It was a smart, prudent choice to set aside an unproven engine before undertaking this important event.

I wonder how many new truck customers will make the same choice? Is America REALLY going to embrace a V6 full-size?

Not clear why it didn't have enough power. They made it sound like power/torque matched up well with the stock full class. Was there a failure? From Ford's perspective it wouldn't make sense to tune it for more power given it's a virtual endurance test.

This is a confusing story. Did the driver park the truck because the ecoboost isn't powerful enough? Did the engine suffer a failure? As a consumer following these stories to evaluate the EcoBoost for my next truck, I need clearer information please.

What a waste,people are not going to be impressed when the ecoboost sucks down more gas than a V-8 in real world driving,the 3.7 is a dud ,the 5.0 is 1 mpg off on paper,in the real world it will be the same or better ! Plus have the sound of a V-8 in the worse case senario it will be off by 1-2mpg,as all other trucks with a V-8 vs V-6 engine..in the same body style/cab configuration,usually the 8cyl is better or the same if its worse its not by much 1-2 mpg..No ecocrap 4 me !

Fishlips,
You are misunderstanding what happened. He decided not to use the EB truck because it was a 365 hp truck going up against trucks with 800 hp. There was nothing wrong with the EcoBoost.

And, Ford is getting 26.9 mpg in their tests for EcoBoost.

As Einstein said - it's all relative.
The EB engine was down on power compared to 800 HP race engines and much lighter race trucks.

Story exerpt " he would be on the course in a heat mixed with ProTrucks, a spec class using smaller trucks, and the Trick Truck class, which features 800-hp unlimited trucks with 30 inches of suspension travel and 39-inch tires."

It is just as much a safety issue as it is an issue of tearing up a new race truck.

Maybe Ford needs "Bobcat" for that race?

No one was expecting him to win the race. The prerace was just a shakedown. If those drivers think they need a 100% race truck then they better look to sign elsewhere as at least one of the EB's is a production tuned engine.

@Dave-26.9 MPG with a 2wd club cab with low rolling resistance tires, the smallest tires they could get, (Maybe 30"?) with a 3.31 gear? @55 MPH? 65 ? On 91 octane? What configuration, I'm asking? This engine doesn't even look like the one they have posted pictures of, wonder what all they added? Now put it in a 4x4 crew with 4x4 tires and atleast 3.55s. See what that number is. Wish I knew what speed they (epa) get the HIGHWAY MPG at?

Ford has already put this engine into production and if there is a problem with something they will more then likely re-call all engines made before a problem was found. I don't think the EB engine is gutless, it was put up against some tall odds and was clearly out classes. I don't believe the problem is with the engine. Your average customer will see the EB V-6 as an equal to the 5.4 or 5.0. Ford is looking toward its fleet customers and is trying to show that the EB engine is just as "bullet proof" as any V-8 on the market. Ford does does have a lot to loose with the gamble but I feel it will pay off once the EPA's cafe standards fully kick in, there Ford will be ahead of the curve again. Personally, I miss the Ranger & I think the EB would have been put to good use in the Ranger.

@ Taylor - your talking about driving down a paved highway.
Do you see the cloud of dust behind the EB truck in the 1st picture?
Visibility would be next to zero especially on a 25 mile loop. Those 800 HP Unlimited trucks can do over 140 MPH.
That would be like driving a stock Camaro in NASCAR during a dust storm.

Ford must be a little pissed about this. I know im dissapointed.

I agree this guy is a loser. He stabbed Ford in the back. He knew how what the specs were before the race. If he didn't want to race a heavier 365hp stock truck against against lighter 800 hp race trucks, then he shouldn't have signed up for it.

Stop the argument V6 vs V8 you have the choice if you prefer a V8 then buy a V8 if for other people a V6 is fine then buy a V6. You have a choice stop talking about a V6 will not sell well etc...
You like a V8 then take it and stop your stupid commentary point.

Dave,

Ford says 18 combined (normal persons driving)with the ecoboost in the lighter Flex !! Tests show from 14-18 by magazine testers..So the F-150 is a 15 mpg or lower average mpg truck,with normal driving should be pretty much the same as the new 5.0 ! Peoples dreams of a 25 city mpg Ford truck is crazy talk.

