Why no Ecoboost in the F250?

[deerefan]

With power these engines make being comparable to the two gas offerings, why are they not used in the 250/350 lineup? Anyone know/thoughts?

 

[duffer]

I suspect that it would be too much stress, much too often for the engine. Most guys with F250's really work them. Towing trailers, cattle, horses, construction equipment, etc.

I've got an Ecoboost in my F150 and it's fine for just driving around, but I wouldn't want to be towing much of anything with it on a regular basis.

 

[Doughknob]

I've got an Ecoboost in my F150 and it's fine for just driving around, but I wouldn't want to be towing much of anything with it on a regular basis.

Y?

 

[4570Man]

Because there’s no replacement for displacement. Sure little engines can make a lot of power but not for long term.

 

[JimRB]

I saw some hot shot was using an F150 with Ecoboost. I thought I saw pictures of him hauling equipment. After that engine died at well over 200,000 miles of hauling use he put in another one. Maybe that guys was a used tools and equipment dealer, or maybe he was a welding and fabrication guy. I cannot remember who it was.

There is a lot to be said for a larger engine with lots of easily available torque.

 

[ROUSTABOUT]

With power these engines make being comparable to the two gas offerings, why are they not used in the 250/350 lineup? Anyone know/thoughts?

Why aren't they in school buses, dump trucks, and 18 wheelers?

 

[rangerfredbob]

small displacement turbo gas engines are rough, lots of cylinder pressure on a light duty engine is asking for cylinder wall or piston ring wear before mandated warranty period... same reason the Chevy and GMC 1500 got the 400hp 6.2L engine starting in 2014 but in a 2500 or 3500 you could only get a 6.0L until they offered their 6.6L iron block direct injected engine a couple years ago and discontinued the LS based engine line all together...

 

[Slowpoke Slim]

From what I recall, they ran one for testing purposes only, and while it could make "enough" power for a basic truck, the mpg economy was actually worse. If you run a turbo ecoboost engine in full boost, or near full boost mode most of the time (to drive around the larger, heavier truck chassis), the mpg will actually work out to be less than the "traditional" V8 (6.2 or 7.3 gas).

And for the guys that do work their 250/350 trucks hard, the poor little "hair dried" ecoboost suffered premature failures, complaints of poor power, and for a truck engine, where you typically want your power band on the low side of the rpm range, you had to "scream" the little ecoboost (rev it at high rpm) for it to make the power to get work done.

Overall, not a harmonious engine package for a truck that was designed to work for a living.

 

[dieselcrawler]

Even the factory 6.2L gas motor has to scream to get the job done. I have a 2016 F250 (6.2L gas, auto crewcab shortbed), and 2006 F350 (6.0 diesel, 6spd manual, crewcab short bed) and have run both trucks HARD in the past 6-9 months as we relocated to a new farm 3 hours away from the old place.

Loaded GN trailers behind both trucks, running in tandem, my wife driving the gas motor truck. It will keep up and haul any load but the tachometer is bouncing off the red line often, while the diesel is chugging along at 1500-2000 rpm most of the time. Both trucks often grossed 18k-20k+. The 6.2L has been known to want to down shift as far as 2and gear trying to maintain 60-ish mph when cruise control is set pulling an empty aluminum horse trailer (4800#). That experience alone prompted my purchase of the '06 diesel with manual transmission.

I'd hate to see an EcoBoost motor in an F250 superduty truck.

 

[KennyG]

From what I recall, they ran one for testing purposes only, and while it could make "enough" power for a basic truck, the mpg economy was actually worse. If you run a turbo ecoboost engine in full boost, or near full boost mode most of the time (to drive around the larger, heavier truck chassis), the mpg will actually work out to be less than the "traditional" V8 (6.2 or 7.3 gas).

And for the guys that do work their 250/350 trucks hard, the poor little "hair dried" ecoboost suffered premature failures, complaints of poor power, and for a truck engine, where you typically want your power band on the low side of the rpm range, you had to "scream" the little ecoboost (rev it at high rpm) for it to make the power to get work done.

Overall, not a harmonious engine package for a truck that was designed to work for a living.

In general I think you are right, but you should check out the Ecoboost torque curve - it's tuned for low and mid range torque and high revs aren't required any more than non-boosted engines.