Ford F-150 With EcoBoost Rated at 365 Horsepower, 420 Pounds-Feet

[Sax1031]

Last month, we told you about Ford’s three new powertrains for the 2011 Ford F-150. At the time, Ford announced the truck’s first implementation of its 3.5-liter EcoBoost V-6 but was mum on power ratings. Today, Ford said the engine is rated at 365 horsepower with 420 pounds-feet of torque on regular fuel.

Those torque ratings beat out all but the new 6.2-liter V-8, available on the top-of-the-line F-150 and base 2011 Ford F-Series Super Duty. The EcoBoost’s toque ratings are better than the 5.3-liter and 6.2-liter V-8s in the 2011 Chevrolet Silverado 1500, the 5.7-liter V-8 in the 2011 Ram 1500, the 5.7-liter V-8 in the 2011 Toyota Tundra and the 5.6-liter V-8 in the 2011 Nissan Titan.

Up to 90 percent of the EcoBoost’s peak torque will be available from 1,700 rpm to 5,000 rpm — intriguing figures, considering the 3.5-liter EcoBoost implemented on Ford’s cars and crossovers hits peak torque around 3,500 rpm.

The V-6 can tow 11,300 pounds, which is the same maximum towing figure as the 6.2-liter V-8 and beats the best ratings that Chevrolet, Dodge and Toyota can cook up right now. Maximum payload is rated at 3,060 pounds, again the best rating for a half-ton pickup.

The 3.5-liter EcoBoost V-6 will be mated to Ford’s revamped 6R80 six-speed automatic transmission, which is rated for up to 7,000 rpm. The model will also feature Ford’s electric power-assisted steering system, new to the Ford F-150 for 2011.

All of this is supposed to give the EcoBoost not only the best towing, torque and payload figures but also “outstanding” fuel economy, Ford says.

Ford has yet to release final gas mileage figures for this powertrain. The 2011 F-150 will be available later this year; the 2011 F-150 with EcoBoost will be available in early 2011.

•Best-in-class 420 pounds-feet of torque at 2,500 rpm versus premium V-8 competitors
•Up to 90 percent of peak torque available from 1,700 rpm to 5,000 rpm
•Best-in-class 11,300 pounds maximum trailer towing versus all competitors
•Best-in-class 3,060-pound payload rating versus all competitors

Not bad at all.

I would like to know the fuel economy numbers though.

[derklug]

Torque coming in at 1700 sounds good, most car companies don't run turbos on trucks because you don't get enough low end torque. Die hard truck enthusiasts may not like the idea of a turbo, but for the average F-150 owner, the truck is used more like a car.

[JJ#48Racing]

Impressive. Ford is on their game right now.

[motorhead]

It might be okay if it's reliable. That has to be spendy to repair.

[98_Camaro]

Definitely some pretty good numbers.
The question though is how much is it going to cost? The EcoBoost engines aren't very cheap.

[BigDan]

My last 3 truck's have been turbo charged its the only way to go if you want free hp (no engine drag) endless power and tuning capabilities and great mpg.

The new 2011 Explorer is getting a 4 cylinder version of the ecoboost as its base engine, to give it great power, torque when needed and great highway mpg. Too bad they didn't give it a small turbo diesel option like they do in most euro spec Ford's. Or even one of those 100mpg diesel/ electric hybrids in that GM funded program I saw on Motorweek.

[BigDan]

Maybe we will see the SVT Lightning return but with a tricked out ecoboost version of some sort.

[20Camaro11]

Ford is on it right now....the rest of the competition should be studying what they are doing....lots of positives happening at Ford. Its nice to see an American company getting good press (finally) and leading the international community in some of the leading edge automotive technologies.

[bigearl]

This may be a very slick system. I'll wait a little bit to see what pops up before I get too excited, but turbos are so much more reliable now than they used to be. The torque curve really sounds like a small diesel.

I'm still skeptical that a 150 class can tow 11300 for any extended towing session up and down hills, but it would seem that your standard 8000lb 25 foot trailer would be a breeze for this thing.

[Sax1031]

Ford releases a little bit more about the power, more specifically the torque:

[bigearl]

Hmmm, that's a great curve for towing, but why'd they go with the 5.3 GM instead of the more likely competitor. The Ford curve would still be a little better (pretty flat between 2-4k) but it looks like a cheap shot this way.

[BigDan]

Because top of the line L92 headed 6.2L would make the ecoboost's low end torque look not so good on that graph. Same reason why Ford didnt pull out its bigger guns like it's 6.2L SOHC and compare it to their V6.

[a_Username]

Wow I didn't know the 5.3L was that bad on torque.

[bigearl]

Originally Posted by BigDan

Because top of the line L92 headed 6.2L would make the ecoboost's low end torque look not so good on that graph. Same reason why Ford didnt pull out its bigger guns like it's 6.2L SOHC and compare it to their V6.

Are you actually looking at the graph?

If that graph is accurate then the low end torque of the ecotec between 2000 and 3000 rpm appears to be extremely solid. The ecotec's torque peak is at ~3000 with 350lbs available at 2000 and the peak on the 6.2 from ford and chevy isn't until 4000 +. That ecotec's probably the best torque curve I've ever seen on a gas engine for towing.