Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 10-02-2015, 08:48 AM   #29
1 Rivet Member
 
j-ten-ner's Avatar
 
Currently Looking...
. , British Columbia
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by gypsydad View Post
...also had issues several times in Rockies going down long windy steep highway grades, where the "tow" mode did not proved enough engine breaking compression, even in 2nd gear...May look at Chevy and Dodge also...hate to go Diese...
Not a bad idea to take a look at the GM trucks. They come with the "Grade Brake Assist". It's a nice feature and makes me chuckle when I see other trucks at the bottom of the hill with smoking brakes.
I guess many drivers don't know how to go downhill w/o "riding" the brakes.
One rule is to use the same gear (or lower) going downhill as you'd use to go uphill.

In some cases you'd still have to apply the brakes. But it is more efficient to brake "hearty" and release again.

Grade Braking Operation on Full-size Trucks
2014 Silverado, 2014 Sierra Towing Assist Features | GM Authority

I also really like the "Hill Start Assist".
It'll hold the brakes for a few seconds to prevent the rig from moving while the driver takes the foot off the brake pedal to the accelerator.

so long
j-ten-ner
__________________

__________________
j-ten-ner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-2015, 09:31 PM   #30
3 Rivet Member
 
2015 27' Flying Cloud
Washington , Washington, D.C.
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 218
When I was shopping for a TV for my FC 27, I spec'd out the 2.7 on Ford's website. IIRC, it would have been maxed out on payload in a crew cab, even with the special higher payload package, etc. Go for the 3.5; it has a good track record and lots of people happily tow an size AS with it. The 2.7 might be ok with a 25 or smaller.
__________________

__________________
DC Bruce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2016, 05:27 PM   #31
Rivet Master
 
TinLoaf's Avatar
 
2006 25' Safari SS SE
Trenton , Illinois
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 794
Images: 22
I'm retiring my 2010 VW Touareg TDI which has towed about 90,000 miles over the past five years.

The new tow vehicle is a 2016 XLT with the 2.7 liter EcoBoost and optional 3.73 axle.

Before that, I towed four years with a 2005 F-150 with 5.4 liter V8. It did well. The new 2.7 liter has 5 more horsepower and 10 more ft. lbs. of torque, plus two more gears. I think it will do quite well.

I'll keep you informed, good or bad.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_8160.jpg
Views:	42
Size:	94.1 KB
ID:	276565  
__________________
Steve
TinLoaf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2016, 11:37 AM   #32
Rivet Master
 
gypsydad's Avatar

 
2017 28' Flying Cloud
2014 25' FB Flying Cloud
2008 25' Safari FB SE
Austin (winter) Lincoln MT (summer) , Texas & Montana
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,094
2.7 vs 3.5 EB?

Not sure why you chose the smaller EB engine with the 25' AS? Also, what is total payload capacity? You have to be at 800+ LBS with just the 25'AS? Just curious... Love the F150 ride however...
__________________
gypsydad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2016, 12:09 PM   #33
Rivet Master
 
TinLoaf's Avatar
 
2006 25' Safari SS SE
Trenton , Illinois
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 794
Images: 22
The 3.5 liter EcoBoost was a design later modified to become turbo, and it has turned out to be a very nice engine. The 2.7 liter EcoBoost was designed from the start to be a turbo, so I feel we'll see even better reliability with the newer design. The block is made from the same compacted graphite iron as the PowerStoke and is now used in the 3.5 liter EcoBoost Gen II engine for 2017.

My VW had 220 hp / 409 ft lbs of torque and was a supurb tow vehicle. The new EcoBoost has 325 hp / 375 ft lbs, plus the truck has a curb weight over 500 pounds LESS than the VW.

My payload is over 1,600 pounds with the lighter extended cab. Not an issue.
__________________
Steve
TinLoaf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2016, 11:51 PM   #34
2 Rivet Member
 
Currently Looking...
Plover , Wisconsin
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 76
Talking No CGI sleeves in the 3.5 liter Ecoboost

Quote:
Originally Posted by TinLoaf View Post
The 3.5 liter EcoBoost was a design later modified to become turbo, and it has turned out to be a very nice engine. The 2.7 liter EcoBoost was designed from the start to be a turbo, so I feel we'll see even better reliability with the newer design. The block is made from the same compacted graphite iron as the PowerStoke and is now used in the 3.5 liter EcoBoost Gen II engine for 2017.

