Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com
 
Phastek Performance
Go Back   Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com > Members Area > General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-16-2014, 08:35 PM   #71
Ecofx86
 
Ecofx86's Avatar
 
Drives: 2017 Ram 1500 4x4
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by el ess A View Post
Eco-turd troll....run!!!! hahahaa!



Looks like Chevy having trouble keeping up lol and that was one of my worst runs that day.



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk
Ecofx86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2014, 08:38 PM   #72
DDoug
 
DDoug's Avatar
 
Drives: '13 Inferno Orange ZL1 Convertible
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: The 313
Posts: 437
what the heck happened here?

Even Mark Reuss said just this week at the auto show that the Chevy had a 200 lb advantage on the old F-150.

So a 500 lb advantage with the new F-150 truck.

You guys think the engines are the big news? You guys totally miss the point.

No bias here, I make Rams and have owned three of them. Our Ram, even with the new 3.0 litre diesel, is suddenly 3+ years behind in design of their most dominating competitor. That Sucks!

Ford worked with a supplier (forget who, it is on the 'net somewhere) and built a $1 billion factory in NY to supply the needed Aluminum. Cost wise, Ford says it's $1000 more to make, but prices will remain the same. How? Ever see how much rebate is on trucks? Won't be too hard.

Ford reps. also made a valid point that $1000 extra for the Aluminum is still cheaper than the up charge for a more fuel efficient diesel engine would cost.

OK, back to the silly bickering over engines.
DDoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2014, 08:40 PM   #73
HeavyIOM
 
HeavyIOM's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 SS, 2000 Pontiac Formula
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Missouri
Posts: 509
Quote:
Originally Posted by big hammer View Post
isn't the ecoboost and gm's new 6.2 rated very similar for fuel economy? but the 6.2 blows it away in power and rated towing capacity.

in the 2v's they would blow the plugs right out of the heads. in the 3v's they would seize in solid.

Sure it does, but what kind of power, and FE do you think the Ecoboost will get for 2015 now that it's the big dog in fords lineup. I would hope the brand new top dog engine would make more power and achieve decent FE compared to a 4 year old motor lol.

I have had plenty of 2v with 200K+ miles and have never had or heard of someone blowing a plug through the head.


Quote:
Originally Posted by big hammer View Post
the 5.0 is hands down a better engine than the ecoboost.
Having plenty of experience with both I'm going to strongly disagree. I prefer the 5.0 simply because I'm a V8 kind of guy. If the Ecoboost sounded like the 5.0 it would be my choice because it is better in every way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by big hammer View Post
now we know not to take anything you said here seriously. the old 6.2 chevy will smatter an ecoboost. they're slow.
From your post I'm beginning to think you shouldn't be taken seriously, your clearly stating opinions based on blind fanboyism. Have you ever even drove an Ecoboost or 5.0 F150? I'm going to guess no your info is just coming from magazines and the web.

I will admit I am a fan of the F150 but I give GM credit for finally making some competitive trucks. Let's face it there last model of trucks were garbage compared to the competition from Ram and Ford. Not saying as a whole but performance and feature wise.







Quote:
Originally Posted by FenwickHockey65 View Post
Except it's not, since the EPA rating for the 5.3L is 23 and the EcoBoost is 22. So advertise away.

I would rather give up the 1MPG that honestly probably won't even be noticed in real world milage, for the added power the Ecoboost offers. I don't have any experience with the new 5.3, but the old 5.3 was rated at 21 and the closest I could ever get to that was 18 on long straight road at 70 from an underpowered engine.

I'm not trying to dog the new 5.3 seems like a decent engine and it's FE rating is nice. And the new 6.2 is down right awesome!

The people saying the Ecoboost is a POS and slow and can't tow blah blah are annoying as most have probably never even sat in one lol... The Ecoboost was meant to target the 5.3 not the 6.2 The 5.0 was meant to target the old 4.8, and the 6.2's were meant to go head to head. So yes the 6.2 out powers the the Ecoboost as it should.

Now that the 3.5 Ecoboost is the big dog in fords lineup and has the smaller Ecoboost engine to make up for FE I see ford adding more power and aggressive tuning to the Ecoboost. This is just speculation on my part though I'm still hoping Ford still has the next gen 6.2 in development lol
HeavyIOM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2014, 08:50 PM   #74
KMPrenger


 
KMPrenger's Avatar
 
Drives: 16 Camaro SS, 15 Colorado
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Jefferson City, Missouri
Posts: 13,941
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ecofx86 View Post
Lol that's not real world. .You taking about 1 mpg really? 5.3 is no where in the class of an ecoboost. I owned 5.3 chevys.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk
The new 5.3 is NOTHING like the old 5.3. The fact that you seem to act like it is just points to your utter ignorance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ecofx86 View Post
U not lookING at torque. Try high 400 on a tuned ecoboost

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk
So now you talking MODDED? Again...completely ridiculous that your arguing a modded engine versus a stock engine. When you start modding, all rules go out the window.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ecofx86 View Post
55 more than mine lol Not my ecoboost . . What u ran at the track? So you telling me that an ecoboost can't tow 12k?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk
My God...why are you here? Sure you claim to like the 5th gen, but you've been nothing but a pest here on pretty much every post of yours I've ever read.

