• 2018 Ford F-150: All Power Specs Announced – 5.0L Coyote V8 Gets More Power! (News)

    2018 ford f-150 power v8 v6 turbo specs increase
    2018 Ford F-150

    The 2018 Ford F-150 power specifications are here. The updated truck gets increased power for three out of the five engines that are available. There is still no news about the sixth engine – the 3.0L turbo-diesel V6.

    Base 3.3L V6

    The base engine is now a smaller displacement V6, but it boasts a power increase when you compare it to the 3.5L V6 that it replaces. The engine has both direct and port fuel injection. The power rating is 290 hp @ 6,500 rpm (which is 8 hp higher) and 265 lb-ft of torque @ 4,000 rpm (which is 12 lb-ft higher).

    2.7L EcoBoost V6

    The “baby” EcoBoost V6 maintains 325 hp @ 5,000 rpm, but it boosts torque an impressive 25 lb-ft to a total of 400 lb-ft @ 2,750 rpm. The previous version of the 2.7L turbocharged six proved itself as a very quick truck in our 0-60 MPH testing. Now, the truck could be even faster. We cannot wait to test it.

    5.0L Coyote V8

    We are thankful that the V8 engine remains in the F-150 lineup. Now, it’s even sweeter. Maximum horsepower is 395 hp @ 5,750 rpm (up 10 hp when compared to the 2017 version), and total torque output is now 400 lb-ft @ 3,850 rpm (which is 13 lb-ft more).

    The top-of-the-line 3.5L EcoBoost V6 remains at the same power level as before: 375 hp @ 5,000 rpm and 470 lb-ft @ 3,500 rpm. The high-output version (Raptor version) of the engine remains at 450 hp @ 5,000 rpm and 510 lb-ft of torque @ 3,500 rpm.

    Here is our first look at the entire 2018 F-150 engine lineup.

    Andre Smirnov
    Andre Smirnov
    Andre Smirnov is an Automotive Enthusiast, Producer, Reviewer, Videographer, Writer, Software Engineer, Husband, Father, and Friend.

    Similar Articles

    133 thoughts on “2018 Ford F-150: All Power Specs Announced – 5.0L Coyote V8 Gets More Power! (News)

      1. If you are going so small as a 2.7, they should have just made a straight 4 to avoid the long term unreliability of a “V” motor. A 400 hp in-line 4 2.7 liter is far more attractive for a truck. It stands a chance of lasting. This v6 junk is like building a recyclable vehicle. I guess you can get a lot back from the aluminum can recyclers when you pull up with the Ford on the back of a tow-truck.

        1. In case you are unaware, the 2.7L EcoBoost engine uses a compact graphite iron (CGI) cylinder block which is the same material used for the 6.7L Power Stroke diesel.

        2. You should also do some research on basic engine design. The current V6 Ford engines all use a 60 degree V angle which is inherently better balanced than either a 90 degree V6 or an inline 4. Why do you think most large displacement inline 4s have balance shafts and flexible exhaust tubing? It’s so they don’t shake themselves apart.

          1. It seems lately there are new posters on TFL criticizing without offering any experience feedback. All these new folks seem to have consistent prose and ignorance. BS in Internet Engineering has found it’s home.

            1. I’m now driving my 12th personal Ford Truck, a 2015 F-150 S/C 4X4 5.0, and I’m preparing to get a 2017 (taking advantage of model year-end discounts/rebates!) I enjoyed a successful working career selling Ford Trucks, and during that 25 yr. period I was privilaged to have driven 50 or more different Ford vehicles (as demos-what a great job benefit!) I counted ’em as long-term tests, but it seems like nobody asks me what I think! Far too many opinions/comments come from those who know nothing about the #1 Truck. . . Especially from guys who think trucks designed and built by Fiat could ever come close to the technologies Ford continues to introduce! Then, of course, adapted for use by Fiat (and GM) years later.

          2. Uh, yeah, that’s why all commercial vehicles use v6’s–NOT!

            Recipe for Longevity:
            Add large displacement to in-line cylinders

            REcipe for Ripping off Consumers:
            Add small cylinders to a V configuration.

            1. Uh, yeah, but now you are referring to inline 6 cylinders if you are talking commercial vehicles. Those are also inherently better balanced than, say a 90 degree V6 or an inline 4 but they also take up more space in the engine bay which equates to a longer vehicle and more weight. Exactly what you don’t need for better fuel economy in this class of truck.

