2013 F150 Ecoboost vs 2016 Ram 1500 BigHorn 5.7 Hemi
- Thread starter BroRobin
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone with an RV or an interest in RVing!
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
gwcowgill
Well-known member
Horsepower doesn't mean a lot when you look at the RPM that the peak horsepower is developed. When you are making 900 horsepower at 10,000 rpm you are not going to do a lot of pulling unless you have some gears to harness that horsepower.
Agree, I was just trying to convey smaller turbo'ed engines can be made that will do the job. I don't have any experience with the Eco in the F-150 other than one of the contractors that do work for me likes his, and he's done some fairly heavy towing with it. From what I've read, the Eco has proven itself to be a good engine in an F-150. Given the choices as stated by the OP, I would still take the Ram.
henkelphoto
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2016
- Posts
- 129
kdbgoat said:
Of course, the Indy engine is designed to last 500 miles and has a whole pit crew to work on it.
I thought about the Ford Eco-boost, but the salesman told me that they had only been on the market for five years. I don't know about their longevity, and since I owned my last truck for 12 years, I decided to go with the Ram instead. But the Ram has new technology of it's own, so I guess we'll just have to wait and see.
Pugapooh
Well-known member
Another vote for the Ram. We own two and have been generally happy with them. That Ford has ALOT of miles and I agree,it will likely nickel and dime you soon.
gwcowgill
Well-known member
You are absolutely right, I kind of believe I would choose the RAM in this case even though I have heard a lot of good about the ECO boost. I drove a Mercedes Kompressor a couple years ago and was really impressed with it and back when Buick built the T type I was really impressed with it on the drag strip. I still prefer cubic inches though.kdbgoat said:
Peak torque on the 3.5L ecoboost happens around 1500rpm. On most V8s you won't see it until 4000rpm or more. With 3.31 gears, I get 20mpg on the highway, and 18mpg mixed. When towing a heavier load it gets down to around 13mpg. When I bought it, I was looking for a 5.0L V8. The salesman convinced me to drive it because it had all the features I was looking for. I haven't looked back. Ford hasn't either. The max tow package isn't available with a V8. I drove a couple rams and wasn't impressed. They squeeked, rattled, and had crappy finish work just like the 05 I was trading in. If you have kids the bigger cab is also a nice improvement in the ford. There's a reason fords, GMs, and toyotas have a better resale value than dodge.
I have an explorer sport with the 3.5L too. 75,000 miles between them and the only thing I've done is change oil.
My only beef is that it likes premium gas a lot more than regular.
I have an explorer sport with the 3.5L too. 75,000 miles between them and the only thing I've done is change oil.
My only beef is that it likes premium gas a lot more than regular.
8Muddypaws
Well-known member
I didn't know the V6 took premium. That makes me like that sweet little V8 in my 2016 even better.
It doesn't require it, just recommended. I like the 20mpg I get when not towing a lot more than the 12mpg I was getting out of a hemi. Even when towing with that, I ran premium as suggested in the owners manual.
The coyote is a great engine, but it has just as many issues (including the expensive phaser cam). The turbo lag is less noticeable than the 5.0 downshifting. Also like how much quieter the eco is when cruising down the highway. Like I said, I went looking for a new truck wanting a V8 and bought the ecoboost. I haven't been disappointed.
As I said earlier though, a 3-4 year old truck with 90,000+ miles? I don't care what engine it has. No. I had a bad enough experience with 3 years of owning a dodge that I traded it and haven't looked back. If it were between those two trucks, and keeping what I had, I'd keep what I have and buy a reliable daily driver. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
The coyote is a great engine, but it has just as many issues (including the expensive phaser cam). The turbo lag is less noticeable than the 5.0 downshifting. Also like how much quieter the eco is when cruising down the highway. Like I said, I went looking for a new truck wanting a V8 and bought the ecoboost. I haven't been disappointed.
As I said earlier though, a 3-4 year old truck with 90,000+ miles? I don't care what engine it has. No. I had a bad enough experience with 3 years of owning a dodge that I traded it and haven't looked back. If it were between those two trucks, and keeping what I had, I'd keep what I have and buy a reliable daily driver. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
henkelphoto
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2016
- Posts
- 129
pip said:
I have a 2016 Ram with the 5.7 hemi and 3.92 rear end. I get around 20 mpg on the highway and about 16 mixed. If I had the 3.31 rear, it would raise my mileage by 2-3 mpg.
Modern Formula 1 engines are 1.6 liter V6 twin turbo units and produce around 800 horsepower. They must also last for 2 complete race weekends including all practice and qualifying sessions. They are sealed units and no work can be performed on them during the season. They are rev limited to 18,000 RPM and include a Hybrid system that recovers energy under braking and adds it to engine power when desired up to 20 seconds a lap. They also get incredible fuel mileage for a race car.
Engine size is not always an accurate measure of power or economy. Until very recently american vehicles still relied on engines that were designed in the 1940s.
Engine size is not always an accurate measure of power or economy. Until very recently american vehicles still relied on engines that were designed in the 1940s.
henkelphoto
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2016
- Posts
- 129
kdbgoat said:
My MIL has a 1999 Durango with that engine, same thing, a gas hog. Before the Ram, I had a 2004 Toyota Tundra with the 4.7l engine and it got about 16 on the highway and 12 around town. Other than that, a nice truck. I don't have any experience with the Eco-Boost, but I hear varying reports on mileage without towing, but good mileage reports of it when towing.
gwcowgill
Well-known member
keymastr said:
The EPA is probably the biggest mover and shaker of the automotive industry with the buying public now starting to get involved. We are way behind the rest of the world. The VR transmission has been in use in Europe since the late 80's and just now showing up in cars in the US. The transmission in my Jeep allo0ws me to get 17mpg around town and makes you think you are driving a V8 and it is only an 8 speed. Droive a Honda CRV the other day with a VR transmission and was really impressed.
lone_star_dsl
Well-known member
For what it's worth, I had a 230 mile drive this weekend in a 2017 Ford Expedition with the ecoboost and was being followed by a friend in a 2016 Ram with the 5.7 hemi. When we arrived at our destination, the ecoboost showed 17.4 mpg and the hemi showed 17.6 mpg.
gwcowgill
Well-known member
kdbgoat said:
The VR transmission was kept out of the US for years over arguing over warranty obligations.
8Muddypaws
Well-known member
We had an Escape Hybrid with a VR transmission. I'd rather drive a stick with a heavy clutch than ever have another one. 
A
ammotroop1991
Guest
Have a '15 3.5 ecoboost and pull 5K lb TT. 10 MPG avg
