This is all my opinion first off, though facts did contribute to it.

As some of you know, we had a killer F-150 King Ranch for a rental for our trip out west and I loved the thing. I liked the Ecoboost alootttt more than I thought I would even though I'd never have one because I love V8s too much and don't want a complex engine in my truck.

So I finally got a hold of the Denali and drove it thoroughly to compare and here are my findings:

6.2 is more refined, the torque is instant, and it sounds wayyyyy better. GM Corvette V8 for me in my SUV. That's the short version.

Long version? The Ecoboost has some SERIOUS pull but there is turbo lag which is annoying. There is zero waiting with this Denali. You don't have to "adjust your driving style and get used to it" which is kind of ridiculous to have to do in the Ford in my opinion. On the way to the airport to fly out I had to do a seriously fast move and the lag made it dangerous. That just wouldn't have happened here. Also, the ten speed transmission is better in this truck than the Ford (there's just always a lower gear to get more power--you can't catch this Denali flat footed--ever), which confuses me bc I think they're the same one.

The way this V8 responds to the gas it's no wonder it goes in the Vette (albeit tuned slightly differently). On a normal takeoff with a low RPM 1-2 upshift if you just tap the gas and the V8 responds instantly and revs right up like it's dying to do so. It feels frisky in a way that F-150 did NOT, even if that Ford lays down better numbers. It's about real world driving. They took some engine sound out of this gen Yukon which I would have preferred them not, but my god is this thing refined. The sounds and noises and shifts you hear or don't hear/feel are incredibly, incredibly luxurious. This 6.2 would go fine in a bona-fide luxury car and be right at home, at least if it drove and behaved as it does in this Denali. There is NOTHING broken here that needs to be fixed which is why this engine has been on the market for a decade unchanged. It's that good.

I do think the Ford had more torque while the GMC has a much better high RPM horsepower rush. GM torque ain't lacking though, it will pull the truck up to speed from near off idle quite impressively and seamlessly.

Reliability is a no brainer for me. For leasers and people who don't keep cars for the longhaul I'm sure Ecoboost would be fine. But I keep my cars forever. I'll never sell the cars I have now if that tells anyone anything. So when I'm 80 if I make it that long, the Mercedes and LS430 will still be in the garage. You can't get more simple than displacement and that's another reason I prefer the 6.2. Its whole reason for being is to get those huge powerful pistons moving, not to depend on exhaust gas forced back in to make the advertised power and torque. That's a pretty basic explanation, but accurate. Also why I love my much slower LX 5.7, it's tough and burly. It's quick enough but nothing like these two trucks I drove.

GM 6.2 wins for reasons stated above but the Ecoboost is a very, very impressive beast in its own right.

GM guys will buy GMs, Ford guys will buy Fords and that's that. However Ford would be really unwise to ever discontinue the V8. It's slower but still, real world driving versus numbers on a spreadsheet.

 

Comparing the two doesn't really make sense, Ford has a V8 too. EcoBoost is never going to feel like a V8.

 

But it's Ford's substitute, they started the whole thing. And why not? They're both the top engines in very expensive trucks... It's fun to compare and contrast. Ecoboost has power of a verrrrrrrrry potent V8--that's for sure-- it's the delivery that's not the greatest.

 

It makes total sense since ford markets it not only as a V8 alternative but a BETTER choice, every person I know IRL who has one prefers the V8 and everyone who had bought a new one who tried the V6 before went with an 8 in their new truck.

If you want more power than the 5.0 gives slap a supercharger on it, it's 50 state legal and keeps the warranty as well. Then it's zero contest vs the 6 lol!

 

Top engine is relative. Yes its an option, but its an option for people who are concerned about fuel economy which is a lot of people. Anybody who wants that isn't going to cross shop the EcoBoost with the 6.2L V8 in the GM trucks, they're going to compare the 5.0 in the F150.

 

The eco boost is worse real world on MPG, people who care about MPG avoid it lol!

 

This is why people get the EcoBoost, its $100 a month cheaper to fuel than the 6.2 in the GM:


:

 

Thats just not possible, compared to the 5.0 V8 possibly, but not compared to the GM 6.2.

 

Fuel economy is no better in the Ford with EB. At least nothing worth mentioning. My average was 12.1 MPG when I brought it back after 8 days.

 

EPA testing is nothing like real world driving.

 

Yet all the cars I have owned deliver pretty close to the EPA mileage. The point is showing the differences. the 6.2 in the GM trucks is considerably less fuel efficient than either the EB or the 5.0 in the Ford, AND it requires premium fuel. Thats just a fact.

Whether or not the EB delivers on fuel economy is beside the point, its marketed towards people who want better fuel economy. I would get the V8, and if the F150 you drove had the V8 your engine comparison would have been more favorable. Somebody interested in the EB isn't going to also be looking at the 6.2 in the GM trucks. Thats the issue with your comparison. You felt that way because you like V8s and the attributes of a V8 will always win with you. Anybody who feels like you do would never consider buying an EB F150, thats why the comparison really doesn't make sense.

 

No it isn't. Real world it uses more fuel.

 

You live in a city not out where trucks are commonly used as cars.

There is a major difference, for example I'm getting 28.5 average in my 4.0 and 22.5 in my W12 when in theory that's "impossible" according to the EPA. The VW is getting it's sticker highway MPG as its average, when nearly no driving is done in a stop and go or low speed the ecoboosts get their asses kicked by the V8s



Here is another example of how off the EPA is, this is the total miles and MPG my dad has put on the L405 5.0 super and it's averaging 2.5 mpg OVER its highway rating on oil that made it lose 1.5 already. When we first got it he was getting 23 for two tanks work before I switched the oil type

 

If you don't like my "unfavorable" comparisons in threads you don't have to read them. There is no "issue" with my comparison. If you want the "best" engines in a Ford or Chevy, those are it.

You can have Eco or Boost, you can't have both. It got terrible gas mileage and a lot of that was highway.

It's like Jeep trying to market the Grand Wagoneer dropping the Hemi V8, with this new I-6... they're trying to act like it's significantly more fuel efficient now with the new engine. It's not.

Also, turbo lag is a legit complaint. It doesn't exist in the GMC. F-150 takes a second to wake up when you prod it. I dislike that, V8 lover or not.

 

Yep. Same here, I get 20 MPG in my LX570 between 70-80. It's rated for 17. V8s when relaxed often overdeliver. Hence the 5.3L that beat the Chevy turbo 4 by 3mpg in real world interstate driving.