Goodbye to Ford

Discussion about Trucks, Cars, Motorcycles, & Trailers.

Moderators: fowl_wishes, whisperin' duck, KCDuckMaster, ajmorell

Re: Goodbye to Ford

Postby ajmorell » Sat Aug 11, 2012 8:18 pm

That's half tons, not the 6.2 3/4 (which I've driven and was unimpressed with)

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk 2
Andy
ajmorell
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 1666
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2007 7:40 am
Location: Santa Fe, NM


Re: Re: Goodbye to Ford

Postby waterfowlhunter » Sun Aug 12, 2012 7:15 am

:thumbsup:
ajmorell wrote:Actually I haven't heard a single person who's driven both say the 6.2 pulls better. I think the ecoboost may be a bit over hyped but if you put the same load behind both and put them along side each other the ecoboost will out pull the 6.2


I can not agree, A show on one of the outdoor channels had a head to head with the eco boost, a Ram and a silverado (both v8's). In all but fuel economy the eco boost came in last in real world towing (hills, 0-60, 1/4 mile). even in an unloaded drag race it was behind the other 2. I would guess that the ford 6.2 would be simular in performance to the Ram and silverado v8's. They stated "you can really tell you are driving a V6 when you load it down". but as someone posted, most 1500 series trucks are "family cars" rather than work trucks and probably towing the boat down the E-Way it would not really matter if you were driving a V8 or V6. I would like to see the eco boost hooked up to our loader @ 13,000# and hit some hills. :yes:

If I owned a truck just to drive, hit some trails, bring home a new washer / dryer on ocassion and do some camping of fishing I think the eco boost would be a great option. but if it was such a great option why do they not put it in the Raptor :huh:

I hear that GM will have a 1500 4x4 with a V6 duramax turbo diesel real soon. I would have to believe that the fuel economy will be close to 30 as I am getting 20 with my duramax HD combined city/hwy.

Ford does show a std eco boost towing capacity of 8300# in 4x4 trucks with the optional 3.31 gears (3.15 stock) and up to 11,100# with 4.11 gear option but only in a long bed with a special package. I would guess with the 4.11's you would kill the fuel economy.

pulled these from some comparison site.

Ram 5.7 390hp, 407Ft# torque and 20mpg

Silverado 6.2 403hp 417ft# Torque and 20mpg

Ford HP
360 @ 5500 rpm (5.0L V8) 20 mpg
411 @ 5500 rpm (6.2L V8) 19 mpg
365 @ 5000 rpm (EcoBoost®) 21 mpg
Ford Torque
380 @ 4250 rpm (5.0L V8) 20mpg
434 @ 4500 rpm (6.2L V8) 19mpg
420 @ 2500 rpm (EcoBoost®) 21mpg

I did not research these but it looks odd to me that the ecoboost shows 420 @ only 2500rpm.
"A free people ought to be armed" George Washington 1790

‘For those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither Liberty nor safety.’ —Ben Franklin.”
User avatar
waterfowlhunter
Forum & State Moderator
 
Posts: 3795
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 4:53 am
Location: Linden, MI

Re: Goodbye to Ford

Postby ajmorell » Sun Aug 12, 2012 10:00 am

I thought we were talking about the Ford 6.2, not the gm. I haven't driven the GM 6.2 but the Ford was a turd. There's a good thread on gl4x4 regarding real world ecoboost experience, several guys who have 10-20k, some with decent loads behind them have posted their experience.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk 2
Andy
ajmorell
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 1666
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2007 7:40 am
Location: Santa Fe, NM

Re: Goodbye to Ford

Postby ajmorell » Sun Aug 12, 2012 10:02 am

http://www.greatlakes4x4.com/showthread.php?t=243275

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk 2
Andy
ajmorell
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 1666
Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2007 7:40 am
Location: Santa Fe, NM

Previous

Return to Vehicle forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests