2015 Ford F-150 Continues to Ride V-6 Success

2013 F-150 II

V-6 engines have been hugely successful for the Ford F-150. In the last year, more than 50 percent of all F-150 sales have included either an EcoBoost 3.5-liter twin-turbo V-6 or the naturally aspirated 3.7-liter V-6. And it looks like that trend it will continue — Ford plans to announce Friday that it will make a $500 million investment in its Lima, Ohio, engine plant. It will produce the all-new 2.7-liter V-6 EcoBoost engine slated for the new 2015 Ford half-ton.

According to The Detroit News, the plant will add 300 new employees and will continue to produce the Duratec 3.5-liter V-6 as well. The all-new aluminum-bodied 2015 F-150 (due out later this year) will offer three V-6 engines and one V-8 variant.

According to a recent press release, Ford expects interest in the "fuel effective" V-6 to continue for years. In fact, in the first two months of 2014, 57 percent of Ford's F-150 sales have had V-6s under the hood, breaking down to 46 percent equipped with the EcoBoost and 11 percent with the base 3.7-liter.

According to our data, that means that more than 200,000 F-150s in 2013 had the EcoBoost engine, while more than 50,000 were equipped with the entry-level engine. We'll have a more detailed look at each truckmaker and sales data for the various pickup trucks next week, breaking down half-ton, three-quarter-ton, and one-ton sales by make and model.

 

Duratec 3.7L V-6 II

 

Comments

It sure is interesting how V6s are starting to become "acceptable" to the masses in segments where before they wouldn't even get a second look. I think the new transmissions with 8 and 9 speeds will really help this to work by giving the deeper gearing down low while still having nice overdrive ratios on top. That's a big part of what's making the V6 work in full size trucks now.

" , breaking down half-ton, three-quarter-ton, and one-ton sales by make and model."

Great idea

Cleveland Ohio builds the 3.5EB, and Lima Ohio builds the 2.7EB.
O - H

Hopefully with the new 10 speed first gear will be a low gear for towing or it skips to second gear when not towing and 10 gear will be over drive not towing and 9 gear if you are towing. When u turn the tow haul mode on or if somthing is plugged into the trailer break but we won't see the new trans until most likely 2016

Problem with the current v6 in the f150 is u have a base model that tows 6000lbs and a turbo v6 that tows over 11000 there is nothing currently in the Middle for 8-9000 so the new engine should help bring the take rate of v6 to 70-80%.

Plus the v8 have the longest time sitting on ford lots well over 100 some time it was up to almost 200 days and the v6 have the fastest turn over rate

Who builds the 5.0 Coyotte?

My daughter in law's uncle has a 2012 Eco boost engine and when he had his oil changed the pan that caught the used oil was full of aluminum shavings. He called the dealership and they were going to investigate and see if there was a issue.

Ford drivers should all get DUIs since they all have the Ecobooze engine now. LOL Ford girly girls grow up and get a real truck.

The title is misleading. While technically a V6, the EcoBoost has turbo and is the equivalent of a big V8 engine, in terms of power and torque. The sales of the normaly aspirated V6 accounts for only 11% of the F-150.

See it just goes to show what half of us want and need is a truck that we can afford to drive. Some people feel inadequate and need to compensate for that by buying the largest, noisiest, smelliest engine they can while the others who are content with their manhood and realize that at the end of the day, the truck is a work tool, and it needs to get the job done and do so at the lowest possible cost.

What Michigan Bob posted above, Mar 28, 2014 12:20:19 PM, is evidence of that.

Now ford, it's time to think beyond v-6 internal combustion engines. As you can clearly see, there's a need and a lot of people loyal to the brand and even some like me who swore they'd never own another ford again who is waiting for pickup truck 2.0 to become available.

@George

thanks for the 11 percent metric you shared. Some of my fellows on this site have gotten their panties in a wad dreaming about V6 heaven. I've tried to point out that F150s equipped with the base V6 do not sell well except as rental fleet modes and municipal fleet specials.

The Eco boost, on the other hand has created excitement but it cost Ford HUGE ad dollars to make that happen. Big ad dollars.

@Kruckguy123

"Problem with the current v6 in the f150 is u have a base model that tows 6000lbs and a turbo v6 that tows over 11000 there is nothing currently in the Middle for 8-9000 so the new engine should help bring the take rate of v6 to 70-80%."

