I've heard some stories that start out "man, I took this **** four cylinder Ranger [up this/through that/to]..." and it's usually about a 100 HP Lima engine truck.
Naturally Aspirated (NA) V8 Engines
- Thread starter The Critic
- Start date
I chose a 3.5L ecoboost because i live at 6500’ in Utah and tow a travel trailer. There is no comparison. Very few people here tow with half tons. You go into a campsite and its all diesel HD’s except for 1 or 2 trucks. 90% of the time those 1 or 2 are ecoboosts because its the only half ton engine that can tow here without being obnoxious. Between the elevation and headwinds, an NA V8 would be rung out all the time.
If i still lived at sea level then i would have looked at v8’s.
If i still lived at sea level then i would have looked at v8’s.
Turbos are not that expensive. I believe a pair of OE turbos for the 3.5L ecoboost are ~$1100, so $550 a piece.
yeah, that’s expensive IF the turbos ever actually fail.
It’ll be interesting to see how it compares to Ford’s and Toyota’s turbo 6-bangers.
I would rather have the I6 simply for the ease of working on it. If youve ever looked in the engine bay of a 2.3L Ecoboost ranger or mustang there is free space everywhere.
There is?
I'd rather work on my FWD V6's by far. Maintaining this truck is already giving me nightmares, and I'm several years out from having to do anything of substance to it.
Yeah, that makes even my SOHC 4.0 look easy to work on, and maybe fixing the various oil leaks on my Vulcan 3.0 wouldn't be so bad.
I like the current Rangers, but there's no doubt even the most basic model is more complex than any of the '83-'11 models.
By far. They all have the same powertrain, so there's very little under-hood difference between an XL and a Lariat.
I'm not a mechanic but here's my understanding. Disclaimer, I love the V8 and 6 of my 7 vehicles are NA V8s, the other is a 4.0 V6. One variable is the maker/design and known issues. Hondas make excellent small engines, for instance. Some big engines are terrible... so there's a lot behind the scenes...
FYI- the Dodge 5.7 is plagued with cam and lifter problems and MDS and timing chain issues...
I have:
One 4.0L Ford V6
Two 4.6L Ford V8s
Three 4.7L Toyota V8s
One 6.4L Dodge V8.
First of all, cost and complexity. Getting smaller motors to perform to bigger motor standards costs a lot more than just having a bigger NA motor.
Second, effort. A augmented 4 or 6 is going to be pushing higher RPMs and redlines to do what V8 can do with a lot less effort. Towing, speed, etc. And RPMs ultimately are what add up in a motor. This goes to longevity.
Third, efficiency. You're going to diminish any efficiency pushing a smaller motor hard to keep up with a NA V8. These MPG numbers by companies are best case conservative driving. You push a turbo 6 to keep up with a V8 and you're MPGs go thru the floor.
I'm not opposed to smaller motors, and I'd buy one for long commutes or milk runs. But I am generally of the mindset don't buy a small augmented motor if you are going to try to do what bigger motors are doing. Just get a bigger motor!
FYI- the Dodge 5.7 is plagued with cam and lifter problems and MDS and timing chain issues...
I have:
One 4.0L Ford V6
Two 4.6L Ford V8s
Three 4.7L Toyota V8s
One 6.4L Dodge V8.
First of all, cost and complexity. Getting smaller motors to perform to bigger motor standards costs a lot more than just having a bigger NA motor.
Second, effort. A augmented 4 or 6 is going to be pushing higher RPMs and redlines to do what V8 can do with a lot less effort. Towing, speed, etc. And RPMs ultimately are what add up in a motor. This goes to longevity.
Third, efficiency. You're going to diminish any efficiency pushing a smaller motor hard to keep up with a NA V8. These MPG numbers by companies are best case conservative driving. You push a turbo 6 to keep up with a V8 and you're MPGs go thru the floor.
I'm not opposed to smaller motors, and I'd buy one for long commutes or milk runs. But I am generally of the mindset don't buy a small augmented motor if you are going to try to do what bigger motors are doing. Just get a bigger motor!