My Ford 5.4 can get up to 25 mpg !! My buddies new Dodge Hemi CrewCab 1500 got 29 mpg on a trip we went on in June.

UH OH....it's time for "job 2" software calibrations on the 3.5 EB

Ahhhh, baja racing...

Where a 4-cylinder pickup can beat the V8 pickups!!!

It's not the motor folks!

The weight of this truck, maybe the wrong gearing or lack of low gearing, weight distribution could be the main problem.

Baja racing is not all about top speeds off-road. Their are sections you have to crawl over and forge small creeks, etc...

My old 86 Toyota desert machine was so light and with 35" tires would literally float over the silt beds. Sure I had to keep the throttle down (ran it in low-4 the whole race but with no front drive) like other rig but it was easy to travel through with that lighter weight.

Look at what a little 4-cylinder buggy can do out there.

It's not all about power baby!

The saying still sits true, the bigger motor all that does is gets you to the rock that puts you out of the race faster, that is all it is worth.

So why is this truck sinking in the silt beds? Bad tires, not enough ground clearance, bad gearing, too much weight, weight not distributed properly or just the driver behind the wheel?

he's not competing against 800hp trucks. Class wins are based on overall times. Class 8 trucks do typically have a significantly higher output than the 365 in the ecoboost.

"Ford must be a little pissed about this. I know im dissapointed."

Awww yes, some people are just dumbfounded and shoot for the obvious.

Bizarre!

This is a stock motor for crying out loud competing with 800 hp engines, it's redundant.

Do you people not get it?

Good grief!!!!

I ran the Parker course 3 times.

Love the Osborne Wash, hated the first 5 miles. It was rough. The pole line roads were sweet, got hit by the Terrible Herbst's Class 1 buggy in the rear. I was doing about 30 and he was doing over 70 and he smacked my rear bumper.

I thought 'what the hell' but kept moving along. Should have protested but we were still new to the scene.

I launched the truck high into the air in the wash and broke the front axle shaft, made it to the BFG pits after completing the first lap. They took it off, placed it in a plastic bag, threw it behind the seat and went out without front drive.

From that race on, we gutted the front and ran it as a 2wd. Less moving parts and less weight on the front. Worked out better when in low-4 for the race.

Parker is a fun course but I do not think that rough though. Maybe in the middle at best.

Apples and oranges, Fishchips.

The vehicles like the Flex that the EB current resides in are all transverse mounted drivetrains. The transmission in a transverse mounted drivetrain is much smaller than one that is found in a longitudinally mounted drivetrain. Because of that a F150 RWD transmission will always have the ability to be stronger and get better mileage with a greater weight than the EB found in a FWD/AWD setup like the one found in the Flex.

@ Fishlips.

Yup your 5.4L "gets" 25 mpg. One time downhill, in neutral, with wind, and your screen says 25... um that doesn't really have a place in meaningful debate.

"Posted by: Frank | Oct 19, 2010 12:14:42 PM
Awww yes, some people are just dumbfounded and shoot for the obvious.

Bizarre!

This is a stock motor for crying out loud competing with 800 hp engines, it's redundant.

Do you people not get it?

Good grief!!!!"

I personally dont care that he was getting spanked by 800hp race trucks. Im simply disappointed that he backed out because it is a great durability test by someone other than ford. I simply want to see if this thing is as tough as Ford makes it out to be.
Im a buyer who has potential interested in the truck and simply want the most value for my money,
I know the 6.2 is tough and watched it get beat up in Baja last year. I wanted to see if the TTv6 can hold a candle to it. If its close and gets 4mpg better than the 6.2 im in.

You guys are missing the point.
Yes, he is not racing against 800 HP trucks but they are all on the course at the same time.
He was on the course against smaller, lighter trucks and 800 hp unlimiteds.

Quote " We just don't have a race motor," McCarthy said. "I race 100 percent; I am out there to win and I had absolutely no chance. Rather than damage the truck with the amount time between now and the 1000, I just parked it. I am not in the points chase because I missed 'Vegas to Reno,' and it just didn't make any sense to push it around the course and have an incident with the trick trucks."