Yes there is, a 3.15 or 3.31 ratio Ecoboost. The 3.15, that can only be had in a 2wd, is rated to tow 8,500lbs in a crew cab configuration. The 3.31 is rated for 9,200lbs in a 4wd crew cab configuration. Both rear gear ratios will net you considerably better fuel mileage that the more capable 3.55 and 3.73 that is rated for 11,300lbs.

And people wonder why i talk about rear gears all the time. Because not a lot of people know about how rear gears effect a trucks capabilities/fuel economy and that the purpose of so many rear gear options is to best optimize the capability required from the truck while getting the best fuel economy possible. If you need more capability than fuel economy then get a shorter rear gear ratio like a 3.73. If you need more fuel economy than capability then get a taller gear ratio like a 3.15. It works the same for any vehicle.

@All1

Same with camshaft, but in a different spot on the vehicle. Cam is the secret ingredient that drives Nascar Cup managers crazy from week to week.

On most tracks they know already which ring/pinion they'll use, but the cam is mysterious.

On pickups, with VVT these days the cam has become a bit less tricky but it still counts for a lot.

I would think the 5.0 engine would be just right for those in-between trailer weights. The part from PapaJim about the gears also hits the mark!

I do find it amazing that conservative truck guys have embraced the V6 engine. I do believe that it due to the HP and torque figures of the EB3.5 that has made it happen. I was looking at the inventory of my local dealer and 90% of the trucks had the EB3.5 in it.

ONE QUESTION? WOULD FORD HAVE HAD THE SUCCESS OF THEIR V6 IF IT WAS NOT MORE POWERFUL THAN THEIR V8?

FORD IS NOT THE MODEL FOR THE MARKET FOR V6.

I'd like to see Ford cut the stroke [from 86.7mm to 81.1mm] on the 3.7 V6 for a big bore 3.5 liter V6.
300hp 265ft-lbs, better than 285hp 255ft-lbs of small bore 3.5 V6.

- Who builds the 5.0 Coyotte? -

The 5.0 is build at Ford's Essex Engine plant in Windsor, Ontario.

I would bet that in the not too distant future consumers will only be able to find a v-8 in a 3/4 ton truck. All half tons will have v6 or less. I hope not, but the way we are going thats what it looks like

I would bet that in the not too distant future we'll only be able to get a v8 in a 3/4 ton truck, anything in a half ton would be v6 or less.

@Hemi V8

I can't speak for anyone else, but I wouldn't have bought the Ecoboost if it wasn't more powerful than the 5.0L or any of the other V8s in the market at the time. I test drove them all from Ram to Tundra, and non of them came close to the low end powEcoboost. Although I will say that if it weren't for the Ecoboost then more than likely I wouldn't be driving a Ford or probably even a half ton. My second pick behind the F150 with an Ecoboost was a Tundra with a 5.7L, and third was a Ram 2500 with a 5.7L Hemi.

Why George? Big bore engines just make more power up high in the RPM range. Long stroke makes it lower. Make a small bore long stroke if you want to attempt to get more lower end torque. We already have plenty of top end v-6s around.

Small bore also allows for a bit more compression. You want to race, get a big bore.

Ford is selling them, and they will be making a killing off of replacement parts. They WILL need alot of them.

@Greg: might be the timing chain, as those are having issues.

Google it, it's next to head gasket, and spit and sputter in humid areas.

@HEMI V8 - Ford is the "model" for pickup V6's.

The competition (including Ford) had piss poor V6 engines before 2011.

Ford made V6 engines acceptable.

Ram will move V6 acceptability further forward with the Pentastar and VM diesel. The Pentastar has proven to be a decent V6 and like any new product had some teething problems.
The VM 3.0 is proven in the rest of the world and it will most likely sell well.

The trend is to V6 engines.

I suspect that V8's will fade from the picture and be relegated to HD's and performance/limited edition performance trucks.

"I would bet that in the not too distant future consumers will only be able to find a v-8 in a 3/4 ton truck. All half tons will have v6 or less. I hope not, but the way we are going thats what it looks like


Posted by: BenThere | Mar 28, 2014 1:34:18 PM

Yep, The good old government is killing trucks. Just like they did muscle cars in the 60's.

People that want a POWER V8 will have to go to H.D.

V8's will never die. OEM might kill them but after market and race shops, special order will continue.

@LouBC,"Ford made V6 engines acceptable", Yes your right. My point is Ford is not a good sales model to rate the V6 over a V8. Their V6 out performs their V8.
So the take rate might be higher at Ford than G.M. and Ram.

"@Hemi V8

I can't speak for anyone else, but I wouldn't have bought the Ecoboost if it wasn't more powerful than the 5.0L or any of the other V8s in the market at the time.

