The new F150 will win the award for more rivets popped in a few years too lol. Notice the mighty EcOBust is not available for this severe duty, so much for Ecobust being as good as Normally Aspirated V8's lmao.

Oh ya to Ford, Mike Levine and the Ford Powertrain Engineers ready this post, its ok that you weren't good enough for GM and rode the short bus to school, I wont tell anyone.

Also to any Furd lovers reading this, I defy you to explain away the FACT, that the 6.2 from Ford isn't available in the F150 anymore, I have the answer, because it sucks and couldn't hold a candle to the GM 6.2 nor the Hemi 5.7 from Ram, that's why, would still get roasted in all the tests, trust Ford did them before dumping it for the new F150 and would get horrible FE even with the Alum body that's why LOL.

Can anyone explain why the Ecoboost is not available with this winter snowplow package?

Is it because the snow plow blade blocks the intercooler?

With the superior low-end torque of the 3.5L Ecoboost and even to some extent the V8-like smoothness of the recently introduced 2.7L Ecoboost , I think these powertrains would be the perfect choice for this package, that is unless, the intercooler is affected in some way by the plow blade.

@the other mike
Well the Ecoboost engine's intercoolers are located low and behind the front bumper valence, so the possibly of snow clogging the intercoolers could cause problems when shoveling. So that decision was ruled out!!

For someone calling himself Mr. Obvious, things don't seem to come so obvious to him. The only thing that is obvious is his hatred for Ford so why would any listen to anyone with bias? Better yet, why would anyone who is bias even think that anyone would listen to them?

@mr obvious
You can keep the push-rods and lifters!!!! ADVICE MAKE DAMN SURE YOU KEEP THE OIL CHANGED ON TIME, AND FLUSH THE ENGINE AROUND 150,000MILES. Those small oil passages for the lifters don't like slug build-up. STICKING LIFTER TIC TO BENT ROD TO ROD LAUNCH!!!!!! TO MASSIVE ENGINE DAMAGE!!!!!! FACT, FACT, FACT, FACT I KNOW FROM EXPERIENCE!!!

@mr obvious
You can keep the push-rods and lifters!!!! ADVICE MAKE DAMN SURE YOU KEEP THE OIL CHANGED ON TIME, AND FLUSH THE ENGINE AROUND 150,000MILES. Those small oil passages for the lifters don't like slug build-up. STICKING LIFTER TIC TO BENT ROD TO ROD LAUNCH!!!!!! TO MASSIVE ENGINE DAMAGE!!!!!! FACT, FACT, FACT, FACT I KNOW FROM EXPERIENCE!!!

@mr obvious
You can keep the push-rods and lifters!!!! ADVICE MAKE DAMN SURE YOU KEEP THE OIL CHANGED ON TIME, AND FLUSH THE ENGINE AROUND 150,000MILES. Those small oil passages for the lifters don't like slug build-up. STICKING LIFTER TIC TO BENT ROD TO ROD LAUNCH!!!!!! TO MASSIVE ENGINE DAMAGE!!!!!! FACT, FACT, FACT, FACT I KNOW FROM EXPERIENCE!!!

@mr obvious
You can keep the push-rods and lifters!!!! ADVICE MAKE DAMN SURE YOU KEEP THE OIL CHANGED ON TIME, AND FLUSH THE ENGINE AROUND 150,000MILES. Those small oil passages for the lifters don't like slug build-up. STICKING LIFTER TIC TO BENT ROD TO ROD LAUNCH!!!!!! TO MASSIVE ENGINE DAMAGE!!!!!! FACT, FACT, FACT, FACT I KNOW FROM EXPERIENCE!!!

@mr obvious
You can keep the push-rods and lifters!!!! ADVICE MAKE DAMN SURE YOU KEEP THE OIL CHANGED ON TIME, AND FLUSH THE ENGINE AROUND 150,000MILES. Those small oil passages for the lifters don't like slug build-up. STICKING LIFTER TIC TO BENT ROD TO ROD LAUNCH!!!!!! TO MASSIVE ENGINE DAMAGE!!!!!! FACT, FACT, FACT, FACT I KNOW FROM EXPERIENCE!!!

Well said. This Mr. O guy is having another mental breakdown again. smh.

@mr obvious
Oh yeah, WATCH OUT FOR VALVE FLOAT AT HIGH RPMS!!!! See the system uses spring tension (valve spring, to rocker arm, to rod, and to lifter) from the valve spring to work, so at high rpm the tension will reach a point where its no longer sufficient to keep the lifter in contact with the spinning camshaft lobe. Commonly call valve float!!! That's why most factory push-rod engines are limited to 5500 rpms, and why high performance push-rod motors use heavy duty springs, rockers, rods, and lifters. WATCH OUT FOR VALVE SPRING METAL FATIGUE!!!! YEAH

Only ford engineers could put intercooler in the worst possible track location. Easy to break and start to leak from rocks or get blocked by snow, mud or plow. But we all know, that this truck is not build for offroading , plowing or deep snow driving , just for straight line racing with power braking. What a POS. LOL.

