Forums59
Topics1,039,360
Posts13,963,357
Members144,202
|
Most Online39,925 Dec 30th, 2023
|
|
Re: 3.31 vs 3.55
[Re: Samsonsworld]
#13711397
09/25/20 09:38 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 121,172
hopalong
Pescador Loco
|
Pescador Loco
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 121,172 |
I don't get why people get hung up on the number of cylinders. A Ram Cummins is a 6 cylinder and probably the best truck engine you can buy.
The benefit of the 3.5l is not the fuel economy. It's the fact you produce a heck of lot more torque at 2000 rpms than the 5.0l does. The 5.0l has to rev to make power. The turbo engine provides a better driving experience imo, especially if you get hills or when towing. With that said, 2k lbs isn't much weight. Either would work. rotating mass, the v6 works harder to make the power and requires dual turbos, priced out a turbo lately? either will pull 2k easy, over 3k and I want a v8. as to the cummins, do you know what one weighs, ever seen the size of the pistons/cyls. it is a whole lot of rotating mass and the compression is making torque like nobodies business. diesel to gas comparisons are apples to oranges.
|
|
Re: 3.31 vs 3.55
[Re: hopalong]
#13711429
09/25/20 10:35 PM
|
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 12,204
tmd11111
TFF Guru
|
TFF Guru
Joined: Apr 2017
Posts: 12,204 |
I don't get why people get hung up on the number of cylinders. A Ram Cummins is a 6 cylinder and probably the best truck engine you can buy.
The benefit of the 3.5l is not the fuel economy. It's the fact you produce a heck of lot more torque at 2000 rpms than the 5.0l does. The 5.0l has to rev to make power. The turbo engine provides a better driving experience imo, especially if you get hills or when towing. With that said, 2k lbs isn't much weight. Either would work. rotating mass, the v6 works harder to make the power and requires dual turbos, priced out a turbo lately? either will pull 2k easy, over 3k and I want a v8. as to the cummins, do you know what one weighs, ever seen the size of the pistons/cyls. it is a whole lot of rotating mass and the compression is making torque like nobodies business. diesel to gas comparisons are apples to oranges. The ecoboost was actually designed and built as a turbo motor from the ground up. It's not working harder or stressed at all. As for a replacement turbo their only $600. Funny how nobody questions a turbo on a diesel but soon as ones put in a gasser everyone freaks out.
|
|
Re: 3.31 vs 3.55
[Re: Verkeith]
#13711520
09/26/20 01:04 AM
|
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 121,172
hopalong
Pescador Loco
|
Pescador Loco
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 121,172 |
I don't have a problem with a turbo on a gasser and have driven one of the new f150s with 10 speed and ecoboost. truck ran great, different modes like sport etc. but in 14 when I did my research on a new truck the 5.0 won out for towing after a lot of people relayed their results with theirs.
if I didn't tow so often I would probably consider the ecoboost but for what I do and need the 5.0 is my choice.
|
|
Re: 3.31 vs 3.55
[Re: hopalong]
#13711544
09/26/20 01:24 AM
|
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 11,008
BigDozer66
TFF Guru
|
TFF Guru
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 11,008 |
I don't have a problem with a turbo on a gasser and have driven one of the new f150s with 10 speed and ecoboost. truck ran great, different modes like sport etc. but in 14 when I did my research on a new truck the 5.0 won out for towing after a lot of people relayed their results with theirs.
if I didn't tow so often I would probably consider the ecoboost but for what I do and need the 5.0 is my choice. On the 1st Gen EcoBoost engines there were problems with them "making" oil hence the reason many put Catch Cans on them. The other problem with them was they were only direct injected so the intake valves would get dirty and no easy way to keep them clean. In '15 when they put the Gen 2's in the corrected the oil problem and now they are Port & Direct Injected to fix the valve problem. Now logical thinking would say that the fewer parts you have then the fewer parts to go wrong. There are a couple guys on one of the RV Forums that use their EcoBoost trucks to deliver travel trailers from the factory to wherever they are needed. Both of them are in the 350K range the last time I saw them post about them but they are almost all highway miles.
2016 Ranger RT188 Charcoal Metallic Dual Console 2017 Yamaha 115 VMAX SHO (VF115LA) SS Prop Minn Kota Ultrex i-Pilot Link 45" 80 lb. Humminbird Helix 10 Mega SI BalZout Console Humminbird Helix 10 Mega SI BBT Bow Mount Trick Step
|
|
Re: 3.31 vs 3.55
[Re: Verkeith]
#13712061
09/26/20 06:24 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 7,592
Samsonsworld
TFF Celebrity
|
TFF Celebrity
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 7,592 |
Your survey was wrong. The ecoboost flat out spanks the 5.0l for towing. And I have no idea as to the cost of a turbo as my 2013 is pushing 100k miles and still runs like new. Also, a turbo gas engine is similar to a diesel in that it has gobs of low end torque.
|
|
Re: 3.31 vs 3.55
[Re: Verkeith]
#13712342
09/26/20 11:04 PM
|
Joined: Nov 2014
Posts: 23,439
SteezMacQueen
TFF Guru
|
TFF Guru
Joined: Nov 2014
Posts: 23,439 |
Let’s just watch “NASTRUCK” on tv and let them decide which is faster for us.
