01-16-2014, 08:35 PM | #71 |
Drives: 2017 Ram 1500 4x4 Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 58
|
|
01-16-2014, 08:38 PM | #72 |
Drives: '13 Inferno Orange ZL1 Convertible Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: The 313
Posts: 437
|
what the heck happened here?
Even Mark Reuss said just this week at the auto show that the Chevy had a 200 lb advantage on the old F-150. So a 500 lb advantage with the new F-150 truck. You guys think the engines are the big news? You guys totally miss the point. No bias here, I make Rams and have owned three of them. Our Ram, even with the new 3.0 litre diesel, is suddenly 3+ years behind in design of their most dominating competitor. That Sucks! Ford worked with a supplier (forget who, it is on the 'net somewhere) and built a $1 billion factory in NY to supply the needed Aluminum. Cost wise, Ford says it's $1000 more to make, but prices will remain the same. How? Ever see how much rebate is on trucks? Won't be too hard. Ford reps. also made a valid point that $1000 extra for the Aluminum is still cheaper than the up charge for a more fuel efficient diesel engine would cost. OK, back to the silly bickering over engines. |
01-16-2014, 08:40 PM | #73 | |||
Drives: 2010 SS, 2000 Pontiac Formula Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Missouri
Posts: 509
|
Quote:
Sure it does, but what kind of power, and FE do you think the Ecoboost will get for 2015 now that it's the big dog in fords lineup. I would hope the brand new top dog engine would make more power and achieve decent FE compared to a 4 year old motor lol. I have had plenty of 2v with 200K+ miles and have never had or heard of someone blowing a plug through the head. Having plenty of experience with both I'm going to strongly disagree. I prefer the 5.0 simply because I'm a V8 kind of guy. If the Ecoboost sounded like the 5.0 it would be my choice because it is better in every way. Quote:
I will admit I am a fan of the F150 but I give GM credit for finally making some competitive trucks. Let's face it there last model of trucks were garbage compared to the competition from Ram and Ford. Not saying as a whole but performance and feature wise. Quote:
I would rather give up the 1MPG that honestly probably won't even be noticed in real world milage, for the added power the Ecoboost offers. I don't have any experience with the new 5.3, but the old 5.3 was rated at 21 and the closest I could ever get to that was 18 on long straight road at 70 from an underpowered engine. I'm not trying to dog the new 5.3 seems like a decent engine and it's FE rating is nice. And the new 6.2 is down right awesome! The people saying the Ecoboost is a POS and slow and can't tow blah blah are annoying as most have probably never even sat in one lol... The Ecoboost was meant to target the 5.3 not the 6.2 The 5.0 was meant to target the old 4.8, and the 6.2's were meant to go head to head. So yes the 6.2 out powers the the Ecoboost as it should. Now that the 3.5 Ecoboost is the big dog in fords lineup and has the smaller Ecoboost engine to make up for FE I see ford adding more power and aggressive tuning to the Ecoboost. This is just speculation on my part though I'm still hoping Ford still has the next gen 6.2 in development lol |
|||
01-16-2014, 08:50 PM | #74 | |||
Drives: 16 Camaro SS, 15 Colorado Join Date: May 2009
Location: Jefferson City, Missouri
Posts: 13,943
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Keep it up and you won't last long here.
__________________
2016 Camaro 1SS - 8-speed - NPP - Black bowties
2010 Camaro 1LT V6 (Sold. I will miss her!) |
|||
01-16-2014, 09:43 PM | #75 |
Drives: 2017 Ram 1500 4x4 Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 58
|
Keep what up? Last time I checked this is f150 thread? If you don't like my view on this subject, I don't know what to tell you. Just so you know I only have 900 bucks in mods lol. That's full exhaust and a tune. Running low 13s. Just saying buddy, it doesn't take much to get these ecoboost trucks hauling ass.
As for the 5th gen comment, I came here to gather information on them. I do plan on buying one for my wife. Also owned a few 4th camaros myself. Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk |
01-17-2014, 07:26 AM | #76 |
Drives: CGM 2SS/RS, 1987 & 2014 Silverado Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Spencerport, NY
Posts: 1,012
|
My 2014 Silverado with the 5.3 got a best 50 mile average economy of 24.9 mpg. more than the EPA rating, this is a regular cab Z71 4x4.
My average over the life of the truck is 19.7, mostly urban driving.
__________________
|
01-17-2014, 08:49 AM | #77 | |
Unofficial Glass Tech
|
Quote:
I gained at least 1 mpg with the Livernois tune.. |
|
01-17-2014, 08:59 AM | #78 |
Drives: 21 Bronco Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Carol Stream
Posts: 6,024
|
|
01-17-2014, 01:15 PM | #79 | |
Drives: 2012 Ford Focus Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Texas
Posts: 394
|
The Ecoboost managed to beat Chevy's new 6.2L by a minute up the climb. GM sacrificed low end grunt for the MPGs. Look at the available rear end gears for the 6.2L. |
|
01-17-2014, 01:30 PM | #80 |
Drives: 2000 Camaro SS Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Louisville, Ky.
Posts: 25,179
|
|
01-17-2014, 02:22 PM | #81 |
Drives: 21 Bronco Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Carol Stream
Posts: 6,024
|
I don't care what any body says, that 6.2 Sounds beautiful lol.
That was a pretty interesting video, also just watched the F-150 video as well. The turbos helped the F-150 stay at a higher speed, but it was quite a bit thirstier. Also the GM engine braking worked a lot better. |
01-17-2014, 02:37 PM | #82 |
Unofficial Glass Tech
|
|
01-17-2014, 03:42 PM | #83 |
|
Well one thing is for sure. The sound of any V8 will always be better then the sound of any V6.
__________________
Mods: BBK Intake, BBK LT's and High Flow Cats, Corsa Cat-back exhaust, Hurst short throw shifter, SLP skip-shift eliminator. 7/1/09 Placed order for IOM/IO int/ SS/RS 6M 9/26/09 Took delivery! |
01-17-2014, 04:27 PM | #84 |
|
Hopefully the paint won't bubble like the old Expeditions aluminum hoods. Anyone who thinks a pre 2014 5.3 is like a 2014 5.3 really needs to drive a 14.
|
Post Reply
|
|
|