Mr. Obvious is correct!
I sense panic starting to set in at the big Ford corporate meetings and they are pulling out all the stops to slam even repeat stories about how wonderful their new F-150 is.

YES!
I said "REPEAT STORY"
This is a repeat story PUTC ran before.

I agree the eco-boost is a failure so instead of Ford dumping the eco-boost they designed a new F-150 FOR that engine.

I was at the Ford Dealership the other day getting my 2013 F-150 serviced and the salesman found me and told me he expects the 2015 F-150 to offer heavy discounts by July. I told him I wouldn't take one if it was free and I explained to him what I learned here on PUTC about all the problems with the 2015. Plus its ugly and a good looking man such as myself deserves a nice looking truck!

other commenting readers seem to be missing the bigger point--was the 2015 even showing up on dealer lots in the Northeast last fall?

We did not start seeing them in my area until the early spring, and they are still not plentiful. Bogus award.

Yes, it was. They starting showing up last November/December. But the award is for the 2015 F-150, not the 2014-2015 winter season.

This might be big news in Bangor, Maine.

It seems it won because of the seat and steering wheel warmer.

We don't have those feature in vehicles in Australia.

I did see a comment regarding the lack of a snow plough option for the EcoBoost.

Another argument that many don't speak of in relation to turbo engines is the lack of off idle torque.

To gain the torque using an EcoBoost wouldn't it need to increase rpm to generate torque? Wouldn't that then induce wheel spin. Wheel spin reduces traction.

A diesel would be the best engine for a snow plough.

Does the VM diesel Ram 1500 have a snow plough option?

@Kevin, that's really a reach you made there.

I wish Ram allowed me to put a snow plow on my Ram 1500 like Ford allows on their F150. Page 591 of my Ram owners manual tells me not to use the 1500 for snow plowing.

Probably because the 5.0l gets a hydraulic powersteering pump that the ecoboost engines dont have.

Still sad to see the GM manchildren havent gone away.

I wish Ram allowed me to put a snow plow on my Ram 1500 like Ford allows on their F150. Page 591 of my Ram owners manual tells me not to use the 1500 for snow plowing.
Posted by: Z-viera | May 31, 2015 3:06:00 PM

You are still lucky to drive HEMI. My ecoboost won't run in deep snow and I can forget offroading in the mud or gravel road. That's why I bought a RAM3500 with Cummins.

@Big Al

"I did see a comment regarding the lack of a snow plough option for the EcoBoost"

It is because the Ecoboost intercooler is in the same place the brackets for the snow plow package are.

"To gain the torque using an EcoBoost wouldn't it need to increase rpm to generate torque? Wouldn't that then induce wheel spin. Wheel spin reduces traction."

Wow, this is about a dumbest comment I have seen. You need to increase rpm in any engine to generate torque. Just because you generate engine rpm does not mean you will create wheel spin. This just tells me you don't "off road" like you say you do. I have seen plenty of off road N/A V6s and V8s that require a lot more rpms than the Ecoboost to gains torque yet they are still able to be driven off road and in the snow.

I also find it odd that you continue to say you are not biased or a fan boy in any way yet you continue to show that you are by your words. You may not be for a brand, but it is plain to see that you are against one. I guess mine a Lou's words gotten you so mad that you now hate anything Ford and speak about them even when you have no experience with the things you speak about. Tell me, how many F150 Ecoboosts have you driven? How many Ram 1500 Ecodiesel have you driven? What experience with any of these trucks do you have to say anything here?

You are still lucky to drive HEMI. My ecoboost won't run in deep snow and I can forget offroading in the mud or gravel road. That's why I bought a RAM3500 with Cummins.

Posted by: ALLL1 | May 31, 2015 at 03:36 PM

Don't you worry ALLL1, you can buy a relocation kit to prevent the moisture build up and dents from rocks.
Ford engineers are the best.

http://fordf150ecoboostforum.com/topic/871-intercooler-relocation/

"You are still lucky to drive HEMI. My ecoboost won't run in deep snow and I can forget offroading in the mud or gravel road. That's why I bought a RAM3500 with Cummins."