Keep it up and you won't last long here.
__________________
2016 Camaro 1SS - 8-speed - NPP - Black bowties
2010 Camaro 1LT V6 (Sold. I will miss her!)
KMPrenger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-16-2014, 09:43 PM   #75
Ecofx86
 
Ecofx86's Avatar
 
Drives: 2017 Ram 1500 4x4
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 58
Keep what up? Last time I checked this is f150 thread? If you don't like my view on this subject, I don't know what to tell you. Just so you know I only have 900 bucks in mods lol. That's full exhaust and a tune. Running low 13s. Just saying buddy, it doesn't take much to get these ecoboost trucks hauling ass.

As for the 5th gen comment, I came here to gather information on them. I do plan on buying one for my wife. Also owned a few 4th camaros myself.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk
Ecofx86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2014, 07:26 AM   #76
MMC

 
MMC's Avatar
 
Drives: CGM 2SS/RS, 1987 & 2014 Silverado
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Spencerport, NY
Posts: 1,012
My 2014 Silverado with the 5.3 got a best 50 mile average economy of 24.9 mpg. more than the EPA rating, this is a regular cab Z71 4x4.
My average over the life of the truck is 19.7, mostly urban driving.
__________________
MMC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2014, 08:49 AM   #77
Russo
Unofficial Glass Tech
 
Russo's Avatar
 
Drives: 2014 Ford F150 FX2
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Raceland, LA
Posts: 1,376
Send a message via Yahoo to Russo
Quote:
Originally Posted by MMC View Post
My 2014 Silverado with the 5.3 got a best 50 mile average economy of 24.9 mpg. more than the EPA rating, this is a regular cab Z71 4x4.
My average over the life of the truck is 19.7, mostly urban driving.
with my Ecoboost, if I keep it under 65 mph it'll get 22mpg all day long.. that's with about 200 lbs of stuff in the bed, 22s, and random stuff on the inside..

I gained at least 1 mpg with the Livernois tune..
Russo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2014, 08:59 AM   #78
shaffe


 
Drives: 21 Bronco
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Carol Stream
Posts: 6,023
Quote:
Originally Posted by willhe64 View Post
You are the one full of BS.

6.2 chevy towing capacity 12,000 lbs.
Ecoboost towing capacity 9860 lbs.

You realize the 6.2 has 55 more horses than your ecoboost right?
Actually the ecoboost can tow 11,300 pounds in the right cab/bed/drive/axle config
shaffe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2014, 01:15 PM   #79
khell86
 
Drives: 2012 Ford Focus
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Texas
Posts: 394


The Ecoboost managed to beat Chevy's new 6.2L by a minute up the climb. GM sacrificed low end grunt for the MPGs. Look at the available rear end gears for the 6.2L.
khell86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2014, 01:30 PM   #80
Apex Motorsports
 
Apex Motorsports's Avatar
 
Drives: 2000 Camaro SS
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Louisville, Ky.
Posts: 25,179
The aluminum body is probably going to be hell on insurance rates.

Don't Put Aluminum In My F-150
Apex Motorsports is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2014, 02:22 PM   #81
shaffe


 
Drives: 21 Bronco
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Carol Stream
Posts: 6,023
I don't care what any body says, that 6.2 Sounds beautiful lol.

That was a pretty interesting video, also just watched the F-150 video as well. The turbos helped the F-150 stay at a higher speed, but it was quite a bit thirstier. Also the GM engine braking worked a lot better.
shaffe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2014, 02:37 PM   #82
Russo
Unofficial Glass Tech
 
Russo's Avatar
 
Drives: 2014 Ford F150 FX2
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Raceland, LA
Posts: 1,376
Send a message via Yahoo to Russo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=P...yer_detailpage
Russo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2014, 03:42 PM   #83
v6sonoma


 
v6sonoma's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 SS RS
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Providence, RI
Posts: 8,107
Well one thing is for sure. The sound of any V8 will always be better then the sound of any V6.
__________________

Mods: BBK Intake, BBK LT's and High Flow Cats, Corsa Cat-back exhaust, Hurst short throw shifter, SLP skip-shift eliminator.

7/1/09 Placed order for IOM/IO int/ SS/RS 6M
9/26/09 Took delivery!
v6sonoma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-17-2014, 04:27 PM   #84
shank0668


 
shank0668's Avatar
 
Drives: '14 LML/'06 LJ/'76 Trans Am
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Ohio
Posts: 8,438
Hopefully the paint won't bubble like the old Expeditions aluminum hoods. Anyone who thinks a pre 2014 5.3 is like a 2014 5.3 really needs to drive a 14.
shank0668 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:00 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.