My VW had 220 hp / 409 ft lbs of torque and was a supurb tow vehicle. The new EcoBoost has 325 hp / 375 ft lbs, plus the truck has a curb weight over 500 pounds LESS than the VW.

My payload is over 1,600 pounds with the lighter extended cab. Not an issue.
According to a Ford engineer the Gen 2, 3.5 liter Ecoboost engine does NOT have compacted graphite iron sleeves in the cylinders as the 2.7 liter does. However, I hope that your are right.
__________________
Oxen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2016, 12:40 AM   #35
jcl
Rivet Master
 
Currently Looking...
Vancouver , British Columbia
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,048
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oxen View Post
According to a Ford engineer the Gen 2, 3.5 liter Ecoboost engine does NOT have compacted graphite iron sleeves in the cylinders as the 2.7 liter does. However, I hope that your are right.
The 2.7 is not reported to have CGI sleeves, but rather a CGI block. It is a two piece block, with the upper casting of CGI and the lower casting of aluminum. Interesting design.
__________________
jcl is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2016, 09:45 AM   #36
Rivet Master
 
gypsydad's Avatar

 
2017 28' Flying Cloud
2014 25' FB Flying Cloud
2008 25' Safari FB SE
Austin (winter) Lincoln MT (summer) , Texas & Montana
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,094
Quote:
Originally Posted by TinLoaf View Post
The 3.5 liter EcoBoost was a design later modified to become turbo, and it has turned out to be a very nice engine. The 2.7 liter EcoBoost was designed from the start to be a turbo, so I feel we'll see even better reliability with the newer design. The block is made from the same compacted graphite iron as the PowerStoke and is now used in the 3.5 liter EcoBoost Gen II engine for 2017.

My VW had 220 hp / 409 ft lbs of torque and was a supurb tow vehicle. The new EcoBoost has 325 hp / 375 ft lbs, plus the truck has a curb weight over 500 pounds LESS than the VW.

My payload is over 1,600 pounds with the lighter extended cab. Not an issue.
Hi TinLoaf- the 3.5EB has 375 HP, 470 Torque and appears to be about $1,000 less than the 2.7EB. They both are said to have same GCI used in the blocks; the MPG seems the same, maybe 1 mile different; what am I missing? Wouldn't you be better off with the 3.5 for payload hauling and towing an AS?
Appreciate your homework...as I mentioned, we are still looking at the options and after 98K miles on our 2012 EB with no issues, to me, more HP/Torque seems the way to go.
__________________
gypsydad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-14-2016, 12:48 PM   #37
Rivet Master
 
TinLoaf's Avatar
 
2006 25' Safari SS SE
Trenton , Illinois
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 794
Images: 22
I got the huge end of year rebates on a remaining 2016. The 3.5 Gen II EcoBoosts are only in the 2017s with no rebates. In effect, it would have been $10,000 more, so the 3.5 Gen II wasn't really an option for me.

The 3.5 Gen II EcoBoost also comes with the new 10-speed transmission which I'm unsure about.

In the 2016s, the 2.7 is a $750 option and the 3.5 is a $1,950 option in the build lists.

In the end it all came down to the numbers with my old 5.4 liter F-150. The little EcoBoost has more power, more torque, all at lower RPM, and with more gears and less weight. The old 5.4 did great. I fully expect the 2.7 will be even better.

However, I do question whether the small displacement will hold up to towing in the long run. I'm putting a lot of faith in Ford and trusting that this engine was designed from the start to handle basic towing.

I had the same doubts with VW's 3.0 liter, but turned out to be absolutely solid (still have it).
__________________
Steve
TinLoaf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-15-2016, 11:34 AM   #38
Rivet Master
 
gypsydad's Avatar

 
2017 28' Flying Cloud
2014 25' FB Flying Cloud
2008 25' Safari FB SE
Austin (winter) Lincoln MT (summer) , Texas & Montana
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,094
Quote:
Originally Posted by TinLoaf View Post
I got the huge end of year rebates on a remaining 2016. The 3.5 Gen II EcoBoosts are only in the 2017s with no rebates. In effect, it would have been $10,000 more, so the 3.5 Gen II wasn't really an option for me.