Not questioning your buying decision. It's your money. Just wanted to point out in 2011 Ram's @Hemi V8 was rated more powerful than the ecoboost. 5.7 liter Hemi V8 that makes 390 horsepower and 407 pound feet of torque. And the biggest take rate in the Ram line up.

PEOPLE WANT POWER. POWER TO GET THE JOB DONE!

@HEMI V8


They also performed better than ANY half ton V8 at the time it was introduced as well so it took some sales away from other brands too. We'll at least from those that only buy from one brand. If you were only a Ford fanboy then your only other option was to fork over the premium for the 6.2L if you wanted the same kind of power in a half ton. Although that was not an option when I purchased my truck because the 6.2L was only available in special trims. In 2012, it was available in XLTs and up.

As far as the rest..... My trailer doesn't really care if it is being towed by a V6 or V8. Also, the sound of an engine doesn't get my trailer up a hill. It is power that easily pulls my trailer and if I can even get the kind of power I want out of a V6 then I will take. He'll I would even care if it were a Dual Overhead Hamster Cage just as long at it gave me the kind of power I want and expect.

I have a '13 with an EcoBoost. Owned it about a year. There's 2-3 other ones in the family. It's been a good truck. The only people that had issues that I've seen is the first gen & the inter cooler collecting too much condensation. Ford figured that out & has been replacing them as they come in for service. As for anything else going wrong, those are usually the guys messing with them putting on aftermarket parts or overly aggressive tuners. We haven't done any of that & had no service other than regular maint. I'd rather push my Ford than drive a toyota, ram or gm truck & that just the way it's gonna be. the fanboys can yap all they want, I really don't care. Ford earned their rep with me by getting sh*t done & taking an a** kicking in the process.

WARNING! Ford and G.M guys, don't freak out.

No body has done a better job balancing power & M.P.G. than RAM with a V8.

No body has done a better job balancing power & M.P.G. than Ford with a V6.

This is for "greg" who commented about the shavings in oil on the ecoboost. I too found shavings in my oil when I changed it at 26,000 miles. I change my oil every 5k. I told them at the dealership & he said he hadnt heard that before. He wants me to have the next oil change done there so they can see it. Please keep me informed on what you find out. Thanks

@hemi V8

"Not questioning your buying decision. It's your money. Just wanted to point out in 2011 Ram's @Hemi V8 was rated more powerful than the ecoboost. 5.7 liter Hemi V8 that makes 390 horsepower and 407 pound feet of torque. And the biggest take rate in the Ram line up."

I don't race my truck and would rather have more torque especially down low. The Hemi never makes more torque than the Ecoboost and only makes more horsepower past about 4,700 rpm. Between 1,000 to 4,700 rpm the Ecoboost males more power and tons more torque especially around 2,500 rpm. I am not really concerned about pea
ks especially past 4,500 rpm because I don't drive in those rpms. I am more concerned with the power between 1,000 to 3,000rpm (or 4,000 when towing) since that is where I drive the most. The Hemi or any other stock gas half ton truck engine doesn't come close to the Ecoboost in those rpm ranges accept for the GM and Ford 6.2L engines.

That is why I chose the Ecoboost over the others. Because it had more power in the rpms I use my truck in than anything else on the market. Sorry, but it is true. Even more so now that it is tuned.

That is what makes modern time buying so great. Instead of cookie cutter trucks all about the same. Ford and Ram are offering exclusive engines and options. Spreading out in their own directions. It's AWESOME. Hope these trends continue.

@All1, "I don't race my truck and would rather have more torque especially down low." Than compared to your Eco boost.
Rams Eco diesel sounds to me like what your looking for. It was not on the market when you bought your Eco boost.

WARNING! Ford and G.M guys, don't freak out.

No body has done a better job balancing power & M.P.G. than RAM with a V8.

No body has done a better job balancing power & M.P.G. than Ford with a V6.


Posted by: HEMI V8 | Mar 28, 2014 2:35:33 PM

-----------------------------------------------------

Possibly you are unaware, but the '14 GM 5.3L V8 tows more than the 5.7L Hemi, 3.5L EcoBoost AND gets better gas mileage than bot the 5.7L Hemi and 3.5L EcoBoost.

So let us get this straight: GM gets a naturally aspirated V8 that gets better gas mileage and tows more than any of the competition. Go figure...

" I'd rather push my Ford than drive a toyota, ram or gm truck & that just the way it's gonna be. the fanboys can yap all they want, I really don't care. Ford earned their rep with me by getting sh*t done & taking an a** kicking in the process."


