Ford Releases Power Numbers for 2018 F-150

2018 Ford F-150 King Ranch IMG_6092 II

By Aaron Bragman

Would you believe that nearly 75 percent of all Ford F-150s sold are V-6 models? Just a few years ago, Ford didn't even offer a V-6 in the lineup, but today the vast majority of them are running on six cylinders. Of course, that sales number may be due to the fact that 80 percent of the engines available in the F-150 are V-6s — and that hasn't change for 2018.

Ford just released horsepower and torque specs for the pickup truck due this fall; we're expecting to get some seat time in it before the summer is out. But until we take a spin in one, here are the numbers you've been wanting to see:

  • The all-new base naturally aspirated 3.3-liter V-6 engine pumps out 290 hp and 265 pounds-feet of torque, an improvement of 8 hp and 12 pounds-feet from the 3.5-liter V-6 it replaces. It will have a six-speed automatic transmission. 
  • The smaller twin-turbo 2.7-liter V-6 EcoBoost, meant to take the place of a small V-8, makes 325 hp (same as before) and 400 pounds-feet of torque (up 25). It will get the 10-speed transmission.
  • The 5.0-liter V-8 Coyote, now with dual-port and direct-injection technology, and a spray-on cylinder bore liner just like the Mustang GT350, makes 395 hp (up 10) and 400 pounds-feet of torque (up 13). It will get the 10-speed.
  • The bigger 3.5-liter V-6 EcoBoost is not the most powerful; it makes 375 hp and 470 pounds-feet of torque, just like it did for 2017. It will get the 10-speed.
  • The Raptor's 3.5-liter V-6 high-output EcoBoost makes 450 hp and a whopping 510 pounds-feet of torque, also unchanged from 2017. It will get the 10-speed. 

There's one engine for which Ford did not release specs, likely because it's not yet anywhere near production time for it: the all-new turbo-diesel 3.0-liter V-6 Power Stroke. That engine isn't coming until spring 2018, nearly a year from now.

Stay tuned to see what it's like to drive these beasts, when we get behind the wheel in just a few weeks' time. This is an F-150 King Ranch SuperCrew 4x4. 

Cars.com images by Aaron Bragman

 

2018 Ford F-150 King Ranch IMG_6094 II

2018 Ford F-150 King Ranch IMG_6097 II

2018 Ford F-150 King Ranch IMG_6099 II

2018 Ford F-150 King Ranch IMG_6103 II

 

Comments

I hope that base 3.3L doesn't beat my Chevy 6.2 like the 2.7 EcoBoost does. That 3.3 needs a 20speed transmission. Anything more than 5 gears is unnecessary. Aluminum beer can trucks are junk. I can't wait until Chevy goes to aluminum. Tailgate steps are for Ford fan girls. Chevy is inventing the tailgate step.

HAHAHA!!!!

The new 3.3 liter is supposed to be very frugal on fuel and cost less to produce.. If it nails 27 MPG in 2x4 configuration....

Maybe Ford will add the 3.3 liter + 10 speed to the F150 when the Ranger arrives then drop a 3.3 liter with the 6 speed into the Ranger.

@papajim
Your point is speculation. Ford never made the engine you describe and it's cost/performance would be unknown. The best 302 Windsor Factory was the Boss @ 372 hp. A run of the mill modern GT is 435 hp (soon to go higher). So my bet is not on what could have been, but what is.
**Technically, Ford paid Roush Racing $1 million and built a 302 and 351 DOHC motors. Windsor blocks, custom heads. Ford Mgmt killed it and thus we have the MOD motors which were EH...(except for a few special ones). The Coyote is what the MOD should have been from day one. Almost 20 years of EH!

The new 3.3 liter is supposed to be very frugal on fuel and cost less to produce.. If it nails 27 MPG in 2x4 configuration....

Maybe Ford will add the 3.3 liter + 10 speed to the F150 when the Ranger arrives then drop a 3.3 liter with the 6 speed into the Ranger.
Posted by: mackintire | Jun 18, 2017 11:22:29 PM

The 3.3 would be a good engine for the Ranger, assuming it weighs less than the F-150. The 2.7 in a Ranger would totally reinvent the mid size segment in terms of pure fun to drive kick butt power.

I look at these pics and am amazed GM people keep saying it looks like a Chevy. Looks like an evolution of the current F-150 truck. I guess with GM copying anything and everything they do from other manufacturers, they want to claim someone is copying their styling. We all know how well GM trucks aren't selling. The last thing any one wants is to copy them......

Your point is speculation. Ford never made the engine you describe and it's cost/performance would be unknown.
Posted by: Grnzel1

@Grnzel1

My point is only slightly speculative and that's because the Gen 5 Chevy V8 offers all-alloy block/heads, modern electronics and anti knock, and some form of VVT.

In other words, GM already builds their own version of my proposed Windsor V8.

Twelve valves, one camshaft, pushrods instead of DOHC. Since GM is able to compete very effectively against Ford in pickups I'd say their fulfillment of my idea for the Windsor works pretty well. I bet it costs more to build a Coyote V8 than it does to build a Gen 5 motor. You can be sure that the Coyote heads cost a lot more to make.

Probably the best 1/2 ton on the market until you factor in cost. Little disappointed with 5.0 numbers.

Probably the best 1/2 ton on the market until you factor in cost. Little disappointed with 5.0 numbers.

@papajim
I certainly appreciate the design of the old school pushrod motors from GM/Ford and Dodge.
The 5.0 Coyote is much better (power/torque) than its closest completion in pushrod form the 5.3 GM. GM is already testing a DOHC V8 for future corvette applications. Pushrod motors are lighter, easier to work on, and smaller than DOHC motors. DOHC motors tend to make more power per cc but are more complex, etc..

Pushrod motors are lighter, easier to work on, and smaller than DOHC motors. DOHC motors tend to make more power per cc but are more complex, etc..
Posted by: Grnzel1

@Grnzel1

I am a reformed DOHC guy. Until fairly recently I took your point of view. Then I bought a Chevy truck with a Gen 4 engine and have never looked back.

Regarding volumetric efficiency, ask yourself how many NASCAR Cup teams would switch to DOHC.

Answer? Not many. Maybe Roush.

They're getting crazy horsepower from 2-valve single cam V8 engines running ethanol/gas blends. Pushrods don't seem to bother them much.

@papajim
Go check out a website called enginelabs. They did a $10,000 build of the GM 6.2 vs Ford 5.0. The objective was to see how much they could improve the performance. Not suprisingly the 6.2 won - they could spend more money to improve the GM motor because it's a lower cost design. The 5.0 is expensive to build. The important point to the experiment was displacement. The builders determined if the engines were of equal displacement, the DOHC makes significantly more power.

@papajim
Go check out a website called enginelabs. They did a $10,000 build of the GM 6.2 vs Ford 5.0. The objective was to see how much they could improve the performance. Not suprisingly the 6.2 won - they could spend more money to improve the GM motor because it's a lower cost design. The 5.0 is expensive to build. The important point to the experiment was displacement. The builders determined if the engines were of equal displacement, the DOHC makes significantly more power.

The builders determined if the engines were of equal displacement, the DOHC makes significantly more power.
Posted by: Grnzel1

@ Grnzel1

No argument about power. There's a reason that nobody has enterred a pushrod engine in the Indy 500 for about 30 years. But there's another consideration or two---cost and durability.

Few of us are driving around in our pickups revving over 5000 RPM very much.

Most of the driving we do in trucks is in the range between 1500 and 2500 RPM, even under ordinary engine loads. At those engine speeds, and this is KEY, the pushrod engine design has all of the VE that it needs to be a great truck engine.

Because the pushrod motor costs less to build---that's gravy!

Papajim
Disagree - right from the MFG website:
5.3 GM
355 hp @ 5600
383 hp @ 4100
Ford 5.0
395 hp @ 5750 ( +150 rpm diff)
Here's the big one:
400 hp @ 3850 (250 rpm less)
I'd argue the Coyote is the better factory truck engine if high torque at lower RPM is important.

I'd argue the Coyote is the better factory truck engine if high torque at lower RPM is important.
Posted by: Grnzel1

You are referencing HP but focusing on torque. Color me confused. The jury is still out on the 5.0 as a truck engine.

I expect Ford to go on focusing on the 3.3 and the 2.7 for their base truck customers. The high end customers will be choosing the 3.5 Ecoboost or the 6.2 where appropriate.

The 5.0 (in ford trucks) seems like an orphan.

I'd argue the Coyote is the better factory truck engine if high torque at lower RPM is important.
Posted by: Grnzel1

You are referencing HP but focusing on torque. Color me confused. The jury is still out on the 5.0 as a truck engine.

I expect Ford to go on focusing on the 3.3 and the 2.7 for their base truck customers. The high end customers will be choosing the 3.5 Ecoboost or the 6.2 where appropriate.

The 5.0 (in ford trucks) seems like an orphan.

Papajim,
My point - a DOHC motor of similar displacement will outperform a pushrod motor. DOHC motors are capable of producing torque at comparable engine speeds.
What does the jury need to decide? Torque is king in a truck application. I agree you can debate the +\- all day, but they Ford 5.0 is a very capable truck engine. I actually have owned one for 93000 miles - using it like a truck. Having owned 1994 5.0 and 1996 5.8 motors in F150 and Bronco - they have nothing on a coyote in factory guise.

So, you're saying that two engines of equal displacement and other things being equal, two valve heads, same size valves, the one with a SOHC design with outperform the single cam in block design.

If they both flow the same volume through the intake and exhaust and both rev to the same RPM, and both have similar cam grings...

You can see where this is going.

Nope, not saying SOHC, saying DOHC. I'm specifically comparing the GM 5.3 to the Ford 5.0 - since they are roughly equal displacement. Say you have a 4" circle, how many 2" circles can you fit within it - 2. Now using the same 4" circle, how many 1.5" circles can fit within it - 4. A 4" circle has an area of 12.57", a 2" circle is 3.14" for a total of 6.28" of surface area. If you run the math on 4 1.5" circles you get 7.07 inches of surface area - which head will flow more volume (VE)?

So, why does Ford use a 2 valve head on the 6.2?

My guess is cost and they have the Powerstoke which has a higher take rate. Full disclosure - trading my 2013 in for a Superduty 6.2 tonight. Just wanted more capability, i.e. towing. I was frankly surprised how smooth the 2016 SD are. I was very skeptical until I drove it. It better treat me as good as the '13 F150.

I meant 2017 Superduty

new truck! Lucky guy. Did you shop the local RAM and the GM alternatives?

@papajim The Ram and Toyota both have 5.7 engines. The pushrod 2 valve Ram makes slightly more hp and torque than the Tundra. The big difference is fuel mileage. The Ram gets about 4 mpg better than the Tundra. By the way, a Mercedes pushrod motor won the Indy 500 about 10 years ago. It was immediately banned because it had too big of an advantage over the smaller Dohc engines. It was Penske who won with the Mercedes.

I crossed shopped a Ram. The 6.4 Hemi is a great engine too! It honestly was a close call. What got me was the ride and handling of the new F250. The stiffer chassis and hydraulic can mounts make a noticeable difference. My fiancée commented on the ride difference between the trucks. Two odd things I don't like - bought the XLT with Premium Pkg and it didn't have lighted vanity mirrors - I know sounds dumb, and not a big deal but I thought Ford cheaped out on that. Oddly, it included heated seats. Favorite thing - chassis, engine and power scope mirrors.



The comments to this entry are closed.