where are all the ecoboost swaps?


retep88

Active member
Joined
Apr 7, 2009
Messages
187
Reaction score
41
Points
28
Location
Dubuque, Iowa
Vehicle Year
2000
2016
Make / Model
Ford
Chevy
Engine Size
2.5L
Transmission
Manual
If you google "ecoboost swaps", a majority of what you will find is the 2.0L or the 2.3L ecoboost being put into mustangs or some other small car. If you get specific and search for "3.5L ecoboost swaps" it narrows the results down to a hand full of older f100's and a mustang? I know this is a ranger focused forum, but that is why I am posting this in General Discussions. The 3.5L Block itself fits into rangers nicely, the turbos and the plumping that goes along with it are what the swap a paaaaain, but it's not impossible. No worse then any other modular V8 swap.

So why isn't the swap more popular? In not just rangers, but anything. Ford has made a ton of these engines, they aren't exactly "cheap" engines from a salvage yard, but they aren't unobtainium either.

If I had to guess (and we are sticking to Ford engines here), it's because of the Coyote. Who wants a turbo v6 when for the same money you can get a NA v8? The coyote actually has a real aftermarket as well. If you want ecoboost stuff, you are looking at go fast parts for F150's or Taurus SHO's and most of the parts are meant for the larger engine bays of the F150.

I think this is a shame. Every time I talk to someone who has one in an F150, they tell me how much fun the engine is and how much they like it (they also say am crazy for putting one in a ranger :LOL: ). This would be a fun engine in an old bronco, mustang, F100, or maybe a pinto and it doesn't get any love.
 


Rock Auto 5% Discount Code: 248EE46702D889 Expires: October 1, 2019

85_Ranger4x4

Forum Staff Member
Forum Moderator
Article Contributor
OTOTM Winner
TRS Banner 2010-2011
TRS 20th Anniversary
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
20,063
Reaction score
1,014
Points
113
Location
SW Iowa
Vehicle Year
1985
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Size
5.0
Transmission
Manual
Modular swaps are not overly common in Rangers either. Pushrod engines are a much more compact package... it is a shame but that is the way it is.
 

Dirtman

Well-known member
EMT / Paramedic
Joined
May 28, 2018
Messages
2,873
Reaction score
1,060
Points
113
Location
Over there --->
Vehicle Year
2009
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Type
2.3 (4 Cylinder)
Engine Size
466.63 teaspoons.
Transmission
Automatic
2WD / 4WD
2WD
Tire Size
So friggin big!
My credo
Give me money.
Your neat.
 

rusty ol ranger

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 22, 2007
Messages
4,199
Reaction score
422
Points
83
Location
Michigan
Vehicle Year
1987
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Type
2.9 V6
Engine Size
2.9L
Transmission
Manual
2WD / 4WD
2WD
My credo
A legend to the old man, a hero to the child...
I test drove a 2013 ecoboost a few months ago in an F150, frankly when i go truck shopping in a few months ill be looking for 5.0s. Drove both of them and the EB isnt all that impressive next to the 5.0 IMO.

What would be really interesting is a 7.3 godzilla shoved in a ranger. Supposdly someone did it for SEMA in a foxbody, so i wouldnt think a ranger is to far out of the question.
 

retep88

Active member
Joined
Apr 7, 2009
Messages
187
Reaction score
41
Points
28
Location
Dubuque, Iowa
Vehicle Year
2000
2016
Make / Model
Ford
Chevy
Engine Size
2.5L
Transmission
Manual
I am interested in the 7.3 as well, but I am trying not to get to excited about it. It sounds like a lazy high displacement engine for low-end torque. I think it might take a couple of years before the aftermarket has figured out how to make them race engines?

I will admit there is more potential in the 5.0. From what I have seen of the ecoBoost, they fall apart around 500 hp because of their open deck design. But they are a compact engine, sort of, Turbos get in a way some times, but they are able to get 400 hp without too many problems. If there was a better market for the ecoboost, specifically exhaust manifolds that let you move the turbos around, they could fit into a lot of applications pretty easily?

Maybe I am just fanboying over the engine?
 

rusty ol ranger

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 22, 2007
Messages
4,199
Reaction score
422
Points
83
Location
Michigan
Vehicle Year
1987
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Type
2.9 V6
Engine Size
2.9L
Transmission
Manual
2WD / 4WD
2WD
My credo
A legend to the old man, a hero to the child...
I am interested in the 7.3 as well, but I am trying not to get to excited about it. It sounds like a lazy high displacement engine for low-end torque. I think it might take a couple of years before the aftermarket has figured out how to make them race engines?

I will admit there is more potential in the 5.0. From what I have seen of the ecoBoost, they fall apart around 500 hp because of their open deck design. But they are a compact engine, sort of, Turbos get in a way some times, but they are able to get 400 hp without too many problems. If there was a better market for the ecoboost, specifically exhaust manifolds that let you move the turbos around, they could fit into a lot of applications pretty easily?

Maybe I am just fanboying over the engine?
I went nuts over the new 7.3 just because its an pushrod large cube V8 in the world of twin cam high revving horseshit thats out there now.

I wish they woulda bumped it up just a bit bigger though to 7.5L/460CID just for nostalga purposes like they did the 5.0.

Either way, im not looking for build potential with the 5.0, but after driving both the ecoboost seems to "all or nothing" when youre driving. The 5.0 has that smooth power delivery im more accustomef to. Plus it didnt feel any different when you nailed it.