Posted by: kmac1036 | Mar 28, 2014 2:35:27 PM

If it works for you. NOBODY can argue it. It's your HARD earned money.

Possibly you are unaware, but the '14 GM 5.3L V8 tows more than the 5.7L Hemi, 3.5L EcoBoost AND gets better gas mileage than bot the 5.7L Hemi and 3.5L EcoBoost.

So let us get this straight: GM gets a naturally aspirated V8 that gets better gas mileage and tows more than any of the competition. Go figure...


Posted by: Durastrokinns | Mar 28, 2014 2:58:29 PM

AH, Sounds good on paper, but Ram out performed them all while towing or 1,000lb payload.

http://special-reports.pickuptrucks.com/2013/06/2013-light-duty-challenge-results.html

@Durastrokinns: saying a brand can tow better based on tow ratings isn't very realistic. Both a Ram 5.7 and Ecoboost 3.5 make more torque then a 5.3, both at a lower rpm too. But that SAE test will lower GM down quite a bit. Having engineers with 8th grade mentality leaves you with Chevy tow ratings.

More mileage towing? Only cause a 5.3 can run in 4 cyl mode while towing in tow haul. Take the Ram. 5.7 8 speed out of tow haul when not in town or somewhere hilly, it will equal the Chevy tow mileage, or better it. That also lets it use 8th gear, which if you are somewhere flat towing, you don't need it in 7th gear at highway speeds.

There's alot more to towing then speed, such as cooling, lasting that long, transmission life, braking.

But for a truck rated to tow less then the 5.3s, that Ram sure smoked it and the Egoboost, anytime a trailer was hooked up.

Talking about the last light duty shootout in 2013. That Chevy with no trailer got less mileage then the Ram and Ford, somehow the GMC did best. Make less power, maybe you should get better mileage.

@George_C and Trx4tom

Over-square engines tend to be more efficient at making power (VE, or volumetric efficiency). You see high VE engines most often in non-commercial aircraft, piston driven engines, or in motorcycle racing engines. Anywhere that lots of power for its size makes a winner.

Not so true with pickup trucks--no matter how light you make a truck engine, it's still gonna haul heavy stuff and have a heavy frame. This is where I think the obsession with V6 engines in trucks is a little overdone.

The great auto engines down through the years have been very close to square, i.e., bore/stroke being equal.

Today the mix has gotten a little confusing because designers can utilize Variable Valve Timing and try for a win/win scenario. Strong high (and low) rpm.

However, the VVT engines need really clean motor oil because they'll get their tiny oil passages in the valve-timing plumbing kinda gooey otherwise.

We'll see how it goes in a few more years when these VVT engines start hitting 200k or 250 k miles on the clock.

Heat will cause issues there too. Synthetic oil will help but that's just my opinion because it makes sense.

two cents.

@HEMI V8 - The take rate on normally aspirated V6's under 4.5 litres will remain low. They will not dominate the truck market because people want power. That is true regardless of the badge on the hood.

I disagree with you when you say that the EB sells well because it makes more power than Ford's other V8's. The 6.2 has a bit more power but has never sold well. The EB 3.5 sells well because of its power characteristics and improved mpg over the equivalent V8.

@Dean - don't expect any feedback from Greg. He only has negative things to say about Ford or Ram.

@HEMI V8 - I do agree with your comments to Durastrokinns. Chevy hasn't been competitive with Ford or Ram. Even the 6.2 got beat by the EB3.5 with the Ike Gauntlet test.

On paper the 5.3 may tow more and get better mpg but hasn't won any shootouts.

Unfortunately for Chevy fans, the 2014 trucks are weak transition models for their 2018 trucks.

"...The EB 3.5 sells well because of its power characteristics and improved mpg over the equivalent V8."

@LouBC

Sorry guy, but we gotta disagree here.

I'm an old man but I can tell you without any doubt that the EB motor is the most advertised engine in history--period.

When Ford started those Denis Leary ads back in 2011 or so, I remember wondering how LONG they'd run them, especially on an EXPENSIVE broadcast like NFL football games. They did! They still do...that kind of ad support will just about sell anything.

Not that the engine or the idea isn't a good one, it's just the volume and repetition of the advertising is unprecidented in the auto industry.

When I was a kid they bragged about cars on TV but they almost never mentioned the greasy bits underneath. It was all pretty girls and flash.

Now its' Denis Leary telling you not to order your next engine off the kiddie menu. Again, again and again.

