2011 F-150 engine Options

[atvman]

I agree with your point about not everybody needing a towing vehicle, but I hardly think it's fair to imply the 5.0 isn't adequate for towing... Can't it tow 9000lbs or something? That's nothing to sneeze at.

 

By the way, anybody remember when the F-150 Lightning was wicked fast for a pickup with 380hp and 450lb-ft? Now look at us, wondering whether 411hp and 434lb-ft is enough for the optional V8! Just like what's happened with the mustang. They're saying on themustangsource.com that we will be seeing a Mach 1 using a N/A version of the aluminum-block 5.4 from the GT500. I wonder if we'll see this engine in a truck at some point.

 

edit: here's the post on TMS: http://forums.themustangsource.com/f765/next-up-486396/

A Mach 1 with the N.A. 5.4L would be pretty slick, especially if it gets a shaker hood. Hopefully they give it TiVCT and a suspension/wheel/tire package that's more drag strip friendly.

[spudz64]

You'll never see the 3.7 in the Expy/Navigator. Not enough torque.

 

I thought I read unofficially that the 3.5EB would be in the next Navigator? I would think the Expedition would get it too.

 

When Ford killed Mercury and annouced more funding/changes for upcoming Lincolns they had this blurb in the press kit: "•EcoBoost engines available in all Lincolns – from the Navigator full-size SUV to the new C-segment Lincoln"

 

So I'd say its a given that the 3.5 Ecoboost V6 will be going into the Navigator, most likely for 2012.

[jpd80]

I agree with your point about not everybody needing a towing vehicle, but I hardly think it's fair to imply the 5.0 isn't adequate for towing... Can't it tow 9000lbs or something? That's nothing to sneeze at.

My point was that the 3.7 and 5.0 will give better fuel economy in general driving compared to their rivals.

I said nothing about the 5.0 being adequate for towing, that was an unsupported conclusion on your part.

 

Mileage figures will be released in September. Some F-150s could get 24 mpg.

From The Detroit News: http://detnews.com/a...p#ixzz0wP6QHan7

 

 

The EcoBoost engine can tow 11,300 pounds -- equal to the powerful, 6.2-liter V-8 in the Super Duty

and top-line and specialty F-150s that include the Raptor and a Harley-Davidson edition.

From The Detroit News: http://detnews.com/a...p#ixzz0wP5vljdZ

Edited August 12, 2010 by jpd80

[Noah Harbinger]

gah it is NOT a $7000 option! for fucks sakes man. compare the prices of an even optioned sho and taurus limited awd. IT'S LESS THEN $1000 DIFFERENCE!

 

so sick of people making this statement... let me guess you think all fiestas are 23k also?

 

It's usually FordBuyer making the same stupid remarks, as if repeating a lie can make it true.

[jpd80]

It's usually FordBuyer making the same stupid remarks, as if repeating a lie can make it true.

 

I had a look at the Flex SEL on the Ford web site, it's available as a 3.5 AWD as well as Ecoboost 3.5

but to do that, there some options packs that need to be added to level the playing field.

Once that's done, the Ecoboost option works out to be approximately $4,000.

 

I would be glad if someone more conversant with those options could confirm my research.

Edited August 12, 2010 by jpd80

[Deanh]

I had a look at the Flex SEL on the Ford web site, it's available as a 3.5 AWD as well as Ecoboost 3.5

but to do that, there some options packs that need to be added to level the playing field.

Once that's done, the Ecoboost option works out to be approximately $4,000.

 

I would be glad if someone more conversant with those options could confirm my research.

currently ticking the Eco-boost drivetrain in the ford options list ( SHO and Flex ) burdens one with AWD amoungst other items....so the cost differential most definitely is NOT indicative of the engine alone...

[PWR Kid]

GM's 6.2 has less torque than Fords. HP isn't everything.

 

Gm 6.2L @ 384 hp on reg fuel.

[Hydro]

Gm 6.2L @ 384 hp on reg fuel.

Really I had no idea it was so down on power w/ 87 octane. A RAM Hemi makes more beans than their flagship engine

 

If Ford offers the 6.2L in XLT trim I'm really interested. I'm afraid to see what a Lariat 6.2 will cost.

[jpd80]

currently ticking the Eco-boost drive train in the ford options list ( SHO and Flex ) burdens one with AWD amongst other items....so the cost differential most definitely is NOT indicative of the engine alone...

I'll try that again, the EB 3.5 Flex SEL... $39,745

 

3.5 AWD Flex SEL ($33,725) + Rapid Spec 202A ($2,500) = $36,625

adds the extras found in the EB 3.5 Flex SEL except EB engine.

 

 

There fore the $3,100 odd difference must be due to the Ecoboost V6 engine...