Good choice. It's a fantastic tower. Super quiet cabin under load.
Same thing in the desert, heat and hills zaps the NA rigs so you need to keep them boiling.
The First gens seem to have some issues but it looks tightened up on the second gen.
The big block ford in a half ton would be cool.
I really dont get why the NA manufacturers aren't upping the displacement.
My ancient cheap small block 406 would beat 500ftlb from 3500-5500, idle at 800 RPM and run on pump gas.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
No it isn't. The odd one will have a lifter failure (that often takes out the SADI camshaft) but the rate of occurrence is actually quite low. There are a lot of them out there, so there's a lot of noise about it. The GM AFM engines are prone to the same problem, but since they use a billet camshaft, they are more forgiving and sometimes the camshaft survives.
Early VCT engines had some timing chain issues, I've heard nothing on that front in more recent years.
Note that the 5.7L and 6.4L take the same lifters and same MDS components. You don't hear about it on the 6.4L as often because there are fewer of them out there. Even the 6.2L Hellcat engine, which doesn't have MDS, has experienced the odd lifter failure.
This subject has been discussed extensively on this board, FWIW.
Well, it's widely known/reported in the Dodge community. It's quite common that folks avoid the 5.7 or get a manual to avoid the MDS. Dodge did a 50,000 car recall to fix some of these issues. There are boutique engine companies that actually perform the MDS delete.
If you internet search for any of these symptoms there's endless hours of reading and videos proving these to be true.
I would not buy a 5.7L. YMMV.
We seem to some times forget that it takes 400 hp of gas and air to make 400 Hp regardless of the engine size ,,more or less. If there is no turbo. the turbo will never go and if you have a 4 cylinder engine the rebuild will only need 4 pistons. We pays our money and we takes our chances.
Horses are expensive to maintain. Why do you thing Ferrari uses a Horse on their logo?
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Of course it's widely reported, it's their best selling engine, there are millions of them out there, they are going to reflect the highest share of lifter failures.
Avoiding MDS doesn't avoid the issue, it is often non-MDS lifters that fail, as I said, the issue has also impacted the Hellcat 6.2L, which doesn't have MDS. Of course with fewer non-MDS engines sold, the total number of incidences are going to be lower.
I would suggest searching this forum for threads on the matter, I've posted extensively on it, and isn't something I'm going to go to the effort of re-hashing here. You own a 6.4L, be aware that it uses the SAME LIFTERS.
At 19 mpgs the engine would have used approx 23,018 gallons of gas and at $2.50 per gallon is $57,545.00
Last edited:
2.7L ecoboost F150:
Note: no engine problems, regular oil changes, the one and only failure was a recent water pump replacement. Not only will the turbocharged engines last, they may actually last longer due to quality engineering, compacted graphite iron blocks and very robust internals.
But in fairness, I think the ecoboost was first introduced in 2015 so your vehicle is no older than 6 years old. Depending on age that's upwards of 73,000 miles per year. That says to me that it's all big highway trips, very little engine strain of towing, construction lumber runs, hauling dirt/rocks, towing boats, short trips to Home Depot, idling, etc.
I've heard it said that highway miles represent about 1/10th the engine wear and strain of stop and go city traffic with short trips, cold starts, and idling... So that would be closer to 45,000 real miles on the engine as wear is concerned.
I think that nearly any modern motor would do fine at 1/2 million highway miles if maintained.
The YT channel "The Fast Lane" does a lot of mountain towing. In this episode they tested a V8 vs. a V6 ecoboost in a cold weather mountain highway tow. Spoiler, the V8 performed better and 2 out of the 3 testers picked the V8 over the ecoboost.
Kilmer is not omniscient, but he's a well known long-term seemingly honest mechanic. He's typically not a fan of turbo engines or forcing small engines to work as hard as big engines. It defeats the purpose of fuel economy, very complex, very expensive.
Similar threads