            2. Try adding more facts to your recipes and less opinion. There are plenty of V configuration commercial engines as well as inline. Our fleet of apparatus have both types with no apparent longevity difference. Packaging demands, power needs, and availability are deciding factors moreso than longevity regarding architecture. Inline engines have more main bearings per cylinder but are harder on crankshafts due to the added length. Each design has it’s ups and downs. Just like the posters on TFL.

            3. Please stick to what you know about which is not much, the 3.5L F150 engine is one bad ass motor! Pull a 13,000 pound boat with no issues at all! The 3.5L is a major work horse

            4. Engine cylinder configuration has little to do with engine longevity. The latter depends more on construction details, materials used, and such things as filtration, owner maintenance, and more.

          3. Yes but a DOHC V-engine has a much longer timing chain, typically with a water pump in the valley of the engine. And since Ford continues to insist on using, cheaper, stretch prone inverted tooth timing chains, a shorter timing chain would be ideal. Worried about balance? Let’s see Ford make in inline-6 ecoboost with a better roller chain.

        3. The most reliable, bullet-proof, loaded with torque engine was Ford’s legendary 300 “Big Six” – It may have been inefficient on fuel, but Ford could have used the basic bullet-proof design to build a modern inline six (perhaps 225-250 cubic inches) With current technologies, just think of the torque & horsepower that could be achieved!

        4. There shouldn’t be a 2.7 L engine in a full sized pickup anyway. There should be good sized v8s in all full sized pickups. If I get a truck I want it to have the power to do what ever I want.

          1. Why does the 3.5 eco have the same power as a Chevy 6.2? Not to mention that the 3.5 smoked the 6.2 Chevy pulling 10k pounds on 10% grade. I guess if you want power in your truck you better get a V6 3.5 ecoboost. The dodge didn’t even have the GVW to run the test, so Nissan stepped up to the plate. V8 does not necessarily mean more power.

          2. Dude you are an idiot….you obvious have not driven the 2.7 or 3.5 ecoboost motors. They are beasts and very very reliable and out perform everyone else’s V8s hands down. I have had the 5.0, 3.5 and 2.7. all Amazing motors. Torque is where it’s at and these motors have it and gas mileage to boot.

          3. Tommy apparently you ha ENT looked at the power numbers for the ecoboost engines. You should compare them to mid 90s V8 engines. Look at the power ratings for the F150 V8 versions of the early 2000-2008. These new engines produce way more power. No if it’s the sound of the V8 and the naturally aspirated engine then I can understand your comment. If it’s based solely on power ratings then sir you need to use Google and do some RESEARCH

        5. What kind of long term are you talking about? The “V” engines are reaching well over the 200k mile marker.

    1. the expedition 3.5 goes up to 400 hp -__- … should be a good lineup, 2.7 has more torque than the 5.3, 5.0 is de-tuned from mustang levels, guess we’ll have to wait to see how much updated 5.0 can actually make in the mustang

    2. Elpancho, just fill the regular 3.5 EB with 91 octane, power will be similar to the Raptor. Don’t believe me, just search dyno’s on Google image and you will see.
      I’m very impress with the 2.7 and really happy with the Coyote power numbers. Overall, Ford should be able to meet everybody needs with the new engines, even with the plain-Jane XL.

    3. That 5.0 is posting some very nice #’s, the 2.7 would be my choice for hauling less than 8000lbs though.

      1. I hope they give the 2.7 trucks more payload instead of artificially lowering it away from 3.5 and 5.0 numbers. Otherwise it looks like a fantastic choice.

          1. I stand corrected. Thanks for clarifying. I just noticed that all the 2.7 trucks around here had a lower GVWR. Thanks must have been ordered without the payload package by the dealer.

    4. Glad the V8 is getting better. The ecoboost are great engines but there is something about that V8 rumble that a V6 just can’t do.

      1. Yeah, be reliable.

        Those v6’s will shake themselves apart after 200k, while a slower reving v8 will go 350k and an inliine 6 will go 600k.

        1. Tom,
          You obviously have no clue what your talking about and most certainly have never driven a V6 Ecoboost!

          They rev way less rpm’s than a normally aspirated V8 to make their power.

          With twin turbo’s their powerband is similar to a Turbo diesel.

          Very impressed with all of the Engines Ford is offering in their truck lineup right now!!!

          1. Well, Ford tunes their transmissions to lug the Ecoboost, so you get the sense that you have to wind it up to get the truck moving. And when you’re in the boost while doing truck things, you’re burning a lot more fuel to do it.

