ConcernedCarOwner Posted March 2, 2012 Report Share Posted March 2, 2012 I JUST PURCHASED A 2012 FORD EDGE 3.5 V6 - SEL. NOW, I'M CONCERNED THAT I SHOULD HAVE PURCHASED THE 2.0 ECOBOOST INSTEAD. IS THERE ANY DIFFERENCE IN THE FEEL OF THE RIDE, AND IS THE ECOBOOST TRULY GETTING THAT MUCH BETTER GAS MILEAGE? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FordGuru Posted March 2, 2012 Report Share Posted March 2, 2012 I JUST PURCHASED A 2012 FORD EDGE 3.5 V6 - SEL. NOW, I'M CONCERNED THAT I SHOULD HAVE PURCHASED THE 2.0 ECOBOOST INSTEAD. IS THERE ANY DIFFERENCE IN THE FEEL OF THE RIDE, AND IS THE ECOBOOST TRULY GETTING THAT MUCH BETTER GAS MILEAGE? ride difference, no. they ride exactly the same as the platforms are the same and the ecoboosts weight isnt far enough off from the 3.5's to cause any difference in front end feel. fuel economy, its too early to report as there are no 2.0's with more than 15,000 miles on them yet. Too many people make the mistake of calculating fuel economy estimates before the vehicle is broke in and all of the powertrain and drivetrain components have settled in together. true fuel economy doesn't start showing up till ususally around or after 15,000 miles on the odometer. power wise, the 2.0 (by the seat of the pants dyno) feels almost as strong as its v6 counterpart. at times the acceleration feels better in the 2.0 once you've overcome the turbo lag. it's really quite zippy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timf Posted March 2, 2012 Report Share Posted March 2, 2012 I test drove both. Going in I was planning on purchasing the EcoBoost, but I ended up switching to the V6. The EcoBoost had a few quirks about it. It didn't sound as powerful (not surprisingly), and there were a couple times where it felt clunky or had a hard shift. I think the 2.0L should work well in the Escape, but the Edge (and Explorer) would be better served by something along the lines of 2.5L-2.7L. On my lease the standard engine saves me about $15 a month over the EcoBoost, when compared with the potential gas savings makes it essentially a wash. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ConcernedCarOwner Posted March 2, 2012 Author Report Share Posted March 2, 2012 I test drove both. Going in I was planning on purchasing the EcoBoost, but I ended up switching to the V6. The EcoBoost had a few quirks about it. It didn't sound as powerful (not surprisingly), and there were a couple times where it felt clunky or had a hard shift. I think the 2.0L should work well in the Escape, but the Edge (and Explorer) would be better served by something along the lines of 2.5L-2.7L. On my lease the standard engine saves me about $15 a month over the EcoBoost, when compared with the potential gas savings makes it essentially a wash. Thank you for the reply. I have been kicking myself, thinking maybe I made a mistake, especially with gas prices on the rise. I went into the dealership wanting a v6, so I did not even drive the ecoboost. Glad to hear from someone who has driven both and still decided on the v6. I am very conservative with my driving habits, so I have been averaging 23-25 mpg with the v6, with quite a bit of city driving. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
granto Posted April 5, 2012 Report Share Posted April 5, 2012 Thank you for the reply. I have been kicking myself, thinking maybe I made a mistake, especially with gas prices on the rise. I went into the dealership wanting a v6, so I did not even drive the ecoboost. Glad to hear from someone who has driven both and still decided on the v6. I am very conservative with my driving habits, so I have been averaging 23-25 mpg with the v6, with quite a bit of city driving. I'm also debating the V6 and Ecoboost.... Is your Edge AWD? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
