Now THIS is an engine Toyota needs to take notes on

2.7 Liter V6 Ecoboost Engine

Horsepower:
325

Torque:
375 (very low in RPM range)

Max Payload:
2,250 lbs.

Max Towing:
8,500 lbs.

MPGs:
mid-20s with mixed driving / high 20s mixed with planned transmission?

Performance mods:
A $600.00 canned ECU tune from LMS typically yields around +10% HP and +15% HP for other EcoBoost engines (with no other mods). Perfomance significantly increases with other bolt-on mods...downpipes, exhausts, turbo upgrades, meth injection, etc. I'd estimate this 2.7L engine will be able to reliably put out 400HP/450TQ on stock internals.


I sure hope Toyota takes notice. Even an engine with a portion of those performance/mileage figures would be a huge improvement over Toyota's current engine options. Any word on Toyota stepping up to try and keep pace with other makers when it comes to future engine/transmission improvements?

 

I'll take a N/A Toyota motor that's reliable over a boosted Ford engine.

 

If the engine has a max payload of 2250lbs how does it work when you put it into a truck that weights 5,000lbs?

Hmmm.....................

 

this is a v6? i thought the 2.7 was a I4, a little dissapointed. i know they have the 1.6 ecoboost too that puts out some pretty impressive numbers too. boost FTW and tacoma FTW = boosted tacoma FTW

 

Oh yeah. A real winner there.

http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2014/04/nhtsa-closes-investigation-on-ford-ecoboost-issues.html

http://partsblog.olathetoyota.com/4383/ford-sued-ecoboost-problems/

 

still better than engines falling out of their mounts and getting stuck in the frame like is VERY prevalent in early 2nd gen Tacoma's.

 

Nope, noda, not going to happen. i’d never by a toyota with fords eco boost. i don’t see them using the co boost at all but if they put it in there trucks with no other option i would not buy toyota.

I know several people that have very bad luck with that engine and ford lying and trying to hid the problem and say it’s not happening or it normal.

 

You dont get that performance with that mileage. Its either one or the other. The MPG's Ford displays are best case scenario, ie, not boosting. Imagine driving an F-150 with a 2.7L V-6. That's what it will feel like to maintain those MPG's. If you thought the Tacoma 2.7 was a slug...

 

What would you say considering the new ram eco boost numbers? Genuine question-no stirring here

 

Ive driven the Ecodiesel Ram.

It is very slow, but does get 26mpg (my buddies average currently). Definitely not a performance engine.

 

While the Toyota engine is known for it's reliability, all of you loyalists really need to admit that Toyota is falling behind when it comes to the mpg game. And while some other manufacturers may not be as perfect as you all think they are, they've come along way from being the garbage that they used to be. Because of this, Toyota will lose customers to them. Heck, the only reason I bought my new Tacoma was because they still offer a manual transmission. If the F150 with EcoBoost had a manual, I might have gone that way. It's really time that Toyota and you loyalists get your head out of the sand and make some changes.

David

 

It will be the same thing with GM and the new Colorado too. 'Green' V6 that gets like 25 mpg (maybe) with the ability to shut down 3 of the 6 cylinders when your cruising with no wind, just like in the Silverados.

But what they don't tell you is, how good does it still work after 100k miles? I have a buddy at work with a 2010 Silverado he had to have over a grand worth of work down to the engine. Something was wrong with the system that shuts down those cylinders for extra milage, and it was buring oil like crazy.

That's the kind of stuff you deal with 10 years down the road with these crazy fuel saving gimmiks. Lord only knows what will happen to this Ecoboost. Remember when they tried to put the turbo-boost Power stroke in the Ford Excursion about 10 years ago? They failed and had to buy them back under state lemon laws.

http://www.autotrend.activeboard.co...dealer-techs-were-un/?page=1#comment-26023097

Keep on reading your spec sheets and fancy manufacturer brochures about 325 hp AND 25 mpg. I'll take my 'outdated' 4.0 and loose a couple MPG today and STILL have it be reliable 10 years from now.

 

For those saying you EITHER get good MPG's or power, not both, you're correct. But that's a fairly blanket statement for ALL engines. Under load, your injectors are spraying more fuel into the engine. This is a no brainer.

If you understand how a forced induction engine works you'd realize that more AIR means more FUEL so as to maintain a proper A/F ratio. The benefit of having a turbocharged engine is that it's power when you need it and MPG when you don't. If you don't have your right foot stuck in it then the turbo doesn't make boost and you essentially run in vacuum the whole time. This means the engine runs like a normal, smaller, NA engine while cruising. This is why my modified twin turbo RX7 gets 10 MPG when I'm fucking around but I get 25mpg average on highway driving (so long as I'm not acting like an asshat).

So if you look at the market as a whole. I'd say that MAYBE 1% of truck buyers actually tow daily. And if you do, buy a larger diesel and be done with it. But for the other 99% of buyers they don't care if they get shit gas mileage for 1-2 trips a year when they tow the boat/jet skis to and from the lake. Even if it gets 12mpg towing, the cumulative savings on gas that's realized when driving EVERY OTHER FREAKING DAY is significantly more important. If I put 15,000 miles a year on my truck and I tow for 200 miles....I know where my money should be. Do you?

 

Care to explain why you can't have new technology and reliability? I'm sure you were the same guy that complained when fuel injection came out and stated that we should stay carbureted forever. And look at it now, it provides for a higher reliability source of fuel with much improved fuel economy. The references you gave were simply those where the manufacturers didn't due their due diligence with regards to the technology. Sort of how Toyota has had problems with their frames and suspension.

David

 

Ding ding ding... here's a guy that gets it. You sir are a WINNER!

David

 

It's a pretty impressive engine. There was a review done recently from someone who towed a 7,000 lb Airstream with it and he said it towed better than his Hemi Durango. Obviously we don't know about reliability yet, but from a pure spec standpoint, it's a pretty nice package.

 

ecoboost has been out for a while now ford taurus 3.5 ecoboost. looks like there going strong 180,000 miles on them, also used in police cars. toyota cant build a frame to last 100,000 miles.

 

Your theory is correct, but from what I hear from actual F150 owners, not boards and threads, the 3.5 spends most of its time in the boost, even when running in light daily driving mode. As such, its actual mpg numbers equate more to v8 mpg in a truck of that size. I hear alot of the same things from actual owners of Silverado's with the cylinder deactivation, it's such a small percentage of drive time that it's irrelevant for their actual use.

Smaller displacement turbo'd engines and cylinder deactivation seem to add to EPA generated mpgs, but not real world mpgs. The optimum case is just to small...

 

If that's the case, it sounds like the EcoBoost's CPU needs to be tweaked a bit and it'll still work just fine. Not a major deal IMO.

David

 

I agree with that but not for the reason you might think.

The issue is typically the driver in most (if not all) cases. Take our trucks for example. If you drive like you want decent fuel economy you can get 22-24mpg even on the 4.0 V6. But if you speed up from stops quickly, hit the brakes often, can't modulate the throttle to save your life, you'll end up getting shitty mileage.

On a turbo car this is even more important. As much as the fuel demands for an NA car increase with throttle increase, a boosted engine is even more so. Once that turbo spools you're using a ton of fuel.

As for Ford and it's 3.5 I wouldn't be terribly surprised to see a slightly longer final gear used for cruising to keep it out of boost. Either that or some ECU trickery to keep the turbo from spooling so low.....which sounds absolutely sinful coming from my typical point of view which is sports cars lol.