and power levels, the 80s F1 cars being a good example where BMW was getting 1400 hp out of 1.5 liters running 5.5 atm of boost pressure.  But at those levels the engine was only good for 4 qualifying laps and the fuel economy had to be horrendous.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Got to thinking this morning about a fuel economy gas/vs diesel comparison. Last week we made a run down to Tulsa OK to pick up a milling machine.  Took the 2015 Suburban (5.3 V-8) and a bumper pull trailer with a 3500 lb axle.  Net load was around 2500 lbs.  Mileage down there empty was around 12-14 mpg I think, we were pushing the speed limit and hitting some wind.  Loaded I was seeing more like 9-11 mpg.  Some years ago I ran the same road pretty much with my ’99 Dodge Cummins pulling a tandem single gooseneck with two 5200 axles.  Picked up a crated rake in TX that probably weighed 4-5000 lbs and hauled it back up here.  Hand calculated the mileage, 14 mpg down there and 14 mpg back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

preignition and detonation

Do remember, these new turbo gas engines are using direct injection like a diesel. That's how the NA 3.3 v6 in my Kia can make 290 hp. They have what would have been an unattainable compression ratio on anything less than race gas, but can inject good ol 87 oct. at TDC thus avoiding preignition. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you want the lowdown on the 3.5L go to youtube....FordTechMakuLoco . He's got tons of 3.5L  videos....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Gearclash said:

Kid I know of used a Ford 3.5 EcoBoost to haul a round baler from out of state to here, got a whooping 3 mpg loaded.  He did have a heavy foot.  I can’t even get my chipped 5.9 Cummins that low.

Yes, pass everything but a gas station if you are towing with a heavy foot.   

Pulling my travel trailer I barely have to push the gas pedal to go 70 MPH in double OD. Good for 8-9 US MPG towing a box at that speed. I can get US 12 MPG  holding 55 MPH.

Pulling same trailer I can make the real time MPG meter peg at 40L/100 (5.8 US MPG) in 4th gear in passing lane on 60 MPH roads with a head wind.

Tons of power, but you pay. I can get 22 US MPG empty truck 50 MPH roads 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Cattech said:

preignition and detonation

Do remember, these new turbo gas engines are using direct injection like a diesel. That's how the NA 3.3 v6 in my Kia can make 290 hp. They have what would have been an unattainable compression ratio on anything less than race gas, but can inject good ol 87 oct. at TDC thus avoiding preignition. 

Direct injection certainly has allowed much more boost and solved the preignition problem.

I think the problem now is if there is an injector malfunction and its an under fueled event then the combustion temperature sky rockets.

Pre-emission gas motors ran rich and used the unburnt fuel to keep combustion temperatures down now they run way leaner.

This happens too many times and that cylinder goes BOOM  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can’t stop. Sorry.  I think that Makuloco dude has a video where he compares the then new style Dodge (ram whatever)  to the Ford, and he explains why he had to buy one . He does a top five or top 10 comparison where he primarily talks about -cupholders- and I think the knobs that turn on the windshield wipers.   Beauty. Those are always the two main  things on the top of my list when I’m researching for a new  Truck.

Ok I’ll stop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...