Makes sense to me!

Quote"Rather than damage the truck with the amount time between now and the 1000"

Quote"and it just didn't make any sense to push it around the course and have an incident with the trick trucks."

Give the guy a break.

The whole point is to test the durability of the motor not to wreck the truck and miss the Baja 1000.

The ultimate goal is to race the Baja 1000.

Why risk damaging the truck in a warm up race?

He felt underpowered and unsafe.

I am as eager as the next guy to see how this engine holds up.

You can't test the truck in the Baja 1000 if you wreck the truck in a local race.

From the title of this article to the end of the story it's vague and appearantly misleading. It sounds like the truck performed just fine for what it is. It sounds like it could not keep up with 800 hp race trucks. What a huge suprise!! As if any production motor in any truck could. So the driver stopped to avoid a wreck. Reading the title I expected to find that the engine blew apart or something. These guys do this professionally right? I don't know crap about this but common sense tells anyone this was not a good situation for a shakedown. The whole thing seemed stupid.

And I've owned F150 5.4's for over 300k miles and no way in hell did either of them get anywhere close to 25 highway on a sustained, real world basis. That is complete bs. Try mid to upper teens. Great engine but 25 mph is laughable.

From the title of this article to the end of the story it's vague and appearantly misleading. It sounds like the truck performed just fine for what it is. It sounds like it could not keep up with 800 hp race trucks. What a huge suprise!! As if any production motor in any truck could. So the driver stopped to avoid a wreck. Reading the title I expected to find that the engine blew apart or something. These guys do this professionally right? I don't know crap about this but common sense tells anyone this was not a good situation for a shakedown. The whole thing seemed stupid.

And I've owned F150 5.4's for over 300k miles and no way in hell did either of them get anywhere close to 25 highway on a sustained, real world basis. That is complete bs. Try mid to upper teens. Great engine but 25 mph is laughable.

I was misled. Driver did the right thing.

@ Fish Lips

25 mpg with a 5.4L and 29 mpg with a Ram/Hemi. You're a funny guy! Good one!

@ Dave

The eco boost cant even get that kind of mileage when it is in the Taraus. Why the hell do you think it could pull that off in a much heavier, and less aerodynamic truck.

Get Real.

llep, Different engines. Different transmissions. That argument is dead.

Wasn't the point of the Baja race was to show that the engine can handle the abuse of the race to show that the engine can handle hauling loads and towing and racing in the desert. Buddy stopped driving cuz he couldn't keep up with the others I think he gave up to early and should have kept going and finish the race ford wants to push the engine hard and he wiped out all he had to do was try to finish the race.

What part of Ford has already gotten up to 26.9 in their tests don't you understand?

That may not be what the final number will be but they have already gotten 26.9. It's not a matter of if. It has already been done.

Highway mileage on the old 4x4 5.4 is 17 to 22. Add 20% and EB = 20.4 to 26.4

Owen, Good point. He should have tried to finish. Winners never quit and quitters never win. I think he got greedy because he saw that he was close to winning the other contest and he wanted to concentrate on that. So he just stopped. WTF. Will they have the same driver for the Baja 1000?

Forget it. I can't understand this article. He got out of the truck then I don't know what happened next.

Dave it isn't going to happen.

You believe that a vehicle that weighs 1000+ more lbs, and has the drag co-efficient of a brick, will be able to out mpg a much lighter and aerodynamic vehicle, because the engine has different turbos. You must have the greatest "meds" in the world if you believe that, because the defies physics.

BTW the 5.4 couldn't average 22mpg with a tail wind and down hill, using the same trans as the EB.

he said the truck dont have good power to race in soft track,,,the wheel dont spin fast in deep sand and this is a no,no,,,to float on the top....

Flex EcoBoost is rated at 21 highway. We already know the 2011 EcoBoost F-150 will be rated higher than than 21 highway. This is not up for debate.

PS This was from a Ford employee on another forum:

"Anywho, if you can believe the engineers I've talked to (and I do), expect the highway mileage to be around 25."

Add 365 hp and diesel like torque and you have a killer truck.

@Dave

Your quote is unreliable hearsay. That's not for debate either. :)

So you think it will get less than the Flex? You're nuts.

