Check out the video near the bottom
http://m.motortrend.com/wot/2015_ford_f_...x_8500_lbs.html
Fords new 2.7 vs Chevy 5.3 vs Dodge 3.0 Diesel
- Thread starter mcrn
- Start date
- Status
Nice! Thanks for the topic.
We can now predict the responses.
IT's about time someone combined an up to date diesel engine with light weight. One nice thing about increased performance from light weight is that it helps everywhere.
Originally Posted By: OneEyeJack
IT's about time someone combined an up to date diesel engine with light weight. One nice thing about increased performance from light weight is that it helps everywhere.
Wonder what the measured fuel consumption between the three trucks was? With the lighter trucks Ford should on a day to day basis do well in fuel economy, but I wonder if it translates to towing situations? They've thrown a lot of new technology at their new trucks... turbo charging, all aluminum body, etc. It's a huge gamble for the best selling vehicle in the US. Technology is great when it works, but nothing can be more frustrating than new technology that has problems. Ford's execution on this new truck can make or break them. They have to get it right.
Maybe it's just my perception from the video, but both the Ram and Chevy take the Ford off the line, then it seems the Ford's turbos spool up and take over. I suppose it'll operate in the real world similar to the difference between a Chevy 350 and the first 5.3 engines, grunt vs speed.
Seeing how all the manufacturers across the board have finally gotten sufficient power, daily driver performance, and decent economy out of the pickups, I am most intrigued by the aluminum construction. I have 200k on my truck and dont feel the need at all to dump it except for the body rusting out. If only the body had been aluminum construction......hmmm.
Originally Posted By: tstep
Maybe it's just my perception from the video, but both the Ram and Chevy take the Ford off the line, then it seems the Ford's turbos spool up and take over. I suppose it'll operate in the real world similar to the difference between a Chevy 350 and the first 5.3 engines, grunt vs speed.
Seeing how all the manufacturers across the board have finally gotten sufficient power, daily driver performance, and decent economy out of the pickups, I am most intrigued by the aluminum construction. I have 200k on my truck and dont feel the need at all to dump it except for the body rusting out. If only the body had been aluminum construction......hmmm.
A little more about the 2.7 EcoBoost:
Direct link to video in the Motortrend Story.
Pretty impressive for such a tiny engine in a full size truck.
Economy both loaded and unloaded will be interesting, maybe they will do a video of that like they did with the Superduty. Glad they picked the EcoDiesel too, thats another interesting vehicle.
Originally Posted By: DuckRyder
Pretty impressive for such a tiny engine in a full size truck.
Economy both loaded and unloaded will be interesting, maybe they will do a video of that like they did with the Superduty. Glad they picked the EcoDiesel too, thats another interesting vehicle.
Each truck has its pluses and minuses, With proper gearing any of them are great at towing.
These are nothing more than Ford commercials. Extremely slick and reminiscent of the original Egoboost series of you tube vids.
The 2.7 is a great idea, I love the use of a high strength iron block with the aluminum casting bolted onto it, but I am no fan of a plastic oil pan!
Thanks to all the early adopters! Rush out and buy one and let us know how it works out...
Originally Posted By: whip
...
Since I don't live in the desert, it sounds like the Chevy/GMC powertrain would be a better choice.
I think that will be a good product for Ford. It's good that they kept it a V6. If they had made it an I4, I think many people would stay away from it. It's also noteworthy that Ford has used compacted graphite iron for the cylinder block, which is the first application of it that I know of for mass-production gasoline engines. They have used it previously in their 6.7L Powerstroke diesel.
Originally Posted By: mrsilv04
And just when it seemed impossible for the world's ugliest pickup truck to get any uglier... Ford proves me wrong.
Great job, Ford. You're just designed the new Tundra.
Originally Posted By: mrsilv04
And just when it seemed impossible for the world's ugliest pickup truck to get any uglier... Ford proves me wrong.
At miller88 - Yeah, I am most interested in the forum thoughts on the durability and reliability of the skin panels. Also interested if there is any considerable flexure I'm not thinking of that would cause fatigue stress cracking over time.
Last edited:
I'd be far more concerned with the body's electrical isolation from the frame (or any other steel components) breaking down and causing galvanic corrosion in the aluminum parts.
I watched the video, and you can tell it is highly edited. It appears that the Chevy 5.3 blows the Ford out of the water off the line and probably for the first mile or three. The Ford eventually catches up and barely passes it. All Ford had to do was make the track longer (to catch up) to make their truck win.
It is an impressive truck for sure. For a turbo 2.7 to match or beat a 5.3 V8 is impressive.
Originally Posted By: Miller88
Originally Posted By: tstep
Maybe it's just my perception from the video, but both the Ram and Chevy take the Ford off the line, then it seems the Ford's turbos spool up and take over. I suppose it'll operate in the real world similar to the difference between a Chevy 350 and the first 5.3 engines, grunt vs speed.
Seeing how all the manufacturers across the board have finally gotten sufficient power, daily driver performance, and decent economy out of the pickups, I am most intrigued by the aluminum construction. I have 200k on my truck and dont feel the need at all to dump it except for the body rusting out. If only the body had been aluminum construction......hmmm.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: D189379
To be fair, Ford is repainting it for me under warranty.
- Status
Similar threads
