Towing rpod 192 - Event Date: 28 May 2020 - 30 Jun 2020 |
Post Reply | Page <12345 6> |
Author | ||
offgrid
Senior Member Joined: 23 Jul 2018 Online Status: Offline Posts: 5290 |
Calendar Event: Towing rpod 192 Posted: 02 Jun 2020 at 8:48am |
|
lostagain, I'm glad you're happy with your 2.7. You are a conservative driver with a light right foot so you'll be fine.
With any given engine, selecting a lower gear and reducing speed while climbing will improve cooling. With your previous tow vehicle insufficient cooling was your limiting factor so I suggested you try that. I know there are some reports of both 2.7 and 3.5 eb engines overheating while towing uphill, don't know if that is a general problem or not but lets assume not, it is poor engineering to have an underdesiged cooling system. A larger engine will turn at lower rpm to generate the same hp so will suffer less wear over time, that is not a temp issue but it is an engine longevity issue.
The question was what is the better choice, and that will depend on many factors and will be different for different folks. Driving style, altitude, how often you tow vs just drive the truck around empty, how long you plan to keep the vehicle, whether you focus on first cost or life cycle cost, who does your maintenance, etc. I was raising some of those points for consideration. If some of them aren't important to you that's fine. Like I said, for me, I'd personally select the 5.0, I didn't say that would be right for everyone. |
||
1994 Chinook Concourse
1995 RV6A Experimental Aircraft 2015 Rpod 179 - sold |
||
lostagain
Senior Member Joined: 06 Sep 2016 Location: Quaker Hill, CT Online Status: Offline Posts: 2587 |
Posted: 02 Jun 2020 at 9:30am | |
The best choice for anyone involves a set of compromises and balances. As I said, there is no "right" choice for all. So we agree that everyone's "right" choice is dependent on what they want and, hopefully, how they will affect the rest of us as a consequence of their choices. For some, a Kenworth tractor may be the most ideal choice for towing, for others, as we often see in the European RV world, a small car may work fine.
I just pointed out that I have been happy with our new truck. It won't work for others. Some people put catsup on their scrambled eggs while others put spicy salsa.
|
||
Never leave footprints behind.
Fred & Maria Kearney Sonoma 167RB Our Pod 172 2019 Ford F-150 4x4 2.7 EcoBoost |
||
GlueGuy
Senior Member Joined: 15 May 2017 Location: N. California Online Status: Offline Posts: 2629 |
Posted: 02 Jun 2020 at 9:41am | |
Both the 2.7L EB and the 3.5L EB produce close to full torque at less than 2,000 RPM. Neither of those engines is going to be "screaming" towing a trailer less than 7,000 lbs. The main attraction of the 3.5L is that it will have better engine braking than the 2.7L, and that it could handle a 10,000 lb trailer. The 2.7L will give a bit better fuel economy, and when unloaded, it's hard to tell the difference between the two. I will say that our 3.5L laughs at mountain passes. No screaming involved.
|
||
bp
2017 R-Pod 179 Hood River 2015 Ford F150 SuperCrew 4WD 3.5L Ecoboost |
||
StephenH
podders Helping podders - pHp Joined: 29 Nov 2015 Location: Wake Forest, NC Online Status: Offline Posts: 6288 |
Posted: 02 Jun 2020 at 9:46am | |
I appreciate the various opinions expressed. We'll see what is available when it is time to purchase a new(er) truck.
|
||
StephenH
Happy is the man that findeth wisdom,... ouR escaPOD mods Former RPod 179 Current Cherokee Grey Wolf 24 JS |
||
GlueGuy
Senior Member Joined: 15 May 2017 Location: N. California Online Status: Offline Posts: 2629 |
Posted: 02 Jun 2020 at 9:49am | |
and I will agree with lostagain. If you have not driven an F-150 with the 2.7L EB, you can not understand what that engine can do. It is more powerful than a 5L V8, and it does it at lower RPM than that same V8. Both of those EcoBoost engines perform more like a gas-powered diesel.
The peak torque & horsepower do not tell the whole story. You need to look at the torque and RPM curves. At 2,000 RPM both of those engines are head and shoulders above a 5L V8. They are different animals than what you might be used to.
|
||
bp
2017 R-Pod 179 Hood River 2015 Ford F150 SuperCrew 4WD 3.5L Ecoboost |
||
StephenH
podders Helping podders - pHp Joined: 29 Nov 2015 Location: Wake Forest, NC Online Status: Offline Posts: 6288 |
Posted: 02 Jun 2020 at 10:00am | |
I know that from the 2L Ecoboost engine in the Escape we had. It is a world of difference from the NA engine in the Frontier we now have. I don't miss having to feed it premium gas, but I miss the performance.