            Just like Tom, I’d take a torquey V8 turn low RPM’s over a high specific output turbo V6 for longevity. Especially given the timing chain stretch and fuel dilution issues Ford has struggled with in the Ecoboost engine line.

          2. He still doesn’t understand that the EB engines rev lower than ANY of the half ton V8s. There are also plenty of 200k 3.5tts in the wild and at least one with 300k miles.

            1. There is also a 3.5TT F150 on my local Craigslist with major engine problems at 120k. Not impressed.

          1. It is true that the more displacement of the v8 will likely last longer and vibrate less. And if they have added direct injection to this 5.0, it will likely not rev as high as the old one and produce its power lower in the rev band, making it more durable over time.
            These smaller turbo v6s just do’t last as long.

        2. The 2.7L makes max torque of 400 lb ft @ 2750 RPM. The 5.0L also makes 400 lb ft but at a much higher 3850 RPM.

          1. So, it sounds like the new 5.0 is not direct injected. Or at least, it is more geared for cars than trucks with its high rev power band.

            1. What are you talking about george? The N/A 5.0L makes great power for its small displacement at low RPM. Did you not see where peak torque is? That is a really low RPM for a N/A engine with excellent torque.

            2. All F-150 gas engines (V6 and V8) for 2018 will have both direct injection into the cylinder and port injection into the intake manifold runners.

              The reason the EcoBoost engines are able to make their power at lower RPMs than the 5.0L is mainly because of the sizing of the turbos. They could have chosen turbos that move a larger volume of air but that would sacrifice low RPM torque. It’s all about air velocity. Same principle as using ported cylinder heads on a race engine. More power at higher engine speeds due to higher air volume but less power at lower speeds due to lower air velocity. That’s not a big deal on a race car but it is on a street driven truck.

              The 5.0L makes similar power but at higher engine speeds because to get those numbers they needed larger volumes of air and because the V8 is naturally aspirated (no forced induction) they could not rely on that to get the same high air velocity as the turbo V6s.

              Clear as mud, right?

        3. A 3.5 eb requires much less rpms to reach peak torque meaning it stays at lower rpms in most driving conditions. I have a ’12 with 255k and it hasn’t shaken itself apart yet

        4. Slower revving? The (1st gen) 3.5 eco reaches peak torque at 2500rpm which is much lower than any v8 in its class. I have a ‘12 with 266k on it and still hasn’t shaken itself apart

        5. You literally know next to nothing, looks where the torque is made on a 3.5 eco boost, I think you will be very surprised on your findings. These are NOT high revving engines!

    5. Very impressive engine lineup! And all (except base V6) being paired with the 10 speed auto. You can’t go wrong with any of these engines. I hope the 2.7 and 5.0 are both part of the Gold Hitch awards for 2018.

    6. truck for my professional niece as a traveling salesman in for my weekend family requirements. Interior comfort is superior to any other truck. I am a loyal long-term forecast says:

      Too much time spent on a grill. Needs more focus and emphasis on storage compartments. Such as intergraded tool storage compartments in empty areas of the bed. Factory integrated strapdown solutions like Nisssn offers. They need to learn their real customer base. I said 50% a real construction people in 50% or traveling sales people need a truck for weekends and family. Without question Ford offers the best truck for my professional niece as a traveling salesman in for my weekend family requirements. Interior comfort is superior to any other truck. I am a loyal long-term forecast

    7. From a Toyota guy – these new Ford trucks are awesome! It looks like Ford will continue to be king for the foreseeable future and that sales crown was well earned and deserved. If I ever stray from my Tacoma it will be for an F-150. My only nitpick would be for Ford to not detune the Coyote and give the 3.5EB the 400hp the SUVs have. They can always do that in 2019 when GM release their truck to quiet the buzz they create. The last GM launch was completely overshadowed by the Atlas concept. I bet Ford has something up their sleeve for 2019 as well…

      1. Moondog,
        It’s easy to get the higher horsepower 3.5tt like the SUV’s have?

        Just put 91oct or better in it. That’s all there doing really is rating the SUV’s on premium and the F150’s are always rated on 87oct except for the Raptor!

        1. It’s easy to get the higher horsepower 3.5tt like the SUV’s have?

          Just put 91oct or better in it. That’s all there doing really is rating the SUV’s on premium and the F150’s are always rated on 87oct except for the Raptor!

          Except that Ford IS rating the F-150 EB with 91 octane. All their engines are rated using 91 or 93 octane.

          Just read the F-150 manual and read the fuel requirements. It makes it’s power numbers using 91 octane. And if you drive agressively or tow, Ford REQUIRES 91 octane.