e350 coupe Posted April 5, 2012 Report Share Posted April 5, 2012 I have about 6500 miles on the odometer. So far only engine mod is to switch to a K&N filter. I did an oil change at dealer which is regular 5w-30 oil. Air pressure upped from 35psi factory to 37 psi, give or take a tenth of a psi. In the city I am honestly getting 25-28 US MPG on regular gas, or upwards of 29.2 to 30 US MPG on premium. I live in a very hilly city where there is a large hill to get home and one hill is a steep upgrade of 23 degree's. On the highway I am getting 30.8 to 31.6 US MPG on regular gas, on premium gas I am averaging 36.8 to 37.2 US MPG. This is a calculation determined from Blaine to Bellingham and back, with and average speed of 59-61 mp/h. (cruise control activated) It would be interesting to see other users info as I am considering a 2013 MKX with the 3.7 engine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
us11csalyer Posted April 5, 2012 Report Share Posted April 5, 2012 A little off topic but has anyone heard if Ford might make a Edge with the v6 eco boost? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted April 5, 2012 Report Share Posted April 5, 2012 A little off topic but has anyone heard if Ford might make a Edge with the v6 eco boost? I'd say it's doubtful. The Explorer's original platform had to be heavily modified to handle the torque of the 3.5L ecoboost when it first arrived in the Taurus and Flex. Word is the current Edge platform is due to be replaced soon so it's doubtful they'd spend the money to beef up the old one. But it is possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Limited59 Posted April 5, 2012 Report Share Posted April 5, 2012 Personally, I think we'll be lucky to even have a V6 as an option in the next generation Edge. Those of us who prefer six cylinders may be forced to the Lincoln MKX for 2014. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
us11csalyer Posted April 6, 2012 Report Share Posted April 6, 2012 Personally, I think we'll be lucky to even have a V6 as an option in the next generation Edge. Those of us who prefer six cylinders may be forced to the Lincoln MKX for 2014. I love the 3.5. IMO way better then some 2.0 with turbo lag. Now if they offered a 2.4 with the turbo that is actually two turbos then I'd be all over it. Small turbo for low end and larger turbo for mid-high. What is the point in having a tow package on a 2.0 with little to no boost at low RPMs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Outrage Posted April 19, 2012 Report Share Posted April 19, 2012 Let's do the math: 3.5 liter V6: 15,000 miles / 22 MPG = 682 gallons 682 gallons * $4.00 = $2,728 per year 682 gallons * $5.00 = $3,410 per year 682 gallons * $8.00 = $5,456 per year 2.0 liter turbo I4: 15,000 miles / 24 MPG = 625 gallons 625 gallons * $4.00 = $2,500 per year 625 gallons * $5.00 = $3,125 per year 625 gallons * $8.00 = $5,000 per year Assuming the 2.0 turbo I4 has a $1,000 price premium: @ $4.00 per gallon: $2,728 - $2,500 = $228 per year (break even @ 4.39 years) @ $5.00 per gallon: $3,410 - $3,125 = $285 per year (break even @ 3.51 years) @ $8.00 per gallon: $5,456 - $5,000 = $456 per year (break even @ 2.19 years) The fuel cost savings of the EcoBoost engine is greatly offset by its higher premium price. Even at $8.00 a gallon it would take over two years just to break even. It would only be from that point to the vehicle's sale that any savings would be realized. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NCHeel Posted April 19, 2012 Report Share Posted April 19, 2012 The fuel cost savings of the EcoBoost engine is greatly offset by its higher premium price. Even at $8.00 a gallon it would take over two years just to break even. It would only be from that point to the vehicle's sale that any savings would be realized. The main reason I didn't even bother test driving an EcoBoost. Plus, even brand new I am getting way better mileage than my old MDX. Plus, the Edge uses regular gas. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cozzy Posted June 19, 2012 Report Share Posted June 19, 2012 In May when I ordered my 2013 Edge 2.0L EcoBoost, Ford Canada was offering free delivery for the EcoBoost but charging the usual $1500 delivery fee for the 3.5L, so even though the EcoBoost is a $1000 upgrade, I saved $500 by ordering the EcoBoost. I much preferred the 2.0L EcoBoost over the 3.5L and would have ordered it anyways, so it was win win for me. I'll save fuel costs and I'm $500 in the black even before I start driving it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACLazer Posted September 23, 2012 Report Share Posted September 23, 2012 (edited) I work at a Ford Dealer, but