[Hydro]

I'll try that again, the EB 3.5 Flex SEL... $39,745

 

3.5 AWD Flex SEL ($33,725) + Rapid Spec 202A ($2,500) = $36,625

adds the extras found in the EB 3.5 Flex SEL except EB engine.

 

 

There fore the $3,100 odd difference must be due to the Ecoboost V6 engine...

I'd say thats about right. They were charging 3k for the 6.2 L in the raptor. 3k for DI twin turbos and a more "techy" engine isn't hard to imagine. that's where I'm afraid the F-150 will be going deep into super duty territory ($$) with it's high end engines.

[Captainp4]

With the power numbers and tow rating on the 3.5 ecoboost in the F150 I wonder if it will ever make its way into the superduty as a base engine maybe. My initial thinking is that it wouldn't be durable enough, but with the trailer rating on the F150 it makes me think it might be. Maybe a 5.0 ecoboost is a diesel alternative or 6.2 alternative. What do you guys think?

[old_fairmont_wagon]

With the power numbers and tow rating on the 3.5 ecoboost in the F150 I wonder if it will ever make its way into the superduty as a base engine maybe. My initial thinking is that it wouldn't be durable enough, but with the trailer rating on the F150 it makes me think it might be. Maybe a 5.0 ecoboost is a diesel alternative or 6.2 alternative. What do you guys think?

 

I believe that it's been mentioned on this board before that there has been bench work done with both the 5.0L and the 6.2-7.0L engines in twin-turbo form. The 7.0L twin turbo was able to put out 700+ lbs of torque (and similar HP) and be a true diesel replacement in all functional parameters, save for efficiency (and that wasn't too far off when you take into account the mpg killing emissions gear). Basically, Ford was/is hedging in case Diesel emissions tighten up any more and it gets too expensive for customers to buy the diesel powerplants. I'd imagine that the 5.0L tt numbers were probably in the 500+/500+ range.

[atvman]

I'll try that again, the EB 3.5 Flex SEL... $39,745

 

3.5 AWD Flex SEL ($33,725) + Rapid Spec 202A ($2,500) = $36,625

adds the extras found in the EB 3.5 Flex SEL except EB engine.

 

 

There fore the $3,100 odd difference must be due to the Ecoboost V6 engine...

I do believe that a $3100 jump in price is less than the jump from a V6 Mustang to a GT, a V6 Camaro to an SS, and a V6 Challenger to an R/T.

[F250]

Once most F-150 buyers test drive the 5.0 they will find it has the best combination of power and mileage for the money.

EcoBoost might be a hard up-sell, not because it's a bad engine but rather because the 5.0 is so good.

The 6.2 finally gives the show trucks (Harley and Platinum) something more to justify their sticker prices. The Raptor of course needs the 6.2.

[jpvbs]

I am guessing Ford is hoping for a high take rate for the EB engine as it will help their CAFE numbers. Maybe it will be priced to help encourage that. It will even be available on XL trims which generally don't have a whole lot of options to drive the price up.

[PWR Kid]

I am guessing Ford is hoping for a high take rate for the EB engine as it will help their CAFE numbers. Maybe it will be priced to help encourage that. It will even be available on XL trims which generally don't have a whole lot of options to drive the price up.

 

 

Great point & I agree.

[Deanh]

I do believe that a $3100 jump in price is less than the jump from a V6 Mustang to a GT, a V6 Camaro to an SS, and a V6 Challenger to an R/T.

dont forget 20 inch wheels, dual exhaust, paddle shifters and EPAS

[fordmantpw]

dont forget 20 inch wheels, dual exhaust, paddle shifters and EPAS

 

But then it wouldn't support their opinion Dean!

[Deanh]

But then it wouldn't support their opinion Dean!

just the facts Mam, just the facts...lol

[akirby]

I noticed they dropped the flareside bed for the 2010 models which seems to be standard practice when they introduce a new body style (IIRC). Does anybody know if they'll reintroduce the flareside for 2011?

 

I love the Supercab flareside look on the STX and FX4 models. A 3.7L supercab flareside STX would be mighty tempting......

[jpd80]

I'd say thats about right. They were charging 3k for the 6.2 L in the raptor. 3k for DI twin turbos and a more "techy" engine isn't hard to imagine. that's where I'm afraid the F-150 will be going deep into super duty territory ($) with it's high end engines.

There's nothing wrong wit paralleling engine options, especially in the F150,

Letting buyers decide whether they are comfortable with 6.2 or EB 3.5 for similar money

shows great confidence and perhaps a belief that two different buyer pools could exist at the same time.

Buyers who want a no nonsense big capacity V8 versus those that are turned on by Ecoboost tech and fuel efficiency.

Edited August 14, 2010 by jpd80