Odarabla's infinite BS thread for the foreskinned (AKA Smack Down)
12 Second Club
iTrader: (3)
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 543
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wonder what car people from 50 years ago would think if we told them 400whp out of a 3.5L v6
9 Second Club
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Joliet,IL and Las Vegas 50/50
Posts: 1,230
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
Besides it's a compliment that you would compare a more base/general purpose motor against the top of the line prospect of GM's 1500 trucks. Flattering really.
Modern trucks like the new F150's and Silverados are not bad for what they are made for - impressive, really.
Comfortable, good power, lots of TQ, great MPG for a truck, nice interiors..but let's not pretend they are fast.
Comfortable, good power, lots of TQ, great MPG for a truck, nice interiors..but let's not pretend they are fast.
7 Second Club
My 2013 6.2L Silverado 4x4 ran a 15.34@90mph bone stock...lol.
12 Second Club
iTrader: (3)
10 Second Club
and the ecoboost is not fords base truck engine. sorry.
10 Second Club
actually the most fuel efficient trucks are still n\a.
7 Second Club
9 Second Club
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Joliet,IL and Las Vegas 50/50
Posts: 1,230
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
I promise i won't sell this one like I did the Bimmer. That was in illinois for what 2 weeks lol.
Wait?!?! so are you saying I can't has race truck?
FWIW tune only ecoboost trucks are hitting on average the mid to high 13's. Not bad for what it is anyway. Some of the Socal tunes are 13.3-13.5 tune only. The newest tune has been making great power as my link above suggests.
9 Second Club
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Joliet,IL and Las Vegas 50/50
Posts: 1,230
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
the ecoboosts are pretty slow stock. sure they wake up with a tune, but then the poor fuel economy gets even worse. the new 6.2 starts off already at nearly 60 more hp than the ecoboost and 40 more tq. wont be hard to beat.
and the ecoboost is not fords base truck engine. sorry.
and the ecoboost is not fords base truck engine. sorry.
I've noticed that you tend to pad numbers in your favor here and in other posts. One could only assume you do a similar 'padding', as it were, with a gym sock in your pants to impress the ladies or potential suitors. Now I am not here to judge you. I for one am glad you do such admirable things with such a level of pride and perseverance. It's like when I observe retarded children trying to do the simplest of chores or activities. I commend them on their indefatigability and find it sooo, so, inspiring. If a retarded child can struggle with the simplest of tasks like addition and subtraction, such as yourself, then what does that say about our compassionate society for supporting this behavior?
Ford Ecoboost 365hp 420tq
Ecotec3 6.2 420hp 450tq
RealDifference 55hp 30tq
HammerDerpfference 60hp 40tq
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Georgetown, Tx
Posts: 1,053
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't want to deflate the balloon any, but with my Ecoboost (running 87 ONLY, it's a company truck) it's only good for 1st and 2nd gear pulls to redline. If you hit 3rd WOT, it'll pull timing around 4k and that carries in ANY gear above that as well.
Again, this is factory tuned, and on 87. I'm sure 93 would cure this condition, but it exists.
Hammer, I appreciate the GM loyalty and I'm sure the new 6.2 will be nails, but AFM can be an issue. My last 5.3 had to have the cam, lifters, and pushrods all replaced @ 33k and was making lifter noise again when I turned it in at 95k. That said, my '07 and '04 with 5.3's performed flawlessly.
Again, this is factory tuned, and on 87. I'm sure 93 would cure this condition, but it exists.
Hammer, I appreciate the GM loyalty and I'm sure the new 6.2 will be nails, but AFM can be an issue. My last 5.3 had to have the cam, lifters, and pushrods all replaced @ 33k and was making lifter noise again when I turned it in at 95k. That said, my '07 and '04 with 5.3's performed flawlessly.
9 Second Club
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Joliet,IL and Las Vegas 50/50
Posts: 1,230
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
Don't want to deflate the balloon any, but with my Ecoboost (running 87 ONLY, it's a company truck) it's only good for 1st and 2nd gear pulls to redline. If you hit 3rd WOT, it'll pull timing around 4k and that carries in ANY gear above that as well.
Again, this is factory tuned, and on 87. I'm sure 93 would cure this condition, but it exists.
Hammer, I appreciate the GM loyalty and I'm sure the new 6.2 will be nails, but AFM can be an issue. My last 5.3 had to have the cam, lifters, and pushrods all replaced @ 33k and was making lifter noise again when I turned it in at 95k. That said, my '07 and '04 with 5.3's performed flawlessly.
Again, this is factory tuned, and on 87. I'm sure 93 would cure this condition, but it exists.
Hammer, I appreciate the GM loyalty and I'm sure the new 6.2 will be nails, but AFM can be an issue. My last 5.3 had to have the cam, lifters, and pushrods all replaced @ 33k and was making lifter noise again when I turned it in at 95k. That said, my '07 and '04 with 5.3's performed flawlessly.
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Georgetown, Tx
Posts: 1,053
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
True statement. The only reason it was on my mind was due to it pulling timing on me entering the highway on my way home. Today was a cool day, the high was only 86*.