we can only sell Big Trucks, Cross Overs, SUV's, no cars at all. I just sold my 2008 SEL that I purchased new. It had 45k on the clock. I ordered a 2013 Limited with an EcoBoost. It arrived at the dealership, and I drove it home, overnight one night. I told the Sales Mgr to Dealer Trade it away, and I ordered a 2013 with a 3.5. It just came in a week ago, and I love it. MPG difference is not worth it to me. Edit: I know the EcoBoost Guys are going to blast me, but thats okay Edited September 23, 2012 by ACLazer 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JOEHIO Posted September 23, 2012 Report Share Posted September 23, 2012 You won't get blasted, to each his own. It'slike talking hybrid, how much driving will you have to do to re-coop the extra cost? Different strokes for different folks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott011422 Posted September 24, 2012 Report Share Posted September 24, 2012 Everyone is different. Although, I just can't believe that people are finding the Ecoboost lacking. Before purchasing our 2013, I had the wife test both for herself, Being she didn't believe a 2.0 would out perform the 3.5 with two less cylinders. She thought the Eco was a much hotter engine. If she was to bad mouth anything, it was that without traction control, anything over 50% throttle made the Eco almost uncontrollable. Even with both of us in it, the Eco will break the tires with traction off at 30 mph. The 3.5 could barely squeak them from a stop. True that you can not tow with the Eco or get AWD, we thought we would be too disappointed staying with the 3.5. Couldn't be happier with the Eco!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACLazer Posted October 1, 2012 Report Share Posted October 1, 2012 (edited) Scott, I did give the Eco a fair shot, maybe the V6 Eco would be in my garage if they would put them in there. My 08 SEL had the V6, and I drove it for almost 5 years, I guess I just got used to that. Engine Specs: 3.5 V-6 Horsepower (SAE net @ rpm) 285 @ 6,500 Torque (lb.-ft @ rpm) 253 @ 4,000 Compression ratio 10.8:1 2.0 Eco 4 Cyl Horsepower (SAE net @ rpm) 240 @ 5,500 Torque (lb.-ft. @ rpm) 270 @ 3,000 Compression ratio 9.3:1 Edited October 1, 2012 by ACLazer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted October 1, 2012 Report Share Posted October 1, 2012 3.5 V-6 Torque (lb.-ft @ rpm) 253 @ 4,000 2.0 Eco 4 Cyl Torque (lb.-ft. @ rpm) 270 @ 3,000 I don't understand how the 2.0L EB could be lacking when it has significantly more torque at lower rpm. Not blasting, just trying to understand. Was it just the sound/feel of the engine? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACLazer Posted October 2, 2012 Report Share Posted October 2, 2012 I drove it home overnight. It was just not what I was used to, It didn't feel right. Hard to explain, I just didn't like it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pbrmeasap Posted October 11, 2012 Report Share Posted October 11, 2012 About 3500 miles into Limited with Ecoboost and am getting 27 - 29 mpg so far, 75% of which is highway. Don't notice any power / performance issues whatsoever. In fact, my 5.4 Expy that I had for 12 years and 225,000 miles had 265 hp, whereas this is 240hp. Heck, my '95 t-bird 4.6l had 200hp. So going from 0-60 in about 7.5 sec and getting close to 30 mpg is very much a no brainer for me, even with the additional front end cost. I also would expect re-sale value to account for some of the add'l up front cost, particularly as fuel prices continue to rise. The Range Rover Evoque basically uses the same motor (made in Spain I believe) in a fairly high-end vehicle, which has been universally well reviewed. Thankfully, my boat is only about 1500lbs, so can pull it with no issues. Kinda wish Ford would use some of their European diesel's over here. They can make financial sense when getting 40-50 mpg, even with increase vehicle & fuel cost. Performance is much improved with the new turbo diesels (no lag, tons of torque). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdgeGermany Posted October 13, 2012 Report Share Posted October 13, 2012 I owned a 2003 2.7 5cyl 205hp turbo diesel for 8 years. it's nice and powerful, but I love my 3.7 v6. The sound is awesome. :-) I am willing