Ha ha ha! Actually no, my F150 with lockers is a lot better off road than my Ram 3500 with only limited slip which is why I only take the F150 to the farm when it rains. I have been very close to being stuck in my 3500 before I put my Nitto Trail Grapplers on. I never needed mud tires on my F150 to keep from getting stuck. It easily went through the same mud my 3500 almost got stuck in without mud tires.

Although, I do like the fact that someone took the time to research that Ram does not allow you to put a snow plow on the 1500 and you thought it was me. Kind of like how Big Al the A L was me in another article.

Don't mind papa jim from Florida. He is off his rocker when it comes to plows. He told Jeff S one time that we don't need to remove snow and should "just let it melt." True story.

Actually no, my F150 with lockers is a lot better off road than my Ram 3500 with only limited slip which is why I only take the F150 to the farm when it rains. I have been very close to being stuck in my 3500 before I put my Nitto Trail Grapplers on. I never needed mud tires on my F150 to keep from getting stuck. It easily went through the same mud my 3500 almost got stuck in without mud tires.

Posted by: Cummins | May 31, 2015 4:01:12 PM

I forgot to add, that even my tires and lockers allow me to go some kind of offroading, I never go with my ecoboost, because I broke my intercooler driving behind my friend at gravel road and next week got in to the limp mode, because my intercooler was full of mud and didn't cool my intake air at all.
I am going to install relocation kit asap. I like to play with my ecoboost . Tuning is my life. Thank you Zvieratko for the tip.

@Cummins
No problem. I am glad I could help.

Is Chevy/GMC still running a Grandpa style 1955 design sbc 16 valves/16 pushrod engines with lifters as there V8 in 2015???. No wonder they need an extra 70 cubic inches to match the performance of 5.0/302 Coyote engine. LOL
No wonder the 427cid LS Corvettes got spanked at the 24hrs of Daytona by 216cid 3.5L Ford's. LOL

@z-viera

Help? Help what? You are never in it to help. You are just in it to be a little immature prick that likes to make people as miserable as he is. Sorry to inform you, but there is no way you can make me even remotely close to being as miserable as you are. All I do is laugh at your little immature games you play with you never ending circle jerrks. Let's see what you are going to come up with now to try and purposely pisss in people's Cheerios.

@Chuck Taylor them Ford motors can't be all that great, since you find a lot of "Grandpa style 1955 design sbc 16 valves/16 pushrod GM engines" powering a bunch of that Ford junk. Them Ford boys couldn't figure out push rods that why Chevy smokes Ford in nascar. Yup the only way to make a Ford motor run good is force air into it that bout it. Heck Ford has their 2.7 3.5 with 200 pound lighter truck and they can barely out mpg a Grandpa style 1955 design sbc 16 valves/16 pushrod engine from GM. HAHA Fords what a joke

Cummins

yea you're right
people like you that defend the eco-boost are souring the milk and making us hating the F-150 more.

personally I am tired of the lies and more lies about the great gas mileage the eco-boost gets

If just ONE eco-boost owner would be honest about that he would gain everybody's respect

@johnny doe & @Dr. Power.

Ford as no choice in engine selection. Nascar makes them run pushrod style engines, including Toyota which don't make a pushrod engine for there cars. Just like The Chevy boys run with 9" Ford rearends. Ford is the only Nascar team that runs all Ford design parts on there cars. Can't say that about the Chevy boys. LOL

World's fastest Super Stocker of all time is a Mustang. Where your Copo Camaro's with there factory install 9" Ford rearends & pushrods engine. LOL
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xkrm8FkNwWc

Given New Englands record of lying,cheating, denying with the Patriots I'm sure this award will help Ford to nothing.

Ford has to cut overtime at its Dearborn and Kansas City assembly plant. Brisk sales have caused shortages of steel frames.
GM is offering 0% financing and $2000 cash back on its newly designed Silverado that is almost on par with a 2011 F150.
Ram looking for buyers, and anyone serious about trucks never consider these outdated heaps, unless you want cheap thrills.
Tundra, do they still sell them?

Tom#3

If you don't like lies, then why do you constantly post lies? That doesn't make sense. You constantly lie about the Ecoboost all because you are butt hurt that it outperforms your engine choice and it has proven time and time again to get better fuel mileage too. You hate it because it is better in those areas so you have to lie so you can feel better about your choice.

Can't wait to order my new F150 XLT with 3.5 litre EB. All of the bashing demonstrates how behind the competition really is. I find it funny that GM actually advertises it's Silverado as being produced from cold rolled steel, but supposedly are scrambeling to come up with an aluminun body for future models.
GM and Fiat need to update the looks of their trucks, the Ram is just plain ugly and The Silverado looks no different than a 2007 model.
Ford truly leads in innovation and are risk takers that continues to leave the competition behind.

