Because probably about 95% of the driving population does nothing more than put gas in their vehicle........

Does the Ecoboost engine have more potential than a LSX.... nope, it doesn't. But does it take a blower on a 6.2 Denali to beat one that is tune intake and downpipe equipped..... probably. That or cam/stall and whatever else.

The average guy out there with a 6.2 GM truck will be lucky if they use the recommended premium fuel.

That said I can probably mod my garden tractor to beat your blown Denali....... but what did that prove exactly? Nothing, and who cares. I never saw anywhere in this thread prior about whose engine will go to what limits and take the most. And quite frankly I don't think anyone really knows what the limits of the Ecoboost is. My standpoint however is that as stout as an LS is, coupled with way more displacement, yes it will win all out modded.

People might care what the average truck out there is going to do. You don't and that's cool....... I really don't either but can enjoy the thread either way.

 

before i buy a truck i look to see how much aftermarket support it has for the particular drivetrain/body style i'm looking at buying.

the LS motor obviously has a bit more support than the new 5.0 ford, but the ford engine has only been in production for 3 years or so. the LS is cheaper to mod, mostly due to cam-in-block vs ohc, and its also easier to work on because of the timing chain setup. the 5.0 is a bit more technologically advanced, with variable cam timing for all 4 cams, but that means there are more things to go wrong. the LS guys are removing the variable cam timing setups, and switching to fixed timing.

it seems that the LS guys support the older tech, and the 5.0 crowd is going with the newer tech.

i dont know which engine is "better", but i'm going to try all of them and see which one i prefer.

 

GM's tunability is one of its greatest assets

 

I wouldn't say the ecoboost has low end torque like a diesel. Top gear roll on power isn't anything to write home about. When launched off idle, they don't pull a 6.2 truck. As I've said before...It's an impressive little motor...but to say its more of a "truck motor" or more fun to drive, than a 6.2, is laughable.

Have you driven a 6.2 truck? You sure are hell bent on talking about its lack of low end power. Of course your work truck 6.0 2500 was a turd...what do you expect. The truck is a tank. Not the case with a 6.2 1500.

Have you towed with a 6.2? I have pulled a 6500# camper with mine. It did surprisingly well. Easily maintained speed in 5th gear, and doesn't have to run 4k+ to gain speed. Will be testing an 8500# camper in the next couple weeks, and will report back. Also, when you're towing a heavy load with an EB F150, it GUZZLES fuel, since the motor is running in boost. Talk to EB owners at the gas stations, when you see them with campers. I regularly do.

Yes, the EB will excel at elevation...but if I were towing decent loads in the mountains, I'd have a Duramax anyway. It would smoke them both.

 

My 6.2 with headers, 18" wheels, cai, magnaflow, ls 7 tb, and a tune runs 13.49. I have raced tuned ecoboosts and still beat them. 120 feet above sea level too. These 6.2's are ******* beasts.

 

a tuned ecoboost shouldn't be much of a problem for a tuned/modded 6.2, which you have proved. however, stock for stock, a ecoboost will keep up just fine.

race a ford 6.2 truck with intake/tune/headers/full exhaust, then see which truck is fast.

and remember, alot of the ford guys are running a stock converter, even on 12sec trucks. if you have a stall, you should be able to get the jump, but they will come past you on the top end.



another thing, ford will sell anyone a rclb 2wd ecoboost, and its alot cheaper than a 6.2 truck from ford or chevy. i want to see one with intake/tune/downpipe back exhaust, it should run 12's if it can hook.

 

Like I have said, I have raced several tuned crew cab ecos from the guys at my my job and beat them all, ---pretty badly. Before I bought this truck, I test drove an eco cc for a few days before buying one, as my brother in law works at Russel and Smith Ford in Houston. I wasn't impressed whatsoever with it. It sounds pathetic, the truck itself is nice as most F150s are imo, I just couldn't get used to driving a full sized truck that had to rely on turbos to make power. It's new technology and it's still unproven in the long run. I know a reg cab ecoboost would be a beast, but in a crew cab form, it felt like a dog. If I drop another 2-4K in this motor, Im running low 12's. How many 6.2 Chevy's/GMC do you see compared to ecoboosts? I love being the rarer one.

 

Unproven technology........ wow. Yeah because a turbocharger is such a new device being first patented in 1905 and all. Putting boost into an engine to make power is nothing new. They have been out since 2009 in the cars and aren't randomly exploding at will. I mean my LY6 in the 09 2500HD I had grenaded at 60000 miles so they must all be junk right????? Lol. Mileage complaints from some ( whiners who believe silly hype) and transmission problems in the 2011 F150's aside they are a reliable little engine in stock form. Pushed with more boost they seem to hold together well too. It's just because it's not some big stupid rev happy V8 that some people fear it.......

 

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha .... Some of us don't fear things, we've just tried them and didn't like them. "To each his own." I wouldn't trade my Chevy 6.2 for two fords with four turbochargers.

'Nuff said.

 

True. I won't buy any GMT900 truck in general so I am no different lol.

'Nuff said....... Lol