Fishlips, when you report what you have seen in your instant fuel economy display... why is it that people like you never seem to report that 1mpg when you take off from the lights? At the end of the day, your 5.4 is going to return an average of about 14 mpg.

Sorry Dave I have to agree with the naysayers. Don't get me wrong I'm a Die hard Ford man and V8 lover. But I really do want the Ecoboost to be successful, Its Fords way of giving us a Diesel like engine without it actually costing as much as a true Diesel.

But even if the truck is rated at 24 or 25mpg highway, The EPA numbers are never completely accurate. Hell the 5.4L is rated at 20mpg and how often and under what circumstance's does it achieve those numbers? Personally I think the new 5.0L and Ecoboost will be pretty close in real world economy. Both under mixed city/highway driving I would expect them to see between 16 and 21mpg. Which is not bad at all...Certainly a major improvement from engines 10-12 years ago.

Personally I would love to see Ford's Bobcat 5.0L come into play a few years down the road. A none boosted N/A V8 engine making 450 to 500+hp easy and gets decent fuel economy. That'll be an awesome day if that ever gets kicked off. And Hopefully it will.

However It should also be noted that I think what the driver did here was wrong. Ford was paying him to drive the Ecoboost from start to finish regardless of what position he actually finished in. This was not a Race to prove that the Ecoboost can beat 800hp Baja Trophy Trucks. But a simply a test to show the engines durability.

I agree with fordguy1988

I must say what a chicken for not following through no matter

Maybe ram should twin turbo they're 3.6 hmm maybe 420 plus in hp and 480 torque?

Where's gm v6 turbos after all they all follow each other no matter who introduces the tech first!

Damn impudent managerial staffs and shitty R&D

GM has their old Silverado crew cab 4x4's with the 5.3 rated at 21mpg highway.

So why can't the new EcoBoost with EPAS get 24-26 highway?

It's not all weight and aerodynamics, efficiency is also a factor. If the EB turns fuel into energy with less waste then it would turn better numbers. Don't want to believe the Ford employee? Read some of the reviews people have already posted from actual driving. Ford has all its bases covered now. The EB F-150 gets over 22mpg in mixed driving even over hilly terrain. The last review I read said 25 average in the hills with minimal effort. That's AVERAGE. And with hills. No effort. Take it out on a highway and it should do 25 easily.

@Lou and Dave,

Why risk damaging the truck in a warm up race? He felt underpowered and unsafe? ROTFOLOL!!!!!! I told you Ford lovers that ecocrap is underpowered and not safe. Maybe you should listen to me more often.

Who you calling old? For mileage to fueleconomy.gov and you will see the Silverado 5.3 liter is rated at 21 miles per gallon on the highway vs Fords 5.4 liter that is rated at 18 miles per gallon on the highway. Aint no way Ford is going to top the Silverado! The lighter Flex ecocrap gets 18 combined. Youre a drunk old hoosier if you think youll get get anywhere near 25 in a F150 ecocrap!!!!!!! NOT going to happen.

Don't believe me, look it up yourself on fueleconomy.gov.

GM sells the most trucks and they get the best gas milage period! These are the facts and only the facts. So let it be written, so let it be done!

I don't like ecoboost but GM missed a good chance.... With some tweaks GM could have come out with it first and showed them how it is really done. Turbocharged, it could have made more than 400 HP. Shame on you GM. I hate to say it, but hopefully GM will come out with it on the next model You had the hardware, and should have designed your current truck for this motor.

They don't have the hardware in parts bins like they did the Volt. Believe what you want, but Ford is way ahead of GM in new technology. Now that I think about it, they are ahead in old tech also. GM is trying to figure out how to make VVT work with pushrods, talking about dinosaurs.

Hay, Ford fans. Read it and weap boys!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

2011 Flex Ecoboost
EPA estimated 16 city/21hwy/18 combined mpg

I got this right from Fords site!
http://www.fordvehicles.com/crossovers/flex/

ROTFLOL.

I agree with Bobby. If the lighter more aeradynaic Taurus is rated at 17/25, can we really expect anything close to that from a 6000 lb truck? I was thinking Ecoboost will do no more than 21 highway.