|
||
StephenH
Happy is the man that findeth wisdom,... ouR escaPOD mods Former RPod 179 Current Cherokee Grey Wolf 24 JS |
||
offgrid
Senior Member Joined: 23 Jul 2018 Online Status: Offline Posts: 5290 |
Posted: 02 Jun 2020 at 10:01am | |
I think perhaps you mistook me raising some additional points for consideration with implying that those considerations would inevitably result in a different decision for everyone. That isn't the case, as said, I would personally pick the 5.0 which wasn't even on the original list of choices. The opinions of the maintenance techs who work on these things count for a lot in my book. Others can disagree of course. Not sure what you mean by how these decisions effect the rest of us?
|
||
1994 Chinook Concourse
1995 RV6A Experimental Aircraft 2015 Rpod 179 - sold |
||
offgrid
Senior Member Joined: 23 Jul 2018 Online Status: Offline Posts: 5290 |
Posted: 02 Jun 2020 at 10:35am | |
5.0 395 hp. 2.7 eb 325 hp. 3.5eb 375 hp. So nope, the 2.7 is not more powerful than the 5.0. It does generate its peak hp at a lower rpm though. 5k vs 5750. As to off the line low rpm torque, the 2.7 gets great reviews for not having turbo lag, in fact it is apparently quicker on the boost than the 3.5. I probably have a lighter left foot than even lostagain, so to me that's not important. I baby my stuff. I keep my Prius in ECO mode all the time which makes it less responsive (ie, it feels really gutless) but allows me to be precise and gentle about how much torque I'm applying. So I'll still go with what has the lowest anticipated maintenance cost that meets the requirements. Simpler is better in my opinion. I could invoke the old adage "there is no replacement for displacement" but of course its not true. Turbos can certainly substitute. But if the replacement involves more complex engineering and lower reliability, and if high altitude driving isn't a requirement then why would I? Others my choose differently. |
||
1994 Chinook Concourse
1995 RV6A Experimental Aircraft 2015 Rpod 179 - sold |
||
lostagain
Senior Member Joined: 06 Sep 2016 Location: Quaker Hill, CT Online Status: Offline Posts: 2587 |
Posted: 02 Jun 2020 at 10:44am | |
As for what engine mechanics prefer, those are just a few opinions based on personal preferences, i.e. catsup or spicy salsa. The hard data on the 2.7 engine is that it is very reliable, sturdy, more powerful than many V-8's, and innovative. It will take time to be accepted by those who prefer traditional naturally aspirated engines. But it serves its market well as a transitional technology that will ultimately be replaced by fuel cell and electric based motors.
Since we will never tow a trailer heavier than the one we have now and we have a towing capacity, at least as claimed by Ford, that is 3000# over our greatest trailer load, the truck will work really well for us. Like I say, some would be happier with the Kenworth MontaƱero, probably one of the toughest and strongest conventional transport tractor ever. We don't hear any engine screaming as we climb up to the beautiful hidden campgrounds in the Sierra Nevada. It's a comfortable drive both up and down. Glue Guy is right about the reduced engine braking of the 2.7 as compared to the 3.5, but that is one of the compromises we chose make; catsup or spicy salsa. When I worked in the elevator industry, I heard many mechanics rave about old relay logic elevator controllers and bitch about the new computer technology they didn't understand and were forced to learn to keep working. We all have a tendency to prefer the familiar over the new. It's human nature.
|
||
Never leave footprints behind.
Fred & Maria Kearney Sonoma 167RB Our Pod 172 2019 Ford F-150 4x4 2.7 EcoBoost |
||
offgrid
Senior Member Joined: 23 Jul 2018 Online Status: Offline Posts: 5290 |
Posted: 02 Jun 2020 at 11:54am | |
Its clearly not realistic for a turbocharged engine to be as reliable as a normally aspirated one, everything else being equal. It is more complex, has more moving parts, and exposes those parts to higher stresses. It always will. In this assessment the techs are correct. And their opinions count for a lot with me, most owners rarely even look under the hood.
Its not at all the same thing as substituting electronics for relay logic, that simplified the control systems significantly. Although in the early days of that transition microprocessors were pretty unstable, there was good reason to stick with relay logic to begin with. I've designed and installed both, for me the transition happened in the early 90's. If you have something really simple to do relay logic can still be the better choice. If y'all have need for a turbo to frequently climb the Sierras or the Rockies then that's fine, just like a turbonormalized aircraft engine is the right choice for pilots flying in the high teens to overtop those same mountains. But here in the East its not necessary, the benefits don't justify the reliability and maintainability concerns. Few folks buy turbonormalized aircraft here. I have no problem choosing to go with new technology, once proven to actually be better. I bought my Prius 10 years after Toyota released the first generation. It is now the highest rated vehicle for reliability on consumer reports. But its actually a pretty simple system, just elegant. Turbos have been around forever, and they still have reliability issues, for good reasons. I'll pass. Like I said, I'm fine if you like yours. I'm not in the market for another tow vehicle, but my next passenger car will be electric for sure. But if I wait till the Prius wears out it'll probably be a long time before that happens....
|
||
1994 Chinook Concourse
1995 RV6A Experimental Aircraft 2015 Rpod 179 - sold |
||
Post Reply | Page <12345 6> |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |