• Welcome Visitor! Please take a few seconds and Register for our forum. Even if you don't want to post, you can still 'Like' and react to posts.

Charlotte Showing


Joined
Apr 22, 2017
Messages
319
Reaction score
6
Points
18
Location
USA
Vehicle Year
2002
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
3.slow
Transmission
Automatic
My credo
To each his own.
The Coyote is actually 5.2 liters. Not the same as the old 5.0. They call it a 5.0 for marketing. Also, it was originally engineered to be supercharged. Sorry, not believing any one person has replaced several turbos in the F150's.

Love the internet where everyone's brother, FIL, neighbor, 2nd cousin, and boyfriend has done so much and seen so many things.
 


bobbywalter

TRS Technical Staff
TRS Event Staff
V8 Engine Swap
TRS Technical Advisor
TRS Banner 2012-2015
TRS 20th Anniversary
Ugly Truck of Month
TRS Event Participant
Joined
Aug 9, 2007
Messages
23,470
Reaction score
4,667
Points
113
Location
woodhaven mi
Vehicle Year
1988
Make / Model
FORD mostly
Engine Type
V8
Engine Size
BIGGER
Transmission
Automatic
2WD / 4WD
4WD
Total Lift
sawzall?
Tire Size
33-44
My credo
it is easier to fix and understand than "her"
theres a pile of cores in some of the shops where i live.


idling and hot stop... its drive cycle dependent for the most part.

i figured it was upgrades...but they were cores.


# 5 pistons broken and valves wiped out...knock knock knock....


keep those valves clean and get a catch can.

first they smoke....

then they coke....

damn its broke.
 

fastpakr

Forum Staff Member
TRS Event Staff
TRS Forum Moderator
Supporting Member
Article Contributor
U.S. Military - Veteran
V8 Engine Swap
TRS 20th Anniversary
TRS Event Participant
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
7,991
Reaction score
2,792
Points
113
Location
Roanoke, VA
Vehicle Year
1999
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Type
V8
Engine Size
5.0
Transmission
Automatic
2WD / 4WD
4WD
Tire Size
285/75-16
The Coyote is actually 5.2 liters. Not the same as the old 5.0. They call it a 5.0 for marketing.
This is 100% false.

Also, it was originally engineered to be supercharged. Sorry, not believing any one person has replaced several turbos in the F150's.

Love the internet where everyone's brother, FIL, neighbor, 2nd cousin, and boyfriend has done so much and seen so many things.
This wasn't third hand rumor. Someone who's been on this site for over a decade was crystal clear that his own brother has dealt with this issue.

Do you walk around in real life calling people out as liars without the slightest shred of evidence, or do you reserve that for being a punk in the cyber world?
 

Ranger850

Doesn't get Sarcasm . . .
TRS 20th Anniversary
Joined
Jan 24, 2018
Messages
8,426
Reaction score
4,664
Points
113
Location
Tallahassee Florida
Vehicle Year
2001
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
Born with a 3.0, looking for a donor V8
Transmission
Manual
2WD / 4WD
2WD
Total Lift
Stock 2"
Tire Size
Stock
My credo
Doing things wrong, until I get it right.
I say I couldn't care less, because I really couldn't. I do like to see some of these guys get their panties twisted up their ass about what is good and what is not. Call me Troll if you want. I have been a consumer of cars for a very long time and see trends come and go. The excitement over the new Ranger was well due. And when it gets here , it will meet or exceed some expectations and will fail at others. You have said we cant judge the truck till it gets her, and that is true, and then y'all all start spouting numbers and performance issues, good or bad. Every one has their idea of what the perfect truck would be, and a couple people see things differently than most of you all, that's all.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

85_Ranger4x4

Forum Staff Member
TRS Event Staff
TRS Forum Moderator
Article Contributor
V8 Engine Swap
OTOTM Winner
TRS Banner 2010-2011
TRS 20th Anniversary
VAGABOND
TRS Event Participant
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
32,207
Reaction score
17,523
Points
113
Location
SW Iowa
Vehicle Year
1985
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Type
V8
Engine Size
5.0
Transmission
Manual
The Coyote is actually 5.2 liters. Not the same as the old 5.0. They call it a 5.0 for marketing. Also, it was originally engineered to be supercharged. Sorry, not believing any one person has replaced several turbos in the F150's.
Ford Coyote 5.0 has a stated displacement of 302.1CI, which is not a 5.2.

The '18 Coyotes are a 307 though. 5.073L

5.2 Voodoo is 315CI.

The old pushrod 5.0 was actually a 4.9 but they rounded it up to 5.0 to look better than the 4.9 I6.

Sorry, not believing any one person has replaced several turbos in the F150's.

Love the internet where everyone's brother, FIL, neighbor, 2nd cousin, and boyfriend has done so much and seen so many things.
My brother, FIL and BIL are senior master techs, FIL and BIL are at the same dealer but in different locations, my brother is the shop foreman at the local dealer.

They put the "Ecoboost" in more than just F-150's and I wasn't just referring to that only F-150's. Just in my "what you been up to?" I have heard it come up several times. In the last week or two it was a 4cyl car Ecoboost.

Like I said overall for a turbocharger they are very reliable, everything can fail though. Dealers see more stuff than the average vehicle owner does. It bothers him enough that he dd's a '14 Tremor with the 3.5EB.
 
Last edited:

BlackBII

Ranger Custom
Article Contributor
OTOTM Winner
TRS Banner 2010-2011
Truck of Month
Joined
Aug 14, 2007
Messages
7,895
Reaction score
982
Points
113
Location
UT
Vehicle Year
1989
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Type
4.0 V6
Transmission
Manual
2WD / 4WD
4WD
Total Lift
5
Tire Size
33
I say I couldn't care less, because I really couldn't. I do like to see some of these guys get their panties twisted up their ass about what is good and what is not. Call me Troll if you want. I have been a consumer of cars for a very long time and see trends come and go. The excitement over the new Ranger was well due. And when it gets here , it will meet or exceed some expectations and will fail at others. You have said we cant judge the truck till it gets her, and that is true, and then y'all all start spouting numbers and performance issues, good or bad. Every one has their idea of what the perfect truck would be, and a couple people see things differently than most of you all, that's all. SOrry if I PISSed you OFF
You didn't piss anyone off.

We noticed you spreading false information, and not wanting other readers to get confused, corrected you.
 

Ranger850

Doesn't get Sarcasm . . .
TRS 20th Anniversary
Joined
Jan 24, 2018
Messages
8,426
Reaction score
4,664
Points
113
Location
Tallahassee Florida
Vehicle Year
2001
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
Born with a 3.0, looking for a donor V8
Transmission
Manual
2WD / 4WD
2WD
Total Lift
Stock 2"
Tire Size
Stock
My credo
Doing things wrong, until I get it right.
What false info??? wasn't trying to do that, I was saying turbos I4's put off more heat than a N/A I4 and need to be cooled because of it, is that not true?
 

85_Ranger4x4

Forum Staff Member
TRS Event Staff
TRS Forum Moderator
Article Contributor
V8 Engine Swap
OTOTM Winner
TRS Banner 2010-2011
TRS 20th Anniversary
VAGABOND
TRS Event Participant
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
32,207
Reaction score
17,523
Points
113
Location
SW Iowa
Vehicle Year
1985
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Type
V8
Engine Size
5.0
Transmission
Manual
What false info??? wasn't trying to do that, I was saying turbos I4's put off more heat than a N/A I4 and need to be cooled because of it, is that not true?
Depends on if the NA 4cyl has similar performance. More power means more heat. Displacement or boost doesn't have a great effect on that on its own. Many V8 swaps are cooled by V6 radiators (mine included).

And you get into cooling system efficiency too, there is more to it than displacement, power and radiator size. Airflow thru the radiator, how effective the water pump can move the coolant thru the engine etc. OEM's work all this out which is why cooling capacity is generally a non issue for most people and why it isn't even on my radar for this.

However you did not start off with that argument and I don't think it was ever brought up.

What is so taxing (IMO) is that the little bitty motor has to work harder to make HP in a midsize, than a small v6.

I think Ford has outdone itself with this little turbo 2.3. It apparently is a strong engine and reliable. OK. SO what. Not everybody wants a little bitty motor working twice as hard as a bigger engine with more cylinders. They put the EB2.3 in everything. Talk about cannibalism. Why do they even bother building other motors, if this one can do everything a V8 can do.
270 hp is 270 hp right? wrong. A four cylinder( with turbos) at 270 hp is working harder than a v6 with 270 hp, and that engine works harder that a V8 @ 270 hp. That is just common since.
:popcorn: Now yall hit me with all the knowledge that make that statement wrong:popcorn:
 

Ranger850

Doesn't get Sarcasm . . .
TRS 20th Anniversary
Joined
Jan 24, 2018
Messages
8,426
Reaction score
4,664
Points
113
Location
Tallahassee Florida
Vehicle Year
2001
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
Born with a 3.0, looking for a donor V8
Transmission
Manual
2WD / 4WD
2WD
Total Lift
Stock 2"
Tire Size
Stock
My credo
Doing things wrong, until I get it right.
I said this in a different thread but, If your motor is the heart of your car, wouldn't you want a big healthy heart (V6/V8) that doesn't have to work hard to get you going, over a smaller heart with a pacemaker (I4w/turbo) to do the same jobs. Give me the BIG heart please.
This is what your talking about?:annoyed:
I did not start the argument, I simply made this statement, someone else STARTED arguing with my opinion. and in the original thread that I said this in, some even agreed with me. Go Figure.

then I started F-ing with people and got lost in the mêlée'. :icon_bounceblue:
Sorry for that part. I wish we were all in the same room so you could tell when I'm pulling your chain. But sometimes yall just got to let it go. Sorry it got out of control on my end.:icon_hornsup:
 

BlackBII

Ranger Custom
Article Contributor
OTOTM Winner
TRS Banner 2010-2011
Truck of Month
Joined
Aug 14, 2007
Messages
7,895
Reaction score
982
Points
113
Location
UT
Vehicle Year
1989
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Type
4.0 V6
Transmission
Manual
2WD / 4WD
4WD
Total Lift
5
Tire Size
33
This is why I buy popcorn in bulk
 

bobbywalter

TRS Technical Staff
TRS Event Staff
V8 Engine Swap
TRS Technical Advisor
TRS Banner 2012-2015
TRS 20th Anniversary
Ugly Truck of Month
TRS Event Participant
Joined
Aug 9, 2007
Messages
23,470
Reaction score
4,667
Points
113
Location
woodhaven mi
Vehicle Year
1988
Make / Model
FORD mostly
Engine Type
V8
Engine Size
BIGGER
Transmission
Automatic
2WD / 4WD
4WD
Total Lift
sawzall?
Tire Size
33-44
My credo
it is easier to fix and understand than "her"
i am choking










on



popcorn




850 makes some ...true, but in this application mis-applied so now ridiculous statements....

but


he asked questions too...








When you say the 2.3 Ecoboost would be better than the GM 3.5 N/A V6; by what measure are you comparing the two engines? I believe many people would rather have the NA V6 in the Ranger than a turbo-4. I know I would. They provide more consistent overall mpg between loaded and unloaded, depending on the weight that is behind it. In my opinion, the V^ would also be more reliable over the long term than the smaller turbocharged 4 cylinder. There is something to be said for having a larger engine that doesn't need to work as hard than having a smaller engine that is constantly under mechanical stress. The smaller engine may theoretically get better fuel economy but if it's constantly being stressed to its mechanical limits then fuel economy will undoubtedly suffer. As will the long term durability of the engine itself.

that "if" is not the case. but...it is either using fuel in eco....or boost.

unlike the other turd...this one has options...get "ok" economy with great power....or ecothurst with ridiculous power. up to you. there are durability issues...but its from fluke stuff..




I said this in a different thread but, If your motor is the heart of your car, wouldn't you want a big healthy heart (V6/V8) that doesn't have to work hard to get you going, over a smaller heart with a pacemaker (I4w/turbo) to do the same jobs. Give me the BIG heart please.


What is so taxing (IMO) is that the little bitty motor has to work harder to make HP in a midsize, than a small v6.

I think Ford has outdone itself with this little turbo 2.3. It apparently is a strong engine and reliable. OK. SO what. Not everybody wants a little bitty motor working twice as hard as a bigger engine with more cylinders. They put the EB2.3 in everything. Talk about cannibalism. Why do they even bother building other motors, if this one can do everything a V8 can do.
270 hp is 270 hp right? wrong. A four cylinder( with turbos) at 270 hp is working harder than a v6 with 270 hp, and that engine works harder that a V8 @ 270 hp. That is just common since.
:popcorn: Now yall hit me with all the knowledge that make that statement wrong:popcorn:
first off...you two are absolutely correct in your assertions if this 2.3 in question was a lima...


dead balls right on...


850...
you want knowledge or sense.?.? pick up a book for knowledge.

wise man once said you cant fix stupid. common sense is hard. SINCE it is not so common anymore.


how anyone with the google can not understand the difference between a modern di vvt turbo engine and old school shit is inexcusable.

of course half the population voted for hillary, so its just what it is...people really are this fukin stupid.

i think it is inexcusable regardless.








these engines are not applicable to the facts you two are using.

those facts against a conventional engine are still valid.

these engines are not conventional.


whether ford has huge balls and built these under the heaving brass of those balls, or they were just dumb enough to throw this against the wall to see if it would stick and just got lucky... we could recklessly speculate till the world ends.




this engine is NOT working hard in the sense you pretend to understand. its complicated. they would have built these engines a 100 years ago but did not have a way to do it till now.

and its still sketchy.

we have discussed this before, and unless you use an ecoboost its hard to understand what it is the little buggars do.


this engine is not one engine.

it is not making heat wastefully like you seem to think you understand. the flame-front control afforded by direct injection is revolutionary....epic for the control of flame-front propagation.

the correct amount of fuel is sprayed directly into the process and at the best time we can muster at this point...

all the air has to do is get into the chamber. no quench or cool issue due to weight of fuel in air charge ect..

this makes the load on everything magnitudes less for power generated.


you have more then one camshaft on the fly....


you have the best possible cam profile for low end (within the little turbos limits)....hence the instant boost and torque in numbers unattainable with a conventional engine.

you have the best profile for mid range (within the little turbos limits)


you have the best profile for top end...and this end again....is all limited by the tiny turbo..

if you sequential turbo this thing...it would make even more power in a powerband range that is unimaginable by this old engine builder.

it would probably pull 80 percent to 8 grand...1500-8000 flat as a board monster power curve....with minimal waste....and way less heat. because.


knowledge word of the day 850....efficiency. all that gobbledygook is a description of efficiency.



I just like ruffling ya'lls feathers really. I couldn't care less. I personally don't care for the extra maintenance of a turbo. I know they are better today than they were a decade ago. I still don't want one. I know that if they put all this technology into a single engine, they have to promote the Fawk out of it and make it seem like the best thing since Kraft singles, but my 12 year old Corolla gets the same or better mpg than a ecoboost anything. I know, I know, but it does not have 200+ HP. But if you are getting the power band into 200Hp you AINT getting 20+ mpg. and that bitch is getting HOT. I don't care what you say more heat is coming off that turbo motor than a N/A motor.
EDIT: those squiggly lines in a box look cool btw,



my 5000 pound edge got 32 hiway and 18-22 hammering on it.

and no....efficiency..not the same amount of heat.




IMO, It is just counter productive to have an engine restricted by so many devices due to government regulations, rev limiters, ect, and yet we are constantly looking for more power. We all know these motors are De-tuned and sapped to pass emissions, and as soon as we can we put free flowing exhaust for a few more ponies, cold air intake, few more, and we un-do all the little things to get that power back.


yeah.....sct....hpt.......cobb.....mongoose....drewlink...

you can have it all.


:owned:Nonsense is all I babble. LOL I just like to poke the bear every now and then:sorrysign:. If I say something dumb or nonsenseical I know yall will jump at the opportunity to correct me. Sometimes I even learn a thing or two. Sorry Guys, I really have nothing to argue about. Just carrying on with yall. Call it my twisted sense of humor, IDK, I like to go against the mainstream way of thinking and sometimes it get me in these silly arguments on the TRS forums and I get lost chasing my tail. I know the advantages of a new EB over the old turbos, I also know that todays tech is far superior to yesterdays and all of you have more Ranger Knowledge than I do :icon_thumby:. I'm just some noob who don't no nuthin:pray:


okay....

i have decided...we will take a vote to rename you RUSTY JR.









Ford uses stock CAI's nowadays. No gains with aftermarket.





whats that based on?

you have a 150 ecoboost.

and you think a cai wont increase power? in your case...two separate air filters..??:icon_confused: how sure are you of that? bet money sure?








overall....these engines are indeed epic and revolutionary. i really dig them.




they are also extremely complicated...and have serious issues built into them...


look at the front drive units with the chain drive water pump. the hpfp and 8 miles of timing chain make for some expensive maintenance issues. at least the trucks dont have that disaster...



but. i think this 2.3 will fare well. it dont make the normally correlated heat because it has 10 gears to spread the load over and has stupid power down low due to vvt and direct injection...

yes...more then any n/a big 6 and making less heat and with less stress on the pistons doing it.



as much as i dig them it bums me out too...

my personal p/u truck application precludes it from my main rig as being cost effective...

but i still want one.:D

one thing is true....when your making power your using fuel.

based on lifted trucks with the 3.5 eb and 37 inch tires, installing one in my truck would produce the same or less mpg then the v8 diesel.

and the ecoboost dont run on alternative fuels either. it just wont gobble down old oil and trans fluid like the old idi...



there is a reason for that diesel winning that fight....but not going there with you today RUSTY JR..:thefinger::thefinger:














:thefinger:ecoboost haters:thefinger:

haters gonna hate:popcorn:
 

pjtoledo

Well-Known Member
Supporting Member
U.S. Military - Veteran
Joined
Oct 5, 2007
Messages
5,341
Reaction score
2,912
Points
113
Location
Toledo Ohio
Vehicle Year
20002005199
Make / Model
Fords
Engine Size
3.0 2.3
here here,,,call to order anyone care to second the motion set forth proposing that the individual currently designated as Ranger850 be redesignated as "Rusty Jr."





































and where's my damned popcorn, who took it????
 

Ranger850

Doesn't get Sarcasm . . .
TRS 20th Anniversary
Joined
Jan 24, 2018
Messages
8,426
Reaction score
4,664
Points
113
Location
Tallahassee Florida
Vehicle Year
2001
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
Born with a 3.0, looking for a donor V8
Transmission
Manual
2WD / 4WD
2WD
Total Lift
Stock 2"
Tire Size
Stock
My credo
Doing things wrong, until I get it right.
bobbywalter, thank you for the lengthy explanation. that helped.
Hey Rusty, are we friends now?:icon_confused::icon_thumby:
 

pjtoledo

Well-Known Member
Supporting Member
U.S. Military - Veteran
Joined
Oct 5, 2007
Messages
5,341
Reaction score
2,912
Points
113
Location
Toledo Ohio
Vehicle Year
20002005199
Make / Model
Fords
Engine Size
3.0 2.3
bobbywalter, thank you for the lengthy explanation. that helped.
Hey Rusty, are we friends now?:icon_confused::icon_thumby:


right now, most likely, Rusty is in a lawn chair out in a field securing prime viewing for a train tonight that may or may not have it's holiday lights illuminated.


I'll be there too, on Munson road.
 
Joined
Apr 22, 2017
Messages
319
Reaction score
6
Points
18
Location
USA
Vehicle Year
2002
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
3.slow
Transmission
Automatic
My credo
To each his own.
i


popcorn




850 makes some ...true, but in this application mis-applied so now ridiculous statements....

but


he asked questions too...











that "if" is not the case. but...it is either using fuel in eco....or boost.

unlike the other turd...this one has options...get "ok" economy with great power....or ecothurst with ridiculous power. up to you. there are durability issues...but its from fluke stuff..










first off...you two are absolutely correct in your assertions if this 2.3 in question was a lima...


dead balls right on...


