Melltimejr Posted September 6, 2015 Share Posted September 6, 2015 An engineer buddy of mine was talking with me about the Edge the other day when I told them that I was looking into ordering a 2016 as soon as I could. The engineer, former Ford, now at a supplier, strongly suggested that I avoid the 2.7 ecoboost. Though they didn't go into specifics, the consensus was that there are long term longevity issues that haven't necessarily been worked out yet and that the engine, in the long run, would likely cost me a good amount of money. I was disappointed because I had been pretty set on getting a Sport, and also surprised to hear this since Ford is putting that engine in the F-150...I wouldn't think they'd risk anything subpar in the F-150. Given the circles that this engineer runs in, I'm inclined to believe their words of caution. Anyone else hear or have any inside information pertaining to this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted September 6, 2015 Share Posted September 6, 2015 Disgruntled former Ford employee trying to put a negative spin on things? Knowing how the gen 1 EcoBoost has worked out, I would have no fear buying a 2.7L EB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melltimejr Posted September 7, 2015 Author Share Posted September 7, 2015 Haha, not disgruntled. Left on good terms and by choice. The concern seemed genuine as well as internally discussed and possibly fairly well known. Just trying to see if anyone in the know has any relevant info Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordtech1 Posted September 7, 2015 Share Posted September 7, 2015 Only issue I have heard of is carbon build up on valves causing driveability issues. However, that's an issues on all DI engines, just ask Audi, BMW etc.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xbar Posted September 10, 2015 Share Posted September 10, 2015 (edited) I have heard about the carbon problem. The one thing that sets Ford apart is the turbo. There is no Ford approved induction cleaning service for the EcoBoost. Engineering has found that the cleaning service, such as BG or equivalent, is taking out the turbos. So until they find out a little more, don't induction clean. The video I saw, the guy suggests that you should use a top tier fuel and not just the cheapest gas you find. Another thing is to just go out on the backroads and blow it out like we did in the old days. Some people call it the old " Italian tune up". Other than that, the Eco's appear to be a good engine choice. I love the torque I get out of my truck. I could pull the wheels off my old 5.4L. Edited September 10, 2015 by Xbar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Harger Posted September 10, 2015 Share Posted September 10, 2015 Is there a real world difference between the Ford and Lincoln versions? I see the specs call out a slight difference in output, but is it really a big enough jump on that type of car or is it a marketing thing to help draw a line between the edge and mkx? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted September 14, 2015 Share Posted September 14, 2015 Is there a real world difference between the Ford and Lincoln versions? I see the specs call out a slight difference in output, but is it really a big enough jump on that type of car or is it a marketing thing to help draw a line between the edge and mkx?Previous EcoBoost engines for trucks were "tuned" for more low end torque. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RayoVac Posted September 15, 2015 Share Posted September 15, 2015 I just don't buy into this kind of propaganda. If there were some behind the scenes conversations to back this up and it was leaked, your telling me the Auto News Media would not have already been all over it and Nancy Drew'd it to death???? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xbar Posted September 18, 2015 Share Posted September 18, 2015 I just don't buy into this kind of propaganda. If there were some behind the scenes conversations to back this up and it was leaked, your telling me the Auto News Media would not have already been all over it and Nancy Drew'd it to death???? What propaganda are you speaking of? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RayoVac Posted September 18, 2015 Share Posted September 18, 2015 What propaganda are you speaking of? The whole deal about avoiding buying a 2.7 because some former engineer who won't go into detail etc. etc. If there were some significant underpinning type longevity problems with the 2.7, do you really think that some engineer would leak NDA type information (former employee or not) and that the Automotive Press would not have already been unearthing the skeletons??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xbar Posted September 18, 2015 Share Posted September 18, 2015 I would agree. If there were those kinds of problems, they would be surfacing on forums and auto blogs all over by now. You know how the competition likes the dirt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted September 21, 2015 Share Posted September 21, 2015 There is the classic line, "Never buy a car the first year of production." For the same logic, it applies to the powertains (engine and transmissions). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted September 21, 2015 Share Posted September 21, 2015 There is the classic line, "Never buy a car the first year of production." For the same logic, it applies to the powertains (engine and transmissions). Have there been changes to the 2.7L for the '16 model year? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted September 21, 2015 Share Posted September 21, 2015 Have there been changes to the 2.7L for the '16 model year? Not that I'm aware, at least with anything major. Pretty sure this one was all new for MY2014/2015. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted September 21, 2015 Share Posted September 21, 2015 Not that I'm aware, at least with anything major. Pretty sure this one was all new for MY2014/2015. That's what I thought (yes, it was all new for MY '15), so that would mean waiting for the second MY would do nothing for the 2.7L EB since it will be carry over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xbar Posted September 21, 2015 Share Posted September 21, 2015 (edited) There is the classic line, "Never buy a car the first year of production." For the same logic, it applies to the powertains (engine and transmissions). Partly true. But what about when they start to do cost saves down the line and cheapen them up? Sometimes, after they get the bugs worked out in the end of the first year or early second year, that may the best time to buy. Salary workers are always on the lookout for cost saves, good or bad. Edited September 21, 2015 by Xbar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted September 21, 2015 Share Posted September 21, 2015 Partly true. But what about when they start to do cost saves down the line and cheapen them up? Sometimes, after they get the bugs worked out in the end of the first year or early second year, that may the best time to buy. Salary workers are always on the lookout for cost saves, good or bad. I haven't seen Ford do that recently. Any examples? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pioneer Posted September 22, 2015 Share Posted September 22, 2015 I haven't seen Ford do that recently. Any examples? I could give you some examples from the '13 and '14 model year F-150, but I'd rather not. Trust me. It happens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xbar Posted September 23, 2015 Share Posted September 23, 2015 (edited) I work with enough Engineers to know that they are always on the prowl for cost saves. Whether it's process, material, or design, their performance reviews sometimes depend on it. One example would be this: Sit in a 2007 (first year) Edge, then sit in a 2010. The seating was so less plush and less comfortable that I held out until 2015 to let go of my "07". Just one observation. Edited September 23, 2015 by Xbar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted September 23, 2015 Share Posted September 23, 2015 (edited) Now that I think about it, all of my recent models were first or second year versions. So I wouldn't have noticed the decontenting. Edited September 23, 2015 by akirby Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melltimejr Posted November 1, 2015 Author Share Posted November 1, 2015 So the problem that is troubling the engineer is that the engine block is two pieces and those two pieces are made of different metals; aluminum and cast iron. Apparently this is the only ecoboost variant to use two different metals for the block. The fear is that the longevity through repeated cycles will be compromised since different metals wear, expand, and contract at different rates. The block will eventually leak and cost thousands to repair/replace. Apparently the design was delayed multiple times and engineering wasn't pleased with its longevity. However, with the $$$ invested in it, the white collars decided to push it through. The engine seems like a marvel now, but once they get time and miles on them...??? What say you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pakmak Posted November 4, 2015 Share Posted November 4, 2015 What is the horsepower and torque difference between the 2.7L and 2.0L? Any know issues with the 2.0L? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.