Quote:
Originally Posted by Hersbird
My Brother just bought a 3.5 ecoboost f150 and it flat out is faster then the 5.0 version. His is a loaded up, biggest cab, biggest bed, 4x4 and it runs 14.67 seconds @ 96.8 mph according to Truck Trend. The best times I have seen for a similar 5.0 are 15.3 @ 93.8mph. Not a huge difference but faster is faster. I'd say driving around town the ecoboost's immediate torque feels like an even bigger advantage stoplight to stoplight. Now add in we are 3500 feet elevation and I bet the 5.0 times drop another .3-.4 sec while the turbo doesn't change. Now consider a simple tune really pushed the 3.5 faster while a 5.0 tune isn't that helpful without adding bolt on parts to give the tune something to work with. There is a stupid fast 3.5 ecoboost Flex or SHOs out there running 12.7@107 1/4 miles on just the tunes. An 3.5 ecoboost mustang would be faster out of the box then the 5.0 and also respond better to mods. The upcoming 3.5 Raptor 450 hp version I bet even leaves some on the table.
|
I'm not disagreeing with you. I much prefer the flat torque provided by a well-designed DI, turbo charged engine; albeit I prefer a diesel, because the added air provided by the turbo(s) don't always necessarily require more fuel for extra boost in a diesel, whereas with spark-ignition, adding boost always requires more fuel.
My point is that the newly-designed 3.5L EB will make it where it's not even close and not worth arguing, whereas over on the discussion boards and comment sections from professional reviewer articles right now regarding the F150, they're arguing all the time about which is the better performer and the more practical choice. Looking at the raw numbers, comparing the current 3.5 EB, the Coyote in comes in at 385/387; and the 3.5 EB is published at 365/420, but of course that 420 comes in a lot lower, at 2500 I think, and probably 90% of that will be from 1800 to near redline. I think once the new EB comes out, and especially as the Raptor's performance with a modified version of this engine beats the previous 6.2L V8 performance numbers, many of those die hard V8 folks will get more silent on the issue.
As for performance mods, I'm sure you're right. That's not something I'd ever consider. I always trust the factory to tune it for the best reliability and durability, so I always leave my late model vehicles alone in that regard.
What we can't know is what the new or old 3.5L EB would be like in the Stang, because you can't just transfer the numbers over from the F150. Almost always the peak numbers are higher in the sporty platforms, but of course, since the EB gets marketed as the top performer for the F150, I'm sure it'd be the same, and that in and of itself lies the problem. This is why I feel that even while the Ford Edge and even the Ford Fusion (yes Fusion) will get the 2.7 EB V6, the Mustang gets only a four cylinder. I feel like Ford doesn't want to ****off the muscle heads by planting a V6 engine with a far better torque curve that comes anywhere close to the peak of the 5.0.
I can eek out 24 mpg, overall, year-around average mpg in my new truck with the 2.7L, and it reportedly has 350 ft-lbs from 1900-5000 RPM and peaks at 375. While the horsepower number is not all that close, the torque number comes in real close, and the little EB beats it 0-60 in most reviews, so that could be a problem for Ford, and is why they'll put this engine in a mid-size family sedan (think Camry) but not in a Mustang.