View Single Post
Old 11-06-2012, 10:42 PM   #13
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 35419
Join Date: Apr 2003

Originally Posted by gggplaya View Post
This is why i hate consumer reports, they are a NEWS source trying to sell magazines. This is not the first time their so called "experts" screwed up a comparison.

You can't compare the 5.0 engine to the ecoboost. The 5.0 engine is a car engine, and sucks for towing. Doesn't have the low end grunt making peak torque at 4250rpm, and the epa estimates only make the ecoboost 1mpg better than the 5.0. So they are going to average nearly the same.

Instead CR should have compared the ecoboost to the 6.2l engine. The ecoboost wins hands down in fuel economy. It also tows better at altitude, and has 90% of it's torque at 17000rpm with full torque at 2500rpm. It's a total beast, so yes you can have your cake and eat it too. Tow over 11000lbs, and get the same fuel economy as the lower model engines.
Like the ecoboost isn't a car engine? It was released in the Taurus/Lincolns before the F150--yeah, yeah, it was "changed" for truck duty. Yeah right.

But if it revs to 17,000 rpms, you are right, it is the most amazing engine evar!

All of the towing test I have seen show that it uses MORE fuel than comparable NA engine cause it is constantly in boost--and generating a lot of heat... .
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
daveyboy is offline   Reply With Quote