    8. Well Andre, are we buying this F150 V8 10 speed or what. I cant help but think the superior torque curve in the 2.7 and 3.5EB would be better for holding low rpm. Dont know if its worth losing the V8. I dont find the F150’s really that sporty that they require a V8 sound. I wish they would just mild boost the V8 for superior torque, sound and HP. Im still on the fence. 10 Hp gain is nice but not that much to say I would take it over the torque and HP delivery from the boosted motors be it a V6😕

    9. Never ceases to amaze me how dumb EPA is.

      They fight against an engine that burns half the fuel. If all pickups burned half the fuel, we would have half the pollution in this country.

      The Ghostbusters were right to depict the EPA as the “problem”

    10. I sure hope the rumors about the 2.7L EB going into the 2019 Ranger are true. If it makes it in with the same tune as the F-150 along with the 10-speed that will be one nasty little truck.

    11. That is really impressive that the 5.0L makes peak torque so low in the RPM band. That will help with hauling and towing keeping the engine closer in the torque range. I also seen the new 5.0L at the autoshow and they already released it will be direct injected along with port injection. It appears Ford will be doing this across the board with their engine lineup. Now i really want to know the power of the 5.0L in the Mustang. Ford has to catch up to the Camaro now and it wont be exactly easy when they have more power and a lighter and smaller car.

      That 2.7L engine has been doing extremely well too. To add even more power to it is really going to impress people.

    12. Impressive line-up for sure. The 3.3L will be a great truck. I would love to see how it does at elevation against the midsize V6 trucks.

      1. Even Ford know not to put the 3.5 in the HD.

        The 3.5 is not built for longevity and durability. Its just consumer junk. Inefficient firecracker. Burns hot and then burn out. What glitters isn’t gold.

    13. Lol, anyone who hates on this engine line up probably comes home and kicks the dog and yells at the kids. Well done ford.

      1. Nobody wants to abuse their children.

        So stop changing the subject so as not to answer the question at hand.

        Why does Ford not put the 3.5 in the HDs?

        We all know why.

        1. It wasn’t intended for that application. Same reason the GM 6.2 is half ton only. Any more rhetorical questions?

        2. I didn’t realize anyone was asking me a question…. I was basically reading all these keyboard engineers and laughing at them. Carry on dork

      1. Just so you know, calling someone a troll is an adhominem argument, and in an official debate, you would lose the debate on those grounds alone.
        So instead of admitting defeat by default, maybe make a good point? Just an idea.

    14. I hope Charlotte explains this whole premium regular gas thing. I have had cars that get the same mpg either way and some that getter better mpg with premium. Even if she proves premium has more energy and the ethanol does nothing; does it also matter what vehicle you are driving? Should be interesting.

      1. Rambro,
        There’s no extra energy in premium gasoline.

        All that’s really happening is that the extra octane makes it more stable to pre-combustion/pinging/knocking all in the same.

        With it being more stable the computer or progrcan advance the timing which in effect creates more power!

        All engines that have knock sensors can sense this and adjust the timing for the fuel being used.

        Turbocharged gas engines always have knock sensors and engines programmed from the factory to run on premium usually have them as well.

        This explains why some engines you’ve tried premium on had a positive effect and others did nothing. If you take a non- turbocharged engine without knock sensors, programmed for 87oct and add premium NOTHING will happen.

        If you take an ecoboost rated on 87 oct and run it on 93 oct the knock sensors will tell the computer to adjust timing and horsepower and torque go up quite nicely!

        On the 3.5tt Ford claims from 375hp to 400hp and 475ftlbs to 480ftlbs.

        1. It was opposite for me and 10% ethanol must have some affect on energy levels.

          Had a Turbo Kia sportage before and it could care less what fuel was in it. Always got the same mpg. My Sierra Denali would always do a lot better mpg’s on premium vs regular.

          1. And my Tacoma is getting better mpg’s on premium. About 1.5 to 2 mpg better. I think you lose 10% mileage to the ethanol right off the top

          2. That’s because it was designed for premium and will not have as much timing retarded as it would for 87 octane. If the vehicle was designed for 87 octane it wouldn’t get detonation on 87 and therefor not see a benefit with 89/91+ octane.

        2. Ford rates their engine output based on 91 or 93 octane. You won’t see higher than advertised power on 91 octane without some kind of engine tuning.

    15. Exactly, the 3.5 is not durable enough for an HD. It was never intended to be. Its a throw away engine.
      I wish we could get Toyota to build all engines. Maybe Cummins for some.