850...
you want knowledge or sense.?.? pick up a book for knowledge.

wise man once said you cant fix stupid. common sense is hard. SINCE it is not so common anymore.


how anyone with the google can not understand the difference between a modern di vvt turbo engine and old school shit is inexcusable.

of course half the population voted for hillary, so its just what it is...people really are this fukin stupid.

i think it is inexcusable regardless.








these engines are not applicable to the facts you two are using.

those facts against a conventional engine are still valid.

these engines are not conventional.


whether ford has huge balls and built these under the heaving brass of those balls, or they were just dumb enough to throw this against the wall to see if it would stick and just got lucky... we could recklessly speculate till the world ends.




this engine is NOT working hard in the sense you pretend to understand. its complicated. they would have built these engines a 100 years ago but did not have a way to do it till now.

and its still sketchy.

we have discussed this before, and unless you use an ecoboost its hard to understand what it is the little buggars do.


this engine is not one engine.

it is not making heat wastefully like you seem to think you understand. the flame-front control afforded by direct injection is revolutionary....epic for the control of flame-front propagation.

the correct amount of fuel is sprayed directly into the process and at the best time we can muster at this point...

all the air has to do is get into the chamber. no quench or cool issue due to weight of fuel in air charge ect..

this makes the load on everything magnitudes less for power generated.


you have more then one camshaft on the fly....


you have the best possible cam profile for low end (within the little turbos limits)....hence the instant boost and torque in numbers unattainable with a conventional engine.

you have the best profile for mid range (within the little turbos limits)


you have the best profile for top end...and this end again....is all limited by the tiny turbo..

if you sequential turbo this thing...it would make even more power in a powerband range that is unimaginable by this old engine builder.

it would probably pull 80 percent to 8 grand...1500-8000 flat as a board monster power curve....with minimal waste....and way less heat. because.


knowledge word of the day 850....efficiency. all that gobbledygook is a description of efficiency.








my 5000 pound edge got 32 hiway and 18-22 hammering on it.

and no....efficiency..not the same amount of heat.








yeah.....sct....hpt.......cobb.....mongoose....drewlink...

you can have it all.






okay....

i have decided...we will take a vote to rename you RUSTY JR.
















whats that based on?

you have a 150 ecoboost.

and you think a cai wont increase power? in your case...two separate air filters..??:icon_confused: how sure are you of that? bet money sure?








overall....these engines are indeed epic and revolutionary. i really dig them.




they are also extremely complicated...and have serious issues built into them...


look at the front drive units with the chain drive water pump. the hpfp and 8 miles of timing chain make for some expensive maintenance issues. at least the trucks dont have that disaster...



but. i think this 2.3 will fare well. it dont make the normally correlated heat because it has 10 gears to spread the load over and has stupid power down low due to vvt and direct injection...

yes...more then any n/a big 6 and making less heat and with less stress on the pistons doing it.



as much as i dig them it bums me out too...

my personal p/u truck application precludes it from my main rig as being cost effective...

but i still want one.:D

one thing is true....when your making power your using fuel.

based on lifted trucks with the 3.5 eb and 37 inch tires, installing one in my truck would produce the same or less mpg then the v8 diesel.

and the ecoboost dont run on alternative fuels either. it just wont gobble down old oil and trans fluid like the old idi...



there is a reason for that diesel winning that fight....but not going there with you today RUSTY JR..:thefinger::thefinger:














:thefinger:ecoboost haters:thefinger:

haters gonna hate:popcorn:
Show me the dyno results where an aftermarket CAI without a tune involved makes more power than the stock CAI.
 

Sponsored Ad


Sponsored Ad

Staff online

Member & Vendor Upgrades

For a small yearly donation, you can support this forum and receive a 'Supporting Member' banner, or become a 'Supporting Vendor' and promote your products here. Click the banner to find out how.

Truck of The Month


Kirby N.
March Truck of The Month

Recently Featured

Want to see your truck here? Share your photos and details in the forum.

Follow TRS On Instagram

TRS Events

25th Anniversary Sponsors

Check Out The TRS Store


Sponsored Ad


Sponsored Ad

Sponsored Ad


Amazon Deals

Top