Trade gen 2 for gen 1??

[FordTechOne]

Does not compute.

Of course you can't understand, clearly you're a simpleton. You run your mouth spewing a bunch of ******** that you can't back up.

You claim the 3.5 has no low end torque, yet it's making over double the torque of the 6.2 at 2000 RPM.

Not sure why you are so fired up here. The 6.2 and 3.5 are both great engines.

 

[FordTechOne]

Interesting post. Is "surmising" considered to be evidence based? Because you have "surmised" many things incorrectly

In other words, reality "does not verify" your complaints

See what I did there?

Side note: if the 3.5 is so serviceable and reliable and since it makes more low end torque (*cough marketing nonsense*) and gets better fuel mileage than the 6.2, then why isn't it in the SD?

I haven't stated anything incorrectly. Feel free to try and correct the facts though troll.

All I see if you posting a bunch of ******** and smiley faces. It's not amusing, just sad.

The graph of the 3.5's torque curve has already been posted. It makes over double the torque of the 6.2 by 2000 RPM, and it beats it everywhere else in the powerband. The 3.5 also significantly gaps the 6.2 in Horsepower from 2,000 RPM on up.

Since you obviously don't understand engines or trucks in general, I'll try and explain to your simple mind why the 3.5 isn't used in the Super Duty. Super Duty is designed for loads well in excess of what an F-150 can carry or pull and at duty cycles nearing 100%, especially in commercial use. Meaning the most critical aspects of the powertrain are displacement and heat dissipation. When you're pulling 20,000lbs daily, large displacement, naturally aspirated gas engines excel. Diesels are a different animal all together, which I don't expect you to begin to understand.

 

[isis]

While I appreciate the facts we’ve been in shitpost and trolling territory for some time now. There’s quite a few memes about arguing on the Internet that could apply right now.

 

[FordTechOne]

That's the weight difference and the 10 speed. The Ecoboost just isn't a good performance engine. It has no low end torque and it runs out of air at the top end. It also heat soaks very badly.

It just has that weird mid range torque spike, no doubt for marketing purposes.

Not a good performance engine? Based on what, the meaningless ramblings of a know-nothing newb like yourself who doesn't even understand the concepts of basic engine performance? Once again, the graphs were already posted showing the Ecoboost's low end torque more than doubles the 6.2's, and continues to exceed it as RPM climbs.

The standard Ecoboost runs out of steam starting north of 5K RPM. It's a truck engine, not a performance engine. The H.O. pulls strongly to redline without falling on it's face, and continues to make more top end power than the 6.2 past 6,000 RPM.

Does it make you that angry that the Gen II Ecoboost out performs the Gen I 6.2 in every aspect? Do you have trouble sleeping at night? Obviously you do, and you're so disgruntled that you are compelled to post false information and make up ******** theories on an internet forum to console yourself. It's downright sad; you should probably seek mental health services.

 

[FordTechOne]

In all seriousness I have heard that the full race Gen 2 big turbo kit does put down some good numbers. At equivalent power levels (like stock for stock) the Gen 2 will of course be faster due to the weight difference and the 10 speed. I personally wouldn't trust the bottom end in a Gen 2, though. Only a matter of time before it lets go. Plus, given that the parts alone are $14-15k for the full kit, you would be well over half way to a Gen 3 Coyote / Whipple swap and a reliable 700 whp Gen 2 Raptor.

Once again, caught running your mouth with no data to back a word of it up.

The Gen II Eco is a 6 bolt main engine, meaning 4 main bolts and 2 cross bolts per cap. Same engine used in the Ford GT making 600HP out of the factory while passing all OEM durability testing.

Yet you claim "Only a matter of time before it lets go"?

You really need to get a life kid; you don't have the slightest clue what you're talking about and you're only making a fool of yourself on here.

 

[mchurch0211]

And yet you have no idea of what you are talking about you obviously need to do a little more research! I’m a machinist at Roush Yates racing here in Mooresville! We where contracted with ford performance to build multiple components in the gt engine ex the crank shaft in the gt ( we made for ford performance ) is much stronger than the 3.5 ho raptor engine also the tolerances are much more strict! The raptor engine will not hold up to the same degree we have tested

 

[mchurch0211]

Did you really think a raptor would get the same exact engine as a Gt lol

 

[Truckasaurus]

Doesn't matter at that point. A stock 6.2 will be about 6 lengths behind.

We are finally making progress

 

[Truckasaurus]

And yet you have no idea of what you are talking about you obviously need to do a little more research! I’m a machinist at Roush Yates racing here in Mooresville! We where contracted with ford performance to build multiple components in the gt engine ex the crank shaft in the gt ( we made for ford performance ) is much stronger than the 3.5 ho raptor engine also the tolerances are much more strict! The raptor engine will not hold up to the same degree we have tested

Did you really think a raptor would get the same exact engine as a Gt lol

View attachment 137441

No one ever believes me when I tell them this!

Now you should tell them what one of the actual engines that goes into a Ford GT race car costs.

 

[mchurch0211]

Ford shipped us bare blocks we assembled! They have different oiling systems gt engine is 4-Stage External Dry Sump Oil Pump, connecting rods, pistons, cams, intake manifolds and turbos! No where close to one another