Eat. Sleep. Fish.
|
|
Re: 3.31 vs 3.55
[Re: Verkeith]
#13712404
09/26/20 11:55 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 870
TITANIUM-BACK
Pro Angler
|
Pro Angler
Joined: Sep 2012
Posts: 870 |
I have been a diesel mechanic for over 25 yrs. I also work on gas engines due to fleets changing over and getting away from diesel. I personally own a 2016 fx4 crew cab 6.5' bed f150. I drove the exact same model in the 5.0 and 3.5 eco boost. Only difference I found is 5.0 was little more peppy on lower end but the eco boost was way faster and more torque on top end. The 3.5 is a pulling machine with 3.55 gears and i love 3.55 you get best of best worlds..pulling and fuel millage. My 3.5 with 3.55 gears pulls our 30' trailer like nothing and will flat out spank my father n laws 6.2 denali 4x4 with long wheel base...it pisses him off..lol I also own a cummins and a duramax with 3.55 gears also for my other trucks. The eco boost babied in town with the 35 gallon tank gets about 23.5 mpg. I do not regret not getting the 5.0.
As far as all the eco boost problems...most of the time I see them is because people use those cheap oil change coupons and use what ever with the cheap filters and it sludge's the turbo oil supply lines up and causes bearing failure. You should use 5w30 syn with a motorcraft filter and stick with same oil.
|
|
Re: 3.31 vs 3.55
[Re: Verkeith]
#13714406
09/28/20 08:25 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 7,490
redchevy
TFF Celebrity
|
TFF Celebrity
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 7,490 |
So did you buy a new pickup yet?
Honestly for your 2,000 lb weight and a modern 1/2 ton pickup i dont think it will matter.
The rear end ratio becomes increasingly insignificant as the number of transmission ratios increases.
|
|
Re: 3.31 vs 3.55
[Re: Verkeith]
#13714434
09/28/20 08:54 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 860
Verkeith
OP
Pro Angler
|
OP
Pro Angler
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 860 |
I'm headed to the dealership on Wednesday. I really appreciate everyone's input....i don't think I'll be disappointed either way.
|
|
Re: 3.31 vs 3.55
[Re: tmd11111]
#13714570
09/28/20 11:30 PM
|
Joined: Aug 2020
Posts: 952
z289sec
Pro Angler
|
Pro Angler
Joined: Aug 2020
Posts: 952 |
I don't get why people get hung up on the number of cylinders. A Ram Cummins is a 6 cylinder and probably the best truck engine you can buy.
The benefit of the 3.5l is not the fuel economy. It's the fact you produce a heck of lot more torque at 2000 rpms than the 5.0l does. The 5.0l has to rev to make power. The turbo engine provides a better driving experience imo, especially if you get hills or when towing. With that said, 2k lbs isn't much weight. Either would work. rotating mass, the v6 works harder to make the power and requires dual turbos, priced out a turbo lately? either will pull 2k easy, over 3k and I want a v8. as to the cummins, do you know what one weighs, ever seen the size of the pistons/cyls. it is a whole lot of rotating mass and the compression is making torque like nobodies business. diesel to gas comparisons are apples to oranges. The ecoboost was actually designed and built as a turbo motor from the ground up. It's not working harder or stressed at all. As for a replacement turbo their only $600. Funny how nobody questions a turbo on a diesel but soon as ones put in a gasser everyone freaks out. Them little dinky turbos they put on factory engines, ain't stressing anything. Try running a stock GM 5.3 block, with a 88MM Gen2 ProMod.
Last edited by z289sec; 09/28/20 11:30 PM.
|
|
Re: 3.31 vs 3.55
[Re: TITANIUM-BACK]
#13714987
09/29/20 12:42 PM
|
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 121,172
hopalong
Pescador Loco
|
Pescador Loco
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 121,172 |
I have been a diesel mechanic for over 25 yrs. I also work on gas engines due to fleets changing over and getting away from diesel. I personally own a 2016 fx4 crew cab 6.5' bed f150. I drove the exact same model in the 5.0 and 3.5 eco boost. Only difference I found is 5.0 was little more peppy on lower end but the eco boost was way faster and more torque on top end. The 3.5 is a pulling machine with 3.55 gears and i love 3.55 you get best of best worlds..pulling and fuel millage. My 3.5 with 3.55 gears pulls our 30' trailer like nothing and will flat out spank my father n laws 6.2 denali 4x4 with long wheel base...it pisses him off..lol I also own a cummins and a duramax with 3.55 gears also for my other trucks. The eco boost babied in town with the 35 gallon tank gets about 23.5 mpg. I do not regret not getting the 5.0.