Posted by: papa jim |

It really doesn't make any sense. Ford always touted it as having the power of a v8, with the gas mileage of a v6. Except they forgot the v6 half tons are just as bad on gas as v8's, and in some cases worse.

The 3.5 l echo boost does not get any better mileage than competitors v8 s. So why in the hell would someone buy a twin turbo charged v6 engine (essentially forcing air into a small engine to make it work harder) over a v8? Can't wait to see all these trucks in 7 to 8 years when people are having to get them rebuilt and having to replace turbos.

People who have bought ecoboosts have just fallin for a huge marketing ploy.

@papajim -

The whole rationale of sales blitzes is firmly grounded in psychology and sociology.
As intelligent adults ( I like to think that most of use are), we downplay advertising BUT our primitive hardwired survival mechanisms deeply imbedded/interwoven in/with our emotions run the show.

Advertising makes a product appear familiar and safe. Leary rants about superiority, power etc. only works on fanboys. Making an item familiar to our psyche is the message that sells to the rest of us.

Yes, advertising is a huge factor but if the EB 3.5 did not deliver the goods, it would be the equivalent of a boy band.

A flash in the pan.

Why don't they start making 2 and 3 speed rear ends on trucks. This way we can launch a v6 with 5.56 then drop it to 4.11 mid way. finally cruise the hwy at 3.25.

If I was going to buy a v-6 it would be an eco boost. Those things have some power for sure! Wished they'd turbo more gas engines.

@AL

Good question! I remember back in the 1970s we wondered about that. Answer is that the center section needs to be super durable, especially on a pickup.

I'd be happy if they simply offered something like a quick-change rear end. Leaving on a trip? Put in the 'mileage' gear. Headed for the woods? Drop in the low gear.

The quick change gears in race cars whine like crazy--maybe that's why the idea never caught on...

"As intelligent adults ( I like to think that most of use are), we downplay advertising BUT..."

@LouBC

Really???

I haven't been to BC during an election year, but if you're ever down here during elections, the major candidates spend HUGE money advertising negative BS about their opponents.

EVERY poll that's ever been done tells them it's a huge turn-off (negative ads) to voters but the negative ads work. It reinforces all of the negatives that people have about politicians. Even if it does piss them off.

Same with selling cars.

@papa jim - attack adds are just catching on in our neck of the woods. Federal politicians seem to really like them.

The huddled whimpering masses, or at least the 45% that even bothers to vote don't pay attention to much of the issues, platforms etc. They buy into the advertising or vote based on ideology.

We live in a 10 second sound-bite world where people have the attention span's of goldfish.

Within a few years V6's will rule the roost. Manufacturers' are winding back the number of V8s available.

I bet the V8s will be slotted into higher end product.

I can understand the logic behind any governments push to use less fuel. This will help in the demise of the V8.

This will also increase the use of diesel as an alternative for a pickup required for heavier work.

It seems the only guys who will cry when V8s are rarer will be mainly the guys who think they need a V8. The boy racers.

As much as people whine about the changes in design regs and emission controls these have influenced the changes in technology we now have.

A current V6 is a far better engine than it's predcessors and even V8s. Even current diesels are better than previous V8s.

Many on this site who cry about the demise of the V8 are living in the past. Look to the future, expensive aluminium pickups, that's where the US has made a mistake.

Maybe it should have look at the UNECE model, you would have more V8s, but you would have more midsizers as well.

So, are we to assume Ram will lump the Ecodiesel in with their base V-6 like Ford does with the Ecoboost and base 6?
This would be just as accurate.

The take on V-6's is still about 25-28% overall in the full size truck market.

Ford, all 3/4, and up trucks - V-8
and nearly half of all 1/2 ton are V-8

GM probably 95% of all full size are V-8
same with Nissan.

Ram, what 60-70% or so V-8's?
Same with toyota.

The 6 cylinder engines have a long way to go before they are mainstream in the full size truck market. (Even when Diesel, and turbo equipped gas engines are included.)



Post a Comment

Please remember a few rules before posting comments:

  • Try to be civil to your fellow blog readers.
  • Stay on topic. We want to hear your opinions and thoughts, but please only comment about the specified topic in the blog post.
  • Your email will not be shown.

If you have a TypeKey or TypePad account, please Sign In

Home | Buy or Sell a Truck | News | Special Reports

Powered by Cars.com. By using this site, you agree to our terms of service | © 2014 Cars.com | Privacy Statement | Contact Us

Visit our partner: MovingTruck.com