      1. A Toyota HD diesel would be the best. We do have the Cummins though.

        I always thought it funny they called the tax keeping foreign makers from bringing their trucks to our shores the “chicken” tax.

        Because the American brands are just CHICKEN of better quality.

        1. Jeeses. Diesel is a complete failure in the 1/2 ton segment. Do you not see the timid sales of the Titan, the near zero affect on Ram sales. The EPA did Ram a favour and for the first time beat The Sierra sales without a diesel in the lineup. Did you not see the embarrassment the Ram diesel had to go through against the 2.7EB. Have you not been listening to the added maintenance, added cost for maintenance, and larger upfront cost for a diesel with terrible acceleration. They are completely outclassed by turbo gas engines and the new generator-battery trucks are going to trump them all. The diesel is an afterthought at this point. Completely outclassed from top to bottom.

          1. Yeah, that’s why diesels are hard to keep on lots an can’t keep up with demand. The Titan diesel is an exception, because it is an V8 and not particularly efficient, unless you tow lot with it. But the Colorado and the ecodiese (which buy the way lives up to its name ecoboost), and the new 1.6 Chevy and the many new little diesels that have come and are coming. So give it up.

            1. If its a demand issue, then the MFG’s are shooting themselves in the foot. Why would they artificially suppress sales by not providing enough trucks?

              The Ram ED makes up like 10% of total Ram 1500 sales, which are a sub-percentage of the total 1/2 ton sales. Reality is that maybe 2-3% of the 1/2 ton sales are diesel. Hardly a game changer. Anyone with a spreadsheet can run the numbers and see that the fuel savings is minimal, and thats really the only advantage the diesel has. Reliability isnt any better, torque isnt better, and power is CERTAINLY not better.

              The Colorado Dmax is cool, but the new V6+8speed combo is great. I have test driven both(and tacoma/frontier) and I would skip the diesel. The V6 makes solid low end with a much better top end, and little sacrifice in fuel economy. Diesel just isnt worth it at this point.

            2. An inline 4 diesel vs. a v6 gas? I’ll take the diesel every time. Its like the difference between the cummins 6 and teh v8s. History is not on the gasser’s side. The diesel will still be pumping out low end torque for cheap while the gassers are in the junkyard.

          2. “they are completely outclassed by turbo gas engines”

            Except that high specific output turbo gas engines burn themselves out much faster. Just look at all the reliability issues that have plagued the 3.5EB. They eat timing chains like crazy and chug fuel whenever you tow with them. Hence why Ford started tuning the transmissions on the 2015+ F-150’s to lug the engine like crazy, trying to pull good EPA numbers. Real world fuel economy is not impressive when towing or hauling, especially when running 87 octane as the fuel maps are much less efficient.

            1. The diesel is good for towing if you plan to make mpg your life long standpoint. However that is their only advantage and to some that is needed for now but that will no longer be an advantage when battery assist comes out and Workhorse with their Generator-Battery truck already defeats the diesel in mpg, torque and again in HP

              If you want to pull with a superior motor that can accelerate before we get the Generator Battery truck up into mainstream than the gas EB is a superior engine for pulling. The 2.7EB destroyed the Ram 3.0Diesel up the gauntlet and the Ram even had the lower gear set. Without HP it is a dog of a motor and is the primary reason it saves fuel. Yes the diesel molecule has more energy but the low HP is why you save fuel because acceleration is like watching paint dry.

              Funny though the Tacoma Pro gets the same mpg as the diesel ZR2. If the Tacoma had the 2.7EB motor it would beat the ZR2 in fuel economy and it has more torque and of course superior HP.

    16. Been salivating over the 470lbs of torque for a while, But those stats were at 1800 RPM’s. What happened?

      1. I dont think it ever was, its always been 3500 rpm. The 1st gen 3.5 was 420 at 2500 rpm, which i am guessing the new truck matches, but keeps climbing.

        I think its a durability thing. They keep torque low at low RPM to keep cylinder pressures down. We know from the aftermarket tunes that the Ecoboosts have a hell of a lot more low end than what ford gives them.

    17. That Lariat that gets the 3.5 cranked to 400HP is going to blow the doors off the top of the line GMC Sierra. Likely tied with the Raptor with less weight.

      1. You know the current GM trucks do 420 HP and 460tq. Last test i saw, the 6.2 is still top dog by a very small margin in 2017. If GM would pull their heads out of their asses and allow it on the SLE and LT trucks for a more modest price, they would have some happy customers.