As far as all the eco boost problems...most of the time I see them is because people use those cheap oil change coupons and use what ever with the cheap filters and it sludge's the turbo oil supply lines up and causes bearing failure. You should use 5w30 syn with a motorcraft filter and stick with same oil. curious what the fuel mileage is when towing the 30'. that was most of my problem with them in 14 when I was looking, eco dropped to 11-12 with a boat was what everyone was telling me. my main benefit was I added the superchips tuner, I can adjust a lot with it but it is a tow tune not a performance tune and works excellent. flashpaq is super easy to use and was well worth the money imo.
|
|
Re: 3.31 vs 3.55
[Re: hopalong]
#13715030
09/29/20 01:14 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 7,490
redchevy
TFF Celebrity
|
TFF Celebrity
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 7,490 |
I have been a diesel mechanic for over 25 yrs. I also work on gas engines due to fleets changing over and getting away from diesel. I personally own a 2016 fx4 crew cab 6.5' bed f150. I drove the exact same model in the 5.0 and 3.5 eco boost. Only difference I found is 5.0 was little more peppy on lower end but the eco boost was way faster and more torque on top end. The 3.5 is a pulling machine with 3.55 gears and i love 3.55 you get best of best worlds..pulling and fuel millage. My 3.5 with 3.55 gears pulls our 30' trailer like nothing and will flat out spank my father n laws 6.2 denali 4x4 with long wheel base...it pisses him off..lol I also own a cummins and a duramax with 3.55 gears also for my other trucks. The eco boost babied in town with the 35 gallon tank gets about 23.5 mpg. I do not regret not getting the 5.0.
As far as all the eco boost problems...most of the time I see them is because people use those cheap oil change coupons and use what ever with the cheap filters and it sludge's the turbo oil supply lines up and causes bearing failure. You should use 5w30 syn with a motorcraft filter and stick with same oil. curious what the fuel mileage is when towing the 30'. that was most of my problem with them in 14 when I was looking, eco dropped to 11-12 with a boat was what everyone was telling me. my main benefit was I added the superchips tuner, I can adjust a lot with it but it is a tow tune not a performance tune and works excellent. flashpaq is super easy to use and was well worth the money imo. JMHO but you have touted the 5.0 as a superior tower all this time and you have been wrong all along. My take if you go 5.0 you went for simplicity thats it. You will get much bigger gains on the 3.5 from tuning alone also.
|
|
Re: 3.31 vs 3.55
[Re: Verkeith]
#13715037
09/29/20 01:16 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 7,490
redchevy
TFF Celebrity
|
TFF Celebrity
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 7,490 |
I do not personally own a 3.5 ecoboost, but have driven several have read a lot about them and have several family members that own them in excess of 100,000 miles with no issues with the engine other than an electric gremlin here or there unrelated to the motor. I will consider an ecoboost for my next truck, but still got a lot of life in my current ride.
|
|
Re: 3.31 vs 3.55
[Re: SteezMacQueen]
#13715092
09/29/20 01:43 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 7,592
Samsonsworld
TFF Celebrity
|
TFF Celebrity
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 7,592 |
Let’s just watch “NASTRUCK” on tv and let them decide which is faster for us. It's not about who is fastest. It's about running at lower rpms and a quieter ride. It's about maintaining speed with fewer downshifts. That 3.5l is a better tow engine than my 6.2l, much less a 5.0l.
|
|
Re: 3.31 vs 3.55
[Re: Verkeith]
#13723741
10/08/20 02:47 AM
|
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 860
Verkeith
OP
Pro Angler
|
OP
Pro Angler
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 860 |
So I went with the 5.0 V8. I test drove both the 3.5 V6 and 5.0 V8 equipped trucks. The 3.5 seemed like it wasn't as sturdy or stout as the 5.0 to me...it's kinda hard to explain the way it felt while I was driving it. I'm happy with my decision. I purchased a 2020 XLT F150 FX4 Sport Appearance Package with a 3.55 rear end. Thanks to everyone for chiming in.
|
|
Moderated by banker-always fishing, chickenman, Derek 🐝, Duck_Hunter, Fish Killer, J-2, Jacob, Jons3825, JustWingem, Nocona Brian, Toon-Troller, Uncle Zeek, Weekender1
|