The 3.5 Gen II EcoBoost also comes with the new 10-speed transmission which I'm unsure about.

In the 2016s, the 2.7 is a $750 option and the 3.5 is a $1,950 option in the build lists.

In the end it all came down to the numbers with my old 5.4 liter F-150. The little EcoBoost has more power, more torque, all at lower RPM, and with more gears and less weight. The old 5.4 did great. I fully expect the 2.7 will be even better.

However, I do question whether the small displacement will hold up to towing in the long run. I'm putting a lot of faith in Ford and trusting that this engine was designed from the start to handle basic towing.

I had the same doubts with VW's 3.0 liter, but turned out to be absolutely solid (still have it).
Understand the "numbers" on price....we got $12K discount when I purchased my new 2012 Platinum EB back in April 2012; Now, best I have been offered is $6K discount on 2017 models, but the dealer I know said after the 2016 inventory is mostly gone, (January/February he thinks,) should get back to $10K discounts from Ford. Biggest concern I have is payload on new truck. When you add a shell topper, 150-200 lbs, a generator-40-100 lbs, camping gear/misc at ~40 pounds, firewood at ~40 lbs, Kayaks at 80 lbs, driver/passenger at 375 lbs, then 25' AS FB at 800-1000 lbs, = ~1,800lbs, there not many F150's that are standard with that capacity in 4X4 SuperCrew short beds, from what I have been told. Special order with the "camper" package will take it from 3 leaf springs to 5, I believe, which will get up to around 1900 lbs with the HD Tow package also.
Still going to look close at early reporting on the new EB and 10 speed, also the Silverado 6.2 8 speed...then by spring, I hope to either be convinced which way to go, or more confused...
__________________
gypsydad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-16-2016, 09:10 AM   #39
2 Rivet Member
 
Currently Looking...
Plover , Wisconsin
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 76
A 2017 F-150 Super Crew 4X2 w/ 3.5 EB has a payload capacity of 2890#, 2650# w/ 4X4 w/ heavy duty payload package and 18"' wheels, if the wheelbase in 156.8". Check the site, ford.com/trucks/f150/specifications/payload/. Perhaps your choice would be a 145" wheelbase. If so, the comparable payload would be 2260# or 2060#.
__________________
Oxen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-17-2016, 01:53 PM   #40
Rivet Master
 
gypsydad's Avatar

 
2017 28' Flying Cloud
2014 25' FB Flying Cloud
2008 25' Safari FB SE
Austin (winter) Lincoln MT (summer) , Texas & Montana
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,094
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oxen View Post
A 2017 F-150 Super Crew 4X2 w/ 3.5 EB has a payload capacity of 2890#, 2650# w/ 4X4 w/ heavy duty payload package and 18"' wheels, if the wheelbase in 156.8". Check the site, ford.com/trucks/f150/specifications/payload/. Perhaps your choice would be a 145" wheelbase. If so, the comparable payload would be 2260# or 2060#.
I spent a good hour with the dealer I know here in Austin, and we had to use his order system to enter a Lariat SuperCrew, Shortbed, 4X4, HD Tow, power running boards, camper package, and most all options except sunroof. It came in $5-6K less then Platinum package, but payload was still only 1900 lbs. The printed spec sheet Ford has is not very accurate once you start adding the options. I will look again in January and see if things got easier to configure.
__________________

__________________
gypsydad is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
F150 Ecoboost Owners With Problems LFM Tow Vehicles 45 01-29-2016 11:16 PM
2015 F150 EcoBoost or Ram 1500 EcoDiesel or ?? thewoodcalf Tow Vehicles 40 09-08-2015 06:34 AM
F150 Ecoboost or F250 6.2L for 1968? Randy Gates 1965 - 1969 Globetrotter 25 06-16-2013 01:49 PM
Questions - Ordering 2011 F150 Ecoboost KerryFO Tow Vehicles 46 11-03-2011 06:32 PM
ordering our next TV - 2011 F150 EcoBoost jm2 Tow Vehicles 20 03-31-2011 06:29 PM


Virginia Campgrounds

Reviews provided by




Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:29 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Airstream is a registered trademark of Airstream Inc. All rights reserved. Airstream trademark used under license to Social Knowledge LLC.