Re: Transit updates from SMB?
 

I'm not sure I agree with the "low-end" pulling power of the EcoBoost that Ford has hammered so hard in marketing. Look at it objectively using Ford's own data from F-150 engine ratings.

Std V6:
302 HP @ 6500 RPM
278 lb-ft at 4000 RPM (212 HP)

EcoBoost
365 HP @ 5000 RPM
420 lb-ft @ 2500 RPM (200 HP)

5.0L V8
360 HP @ 5500 RPM
380 lb-ft @ 4250 RPM (307 HP)

6.2L V8
411 HP @ 5500 RPM
434 lb-ft @ 4500 RPM (372 HP)

So it appears that at even 4000 RPM a 5.0L V8 would absolutely smoke a 3.5 EB V6 if running at 2500 RPM. You could pull the trailer approximately 50% faster up the hill with the 5.0L V8. And of course the 6.2L is that much more.

To me this says that even though the EcoBoost produces maximum torque at 2500 RPM, it can't generate much power at that low RPM. Even the standard V6 can pull as hard at 4000 RPM as the EB at 2500 RPM.

Re: Transit updates from SMB?
 

I'll take low-end torque any day, rather than having an engine scream when I need it.


Herb

Re: Transit updates from SMB?
 

You lost me here.

I think that you are mixing HP and torque as a metric for pulling power.


R

Re: Transit updates from SMB?
 

But the EcoBoost still has another 2500 RPM left in it, while the 3.7L and 5.0 are already peaked out. You really just need to drive one. Even comparing peak HP number, the aftermarket tuners who have dyno-tested the EcoBoost motors of all sizes pretty all say Ford understates the EcoBoosts number (they speculate it's baggage from the Mustang Cobra fiasco when it didn't quite make stated numbers).

Watch this video.... Pretty good comparison of the EcoBoost vs 6.2L in the Raptor:
[youtube:1z1pf6ii]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wYWE11Oo5rg[/youtube:1z1pf6ii]

Re: Transit updates from SMB?
 

Not a chance. :a3: (Just kidding)

What exactly are you not following, and or think I'm mixing up?

I didn't mean to start a power and torque discussion, but will gladly consider and respond to different points of view; particularly when discussion is technical and grounded in objectivity. There is little point in discussing highly-subjective personal tastes like preferring low-end torque over higher-end power. That never goes anywhere.

I merely responded to carringb's example of EB at 2500 RPM versus 5.0 needing 5k (as in 5000 RPM) to match same work. Right off that comparison seemed out of proportion (based on Ford engine ratings).

Re: Transit updates from SMB?
 

For some reason video link doesn't come up on my iPad.

Re: Transit updates from SMB?
 

It may be a mistake to assume that the peak torque number only occurs at the stated rpm (2500) or at least practically speaking. The EB makes peak torque beginning at 2500 but how long does it maintain that number or close to it as the rpms climb? You'd then need to look at the exact same thing for hp and compare them to see how long big hp numbers match up to big torque numbers through the rpm range. At least that's how I understand it....but if I were wrong it wouldn't be the first time today and it's only 8:00 am.

Re: Transit updates from SMB?
 

That's a great point because many modern turbo engines have a flat torque curve at maximum rating that is due to computer-imposed limits (to limit stresses, temperature, and maybe pollution). The 3.5L EcoBoost may very well remain in the same range of torque up to 3500 or 4000 RPMs or so. The one thing we do know for certain (if you believe Ford ratings) is that if both the 3.5L EB or 5.0L V8 are pushed to maximize power, then they are very close. One at 360 HP and the other at 365 HP. And RPMs aren't all that different either since one is at 5000 and the other at 5500 RPM.

I want to be clear that I'm not against turbos, or against EB in general. I just prefer that marketing-driven hype is kept in check. Lots of torque may feel great to the driver, but unless it comes with some RPMs too it normally doesn't translate to pulling "POWER". There is a reason it's normally called "pulling power" and not "pulling torque". As illustrated above, the standard 3.7 V6 can pull just as hard at 4000 RPM as the EB at 2500 RPM. The only difference is that it needs a lower gear so the vehicle is traveling at same speed. So it may spin up a hill in 2nd gear at close to 4000 when the EB could use 3rd at close to 2500 RPM (if they had similar axle ratios and tire sizes). In both cases MPH are similar and generated pulling force to pull a trailer up a hill is also similar.



carringb: Video link came up on desktop. Cool video but "more than $80,000 into truck"? And to get a few more HP than a 6.2L? That's having a lot of extra money laying around.

Re: Transit updates from SMB?
 

It seems that we have been down this road before. And we will never settle it.

Chance has the numbers, and they are important to him.

Others know what they prefer to drive and why it is important to them.

Everybody is right, everyone wins. Just drop it.

Mike

Re: Transit updates from SMB?
 

You are right, that if you hold the 3.5L at 2500 RPM the other motors can match or beat that HP. But it's not close to maxed out at that point. And having more HP at a lower RPM is desirable for many users who tow. And yes, the EcoBoost does have a very flat torque curve. This is the Taurus/Flex dyno. The F150 is a little less flat, but since the Transit version is detuned from the F-series version, you can bet it will look like the Taurus graph.

https://www.shosource.com/catalog/ima...Boost_Dyno.jpg

PS - I don't disagree the 3.7L makes enough HP for a van. But the EcoBoost is more fun, and definitely a great towing motor, even though it doesn't exactly get "Eco" gas-milaege while towing. But the rest of the time, it does pretty good. I love the power of my V10, but I'm definitely a little jealous of the EcoBoost's milage when I'm not towing.

On that note.... The Transit EcoBoost has my attention, but I'm leaning towards an E450-cutaway conversion, and maybe a Flex for my EcoBoost fix. I'll have to wait until they come out to get a better idea. An EcoBoost Transit and a Fiesta ST would be a nice combo too, but then the Fiesta would be more limited for weekend use.