        The 5.0 10 speed with 3.55 gears will be a great combo. 3.73 if you like bigger tires.

        1. The 365HP 3.5EB beat the 6.2 several times. This one will beat it all the time. There are several articles done by journalists that show the 365HP older model F150 beating the 6.2 in every way, empty loaded and pulling a trailer. That 420HP in the GM only lasts for a brief second at peak rpm. The remaining rpms prior to that and after that are outclassed by the 3.5EB Take a look at the dyno sheets. The 3.5 has superior power curves. The 400HP Lariat will walk away like a boss. Too bad GM or Ram don’t wake up and boost their V8’s like what the SUV market has done.

            1. In what- the Corvette and Camaro? Does not apply here. Unless you are talking about aftermarket tuning, which applies to any engine on the market.

              It’s pretty obvious all you can compare are stock engines from the factory in a setting like this.

            1. The first 3.5 spanked the 6.2s, then GM cranked up the 6.2 to compete, and now Ford wants top dog back in the acceleration tests with the 470 foot pounds. It makes you wonder how deep in tunings these companies are gonna go in future years!

            2. Brad they had to start yhe 3.5 EB in 2nd gear to avoid wheel spin. When is the last time someone said they won a race because the competition had to much power in first gear. Honestly this is why PUTC has such a bad outlook. They even gave the Raptor the king og off road on a score card that included extra tow hooks for the Raptor but gave no points to the Power Wagon for off road chops for having a factory winch, articulation disconnect, or 4 wheel lock. I guess after market winches are easy to add on and tow hooks are an impossible feat for an off road enthuisiast. How is it that PUTC is even a viable or legitimate article anymore. They are completely and utterly useless in these showdowns. Anyways keep looking and you will find more relevant articles such as TFL that rank the 365HP older EB King for pulling and there are other articles that put that same 3.5 ahead of the 6.2 and back then it was using regular fuel vs premium.

              And Kris S the Platinum has 480 torque now as an option not 470. But your stuck using premium. But premium is not more expensive to use over regular. Charlotte may explain this. I have had vehicles that get better mpg with premium because regular has a 10% loss due to fillers such as ethanol. So premium gives you extended range which almost balaces the cost per mile in my opinion. Be interesting to see what Charlotte comes out with on TFL Car. They hide her over there from all the truck perverts I think. Just a boys club over here.

    18. Some of you guys get mixed up between hp and tq.

      Well Ford has released the numbers for us to look at. I don’t see any real surprises​, except for the base v-6. Ford stated they wasn’t going to raise HP TQ over the 3.7 base v-6 and they did.
      Not sure why Ford didn’t go to straight 400hp on the 5.0? I don’t think 5 hp will make much of difference except on paper. And that might be worth more than 395 hp when it comes to sales.
      One thing I noticed on the 5.0 is the peak tq rpm is getting as low as my v-10. Which is pretty impressive with a v-8.

      The next set of numbers will be mpg’s for gas engines.

      I would not expect any numbers for the DSL not for at least 3 months.

    19. I’m not really brand loyal to trucks (I do lean GM for some reason at times), and I’ve mentioned previously in comments that I don’t own a truck and have never owned one, but am in the market for one – a mid-size.

      I really like what Ford is doing with their engines, that 2.7L would be perfect in a mid-sized truck with 325 HP @ 5,000 RPM and 400 LB-FT Torque @ 2,750 RPM. I tend to think that turbo is the way to go these days, considering the auto manufactures finally figured them out.

      Like I mentioned above, I lean GM, I mean, how bad-ass would a similar engine engine be in Chevrolet’s Colorado ZR2? I mean, 45% greater torque output at 1,250 RPM less than Chevrolet’s NA 3.6L V6, and comparatively to Ford’s NA 3.3L V6 max torque. Same goes with the HP ratings of both NA V6’s, Chevrolet at 308 @ 6,800 RPM and Ford 290 @ 6,500 RPM where Ford’s 2.7L V6 Turbo reaches peak a whole 1,800 and 1,500 RPM’s less than both NA engines, Chevrolet and Ford, respectively.

      By the time the auto manufacturers get close enough to my perfect truck, for me to drop the amount of coin being asked, I will most likely be able to purchase one outright, but maybe that isn’t a bad thing after all. It appears things are really heating up in the truck market, both FS and MS, and it may behoove me to sit back and see what the next 18-24 months offers. I can’t believe I would ever be researching trucks as I have always been a sedan person, but I guess personal needs change as one ages and I’d hate to jump into the market too early, especially if I don’t need to purchase at any specific time.