This is a stupied argument
I would not want to plow with a alum tt v6 motor. Anyone that has done real snowplowing for days on end should agree. ive seen temps in my gmc 6.0 gas buried in the red and kept pushing. (still going with 170k on the clock) id be worried about the the ecoboost running very hot and not doing damage. plus turbos are not the best for plowing. In my partners f250 diesel he can push a mountain but has to do it slowly while pushing big piles so the turbo doesn't build to fast and just start spinning the tires. I think the ttv6 whould spin allot. and lighter vehicles just get pushed around by the snow. and the plows made for f150 are not even rated for commercial use.

I see the new 2016 Camaro will have a 270hp 2.0L Ecoboost style engine in there engine lineup. First they copy the Mustang in 1967 now the Ecoboost engine for there 2016 Camaro. What's Government Motors not have any original ideas of there own? LOL

@Chuck Taylor I thought we was talking about grandpa push rod GM motors that a lot got Ford cars/truck guys run in their Ford products, not rear ends LOL!

"Government Motors not have any original ideas of there own"

Chuck must be a real you pup if he don't know bout the Buick's from the 80s with tubro or the GMC typhoon, and GMC Syclone from the 90s. Yeah looks like Ford junk Motor Company doesn't have any original ideas of there own LOL!!!

Mr obvious ignorance is the only thing obivious here. I'll bet he drives a Fiat Ram. Yikes!

@Chuck Taylor
GM had turbo, direct-injected fours almost a decade ago with 260 hp/260 lb-ft ...unfortunately in Sky/Solstice, Cobalt SS, etc. Regal GS and Cadillac ATS also got 2.0 DI turbo before Mustang, but they weigh less than <16 Camaro.

Personally, I think the Jeep Wrangler deserves the award considering the number of 18-wheeler trucks rescued over the course of the winter that far exceeds the single video posted of an F-150 steering one through level city streets. In just one day, Jeeps dragged something like a dozen 18-wheelers up a long grade despite having smaller engines than the F-150.

Yes, Jeep Wranglers are classified as trucks--albeit BoF SUVs and not pickups.

@johnny doe & @IndySkies

1979 Mustang Turbo 2.3-liter overhead-cam rated @140hp.

Like I said, 2016 Camaro copied off the Mustang.

"Government Motors not having any original ideas of there own"

Nice try Chevy Boys. lol

"With the superior low-end torque of the 3.5L Ecoboost and even to some extent the V8-like smoothness of the recently introduced 2.7L Ecoboost , I think these powertrains would be the perfect choice for this package," -- Posted by: the other mike | May 31, 2015 11:00:39 AM

That low-end torque is exactly why it's NOT the better choice; it's far too likely to spin its wheels when what it needs is a very smooth and controlled application of horsepower, which is still where the V8 has the advantage.

@Chuck Taylor

http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/a3786/4296068/

In fact, some of the first turbocharged cars, like the Chevrolet Corvair Monza and Oldsmobile F-85 Jetfire introduced by GM for the 1962 model year

Real nice try Ford Boy. lol

There's a bunch of Neanderthal responses posted here.

The Ford Ecoboost gen 2 3.5 is a great motor, As is GMs newest 6.2 and so is RAMs 5.7 and 6.4.

The ford doesn't have the plow prep option with the eco boost due to the intercooler being blocked. There's an article on it with a response from Ford engineering.

Most of the complaints are about gearing and torque management from the transmission.

Note I left out some motors....mostly because those motors may be good, but not great. (IMO)

I think you'll see by 2022 that all the manufactures are going to be using similar ideas and designs in how they achieve their results. So the brand may be of less importance by then.

You can post whatever you want but please try to post something remotely intelligent.

@johnnydoe

Talking Mustangs & Camaros not obsolete cars like Olds & Covairs..........

Nice try Chevy Boy. LOL

@Chuck Taylor No sir you was talking "original ideas" and engines. Sorry I schooled you so bad Ford boy HAHA! Not my fault you wanna change topics when you lose.

@johnnydoe

Mustang world's best selling Musclecar of all time.

Looks like you got spanked again Chevy Boy.LOL

johnnydoe: well you were mostly correct anyway, as the Chevy Corvair that was turbocharged? was not called the Monza, but it was called the Spyder from 64-65, and Corsa from 65-68. they also made more than one hp per cyl even back then, from 150-180hp from 145-164 c.i.d.

@ Chuck Taylor

"Mustang world's best selling Musclecar of all time."

Yeah to bad over half of them poopstain ford cars are powered by as you say "grandpa push rod gm engines"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mesrHCCOw_I

Looks like you got you monkey spanked again Ford Boy.LOL