That coupled with the fact ive seen the ecoboost reffered to as "ecoboom" in more then a few places, tells me to stay awa
 

PetroleumJunkie412

2.9l Aficionado
Supporting Member
TRS 20th Anniversary
Joined
Oct 31, 2018
Messages
1,530
Reaction score
1,047
Points
113
Location
Pittsburgh, PA
Vehicle Year
1988
Make / Model
Ranger
Engine Type
2.9 V6
Transmission
Manual
2WD / 4WD
4WD
I went nuts over the new 7.3 just because its an pushrod large cube V8 in the world of twin cam high revving horseshit thats out there now.
Hey now... I like high revving horseshit...

🖕🏿
 

fastpakr

Forum Staff Member
Forum Moderator
U.S. Military - Veteran
V8 Engine Swap
TRS 20th Anniversary
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
4,712
Reaction score
217
Points
63
Location
Roanoke, VA
Vehicle Year
1999
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Type
V8
Engine Size
5.0
Transmission
Automatic
2WD / 4WD
4WD
Tire Size
285/75-16
To be clear, are you implying that the ecoboost is the high revving alternative to the coyote 5.0?
 

retep88

Active member
Joined
Apr 7, 2009
Messages
187
Reaction score
41
Points
28
Location
Dubuque, Iowa
Vehicle Year
2000
2016
Make / Model
Ford
Chevy
Engine Size
2.5L
Transmission
Manual
The torque curves I have seen of the ecoboost show peak torque pretty low in the RPM range. But it's going to be one of those things where you have nothing until the turbos come on boost, then they will hit you in the rear. I daily a Colorado with the 4 cylinder Duramax (neat engine, wrong audience :icon_thumby:) and the turbo lag is noticeable. You have to change how you drive to account for it. If I am in a hurry, I will normally use my left foot for the brake to compensate for the time it takes for the turbo to spool up when I go to accelerate.
 

rusty ol ranger

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 22, 2007
Messages
4,199
Reaction score
422
Points
83
Location
Michigan
Vehicle Year
1987
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Type
2.9 V6
Engine Size
2.9L
Transmission
Manual
2WD / 4WD
2WD
My credo
A legend to the old man, a hero to the child...
To be clear, are you implying that the ecoboost is the high revving alternative to the coyote 5.0?
No i was reffering more to the gassers they shove into the 3/4 and 1 tons.
The torque curves I have seen of the ecoboost show peak torque pretty low in the RPM range. But it's going to be one of those things where you have nothing until the turbos come on boost, then they will hit you in the rear. I daily a Colorado with the 4 cylinder Duramax (neat engine, wrong audience :icon_thumby:) and the turbo lag is noticeable. You have to change how you drive to account for it. If I am in a hurry, I will normally use my left foot for the brake to compensate for the time it takes for the turbo to spool up when I go to accelerate.
That was the issue i had with the eco. Its real jerky/spooly and i wouldnt like that on a semi daily basis.
 

fastpakr

Forum Staff Member
Forum Moderator
U.S. Military - Veteran
V8 Engine Swap
TRS 20th Anniversary
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Messages
4,712
Reaction score
217
Points
63
Location
Roanoke, VA
Vehicle Year
1999
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Type
V8
Engine Size
5.0
Transmission
Automatic
2WD / 4WD
4WD
Tire Size
285/75-16
Interesting. Other than a split second of lag off idle, I didn't notice anything with the 2.3 eco in the new Ranger. It pulls hard and smooth from low RPM on up. Very impressive from an engine that size. More motivation than any older Ranger by a large margin.
 

rusty ol ranger

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 22, 2007
Messages
4,199
Reaction score
422
Points
83
Location
Michigan
Vehicle Year
1987
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Type
2.9 V6
Engine Size
2.9L
Transmission
Manual
2WD / 4WD
2WD
My credo
A legend to the old man, a hero to the child...
Interesting. Other than a split second of lag off idle, I didn't notice anything with the 2.3 eco in the new Ranger. It pulls hard and smooth from low RPM on up. Very impressive from an engine that size. More motivation than any older Ranger by a large margin.
Obviously people like them because they outsell the 5.0 by quite a bit. But i dont know man, just aint for me.

Granted this was just an unladen test drive, so towing maybe a different story. But with like a 4.12:1 1st in the 6 speed and 3.73s im not to worried about the 5.0 doing what i need it to do.

I guess losing 2 gears and pulling 4500rpm up hills is something ill just haveta get used to.

Plus, according to the little screen the 5.0 was only averaging 1mpg less then the EB.
 

ford4wd08

Active member
Joined
Nov 12, 2018
Messages
200
Reaction score
43
Points
28
Location
Alcoa, TN
Engine Type
2.8 V6
Transmission
Automatic
2WD / 4WD
4WD
Obviously people like them because they outsell the 5.0 by quite a bit. But i dont know man, just aint for me.

Granted this was just an unladen test drive, so towing maybe a different story. But with like a 4.12:1 1st in the 6 speed and 3.73s im not to worried about the 5.0 doing what i need it to do.

I guess losing 2 gears and pulling 4500rpm up hills is something ill just haveta get used to.

Plus, according to the little screen the 5.0 was only averaging 1mpg less then the EB.
What EcoBoost did you test drive by chance? I drove the 5.0 and my current EcoBoost and the EcoBoost blew the 5.0 away at lower RPM.
 

rusty ol ranger

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 22, 2007
Messages
4,199
Reaction score
422
Points
83
Location
Michigan
Vehicle Year
1987
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Type
2.9 V6
Engine Size
2.9L
Transmission
Manual
2WD / 4WD
2WD
My credo
A legend to the old man, a hero to the child...
What EcoBoost did you test drive by chance? I drove the 5.0 and my current EcoBoost and the EcoBoost blew the 5.0 away at lower RPM.
It was a 2013 F150.

I thought maybe it was just in my head and my bias toward V8s, but then i seen this...

.

Granted those are newer then the ones i drove, but still id think the differences would be close to the same. The EB is quicker but not by much. Probably wouldnt even notice on a butt dyno.
 


Top