      1. A lot of us are hoping for a 2.7EB ranger. It would be a game changer in the mid-sized market. 325 hp is plenty in that sized truck but the extra torque will make it feel 10x better than the existing NA V6’s.

      2. Well at least GM would have the sense NOT to put the water pump inside the engine and drive it off the timing chain. AND evidently GM has seen the light when it comes to DOHC timing chains. They recently switch from a “silent chain” aka inverted tooth chain to a roller chain on their NA 3.6 V6 for 2017. Unfortunately, Ford has continued to stick with the cheaper stretch prone chain.

        I still prefer naturally aspirated V8’s. I don’t need horsepower bragging rights. The 5.7 Hemi is nice and simple, aka reliable, and gets the job done. Same goes for the GM pushrod V8 trucks I’ve owned. The 5.3 and 6.0 are both great engines and run for forever. I can’t say the same for the 3.5EB’s I’ve seen.

    20. So which is the best engine between the turbos and the 5.0? I’m not a hauler, I just like the get up and power when I need it.

      1. If the 5.0 was boosted it would of course destroy the 6 cylinder but it is not. The boosted 3.5 has superior power curves throughout its rpm range so I would say it is the superior motor especially in the Lariat with 400HP but you lose the great sound of the V8 which is a common complaint of many consumers including me.

        1. Rambro, The 2018 F-150 looks great to me. They made it much more aggressive looking and I like it. The King Ranch is especially nice. It seems Toyota is either gearing up for a new Tundra or they are just making some stupid decisions with killing off the Tundra Pro. Another rumor is that they are also not going to make the Tacoma Pro for 2018 as well. I hope that is not the case but if it is I may buy one just to have it.

          1. “They made it much more aggressive looking and I like it.”

            They made it look like a Chevy for 2018. The resemblance is spooky.

            1. @Brick, I don’t see the resemblance but then again you could remove the badges from most cars and the average car buyer couldn’t tell the difference. I just don’t see the Ford truck looking anything like the GM.

          2. Like you Moondog I am not willing to wait anymore. Im not going to wait past August-September. My Truck even with a months warranty left will sell like a hot cake and my warranty runs out in October. This is where i can choose to buy my Tacoma and sell it myself if the Dealer tries to play games. I know what my truck is worth and I will have to go to another dealer in order to play them against each other. There is so much room in value left in my Tacoma I will have to fight for it when I trade. They litarally will take your thousands of dollars earned in your truck if you let them. Toyota told me 29,000 and then I told them the Black Book Value was 34,500 so he said just a minute and talked to a manager and said they could do 32,000. I told them a dealer is selling my identical truck for 38,000 100 miles away and he said he could likely do better. Within 5 minutes I made 3000 dollars and they are still ripping me off. Black Book values are based on actual trade in prices. So to everyone out there make sure you are knowlegable. Most people at that dealer might just assume that there truck is 3 years old and only worth 29,000 on a trade and the dealer walks away with your 3-5000 dollars and buys beer for everyone.

            No I might go to Ford in a full size. I prefer the midsize but the engines are killing me. The power to weight ratio is still poor in the midsize but the full sized trucks are a hindrance to me as well as they are too big.

            1. Rambro, it pays to shop around and get every penny out of your trade. The fullsize trucks are advancing so fast whereas the midsize trucks are making at best baby steps. You really can’t compare them now. The only reason to buy midsize is for the size and in the case of Toyota off road ability.

            2. I am in truck percatory between full size for its engine and midsize for its convienyance of smaller size that suits me better. If i did not need an open box i could buy an SUV and get exactly what I want with almost limitless options. The lack of respect for midsize truck buyers is just deplorable.

            3. I understand completely Rambro. Honestly, the 2018 Ford with that 10 speed in its second year and even more power and torque across the board might make it too hard to pass on. They made the Ford look a lot better and I’m not sure anyone else is even close to them. The sales figures sure seem to say that too. Ford used to lack a bit in creature comforts in their trucks but it seems like they have more than made up for that and then some. I think you should drive that 3.5EB and you may be hooked. Those trucks drive much smaller than you think.

        2. Thank you. I’m not familiar with the rpms when it comes to HP and torque, and always wondered what it all meant when it has a certain HP at a certain RPM and how it’s worse or better than others. Also, when looking at a truck engine, what are you looking for? HP, torque,etc and why? Thanks

        3. I am a v8 guy. But buddy of mine has a 3.5 eco and when he gets on it inside the cab it actually sounds pretty damn cool…

    21. Do we know for sure the 5.0 is DI? Torque seems a bit low to have gone from Port fuel to DI and it didnt shift any lower in the RPMs than the 2017 5.0. It almost looks like a minor retune to bump the power slightly.

    22. 395/400 is good for a 5.0, but for adding direct injection and upping the compression, they should have seen more than 10hp and 13tq. I think they are holding it back for a future hp bump, or to not outshine the EcoBoost.

      1. I’m with you on this one. I think they are holding all of the engines back while waiting on the GM updates. I look for Ford to boost the hp and torque for all engines substantially when GM release their new trucks.

        1. You guys are right- torque could be higher with a different camshaft profile and compression, but you will almost certainly have it at a much higher rpm!

          I think most will prefer it coming in at a lower rpm like Ford seems to be targeting.

    23. Andre I was just on Fords website checking out the 2018 F150 and found there engine specs on must engines that you list are correct . The only one that is different is the V8, ford shows 385 HP and 397 lbs.ft of torque. Maybe you could double check with Ford to see if there information is correctly post or there E-mail to you was incorrect. Thanks Pete

        1. Anyone else notice that the 5.0 also gets PTWA in addition to direct injection? As far as I know that will be Ford’s first use of the spray bore process on a high volume production engine. They first introduced it on the 5.8L Trinity engine in the 2013 GT500 Mustang and most recently have been using it on the 5.2L Voodoo flat plane crank engine in the GT350 Mustang. Neither of those could be considered high volume.
          The process for the Trinity engine was done by an outside vendor (Honsel, I think) but the process for the Voodoo engine has been done since 2015 in-house at the Essex, Ontario plant. I assume the 5.0 Coyote will be done at Essex as well.
          A little surprising that they didn’t take advantage of this to bump the 5.0 displacement up a little as the spray in cylinder liner is much, much thinner than a traditional pressed-in steel liner.
          In my opinion this is really big news but has so far been pretty much ignored by the automotive press.

          1. Oops, the first production use by Ford of PTWA (Plasma Transfer Wire Arc) was in 2011 on the 5.4L GT500 engine, not in 2013 as I previously stated.

    24. That Platinum version will have more HP per LB than the Raptor UH OH!…..with smaller tires.

    25. I never had trouble with my Ford trucks’ durability or longevity, but they keep getting better. That makes you wanna trade ’em in for newer ones.

      1. Same here. I have never had a single issue out of any of my Ford trucks. Not one. It makes you wonder if people that call the EB engines “throw away” engines or that knock the best selling truck for over 40 years have ever driven one. I drive a Tacoma now because I like midsize trucks but if I ever went fullsize again it would be an easy choice!

    26. You would think if Ford can squeeze 395 horses out of its 5.0 then Ram, Toyota and Titan could push over 400-430 with their 5.7 and 5.6 v-8’s.
      Bigger cams, heads, tune, exhaust many ways to get more out of their bigger V8’s. I believe the new Tundra will push its 5.7 close to 420 in a couple years along with a 8 sp. Tranny. Ford has done their homework with cafe laws ahead. GM needs to wake up and Aluminize that GMC with that 6.2 it could be a beast. The King Ranch for me is the best looking truck Ford makes. Hard to beat my Nissan with 172K miles and original Alternator, water pump, and starter. I’ve never had an American car do that have you?

      1. LeftLane News is reporting that Chevy will NOT use aluminum in their next generation trucks. At least not in the beds. Someone caught a 2019 test mule caught in traffic and ran up to it and put a magnet on the bed and got a nice thunk. Stuck like glue. Chevy may be messing up here and I hope they have a slew of newer more efficient engines and not just rely on the 6.2 along with looser government regulations.

      1. Glad to hear your Ford treated you like mine did me. There are so many people basing the EB and this is good to hear. Happy driving.

        1. That’s just because those people don’t have a clue and know nothing about the engine. They believe fan boy internet propaganda and blow out of proportion those that do have issues with the engine. But no manufacturers engines are 100% fail proof. Especially compared to the numbers ford sells. I know several people and a small fleet company that had great luck with their ecoboost engine. The fleet company has 13 trucks and the one with the least amount of miles is just over 200K. The rest are in the high 200K range and several over 300K. A lot of it just comes down to proper maint.

    27. You ecoboost nay sayers don’t have any idea about longevity. Very happy with 2.7 ecoboost and MPG.

    28. I think a v6 In a full sized pickup is stupid. Full sized pickups should have big mean v8s, not this little baby crap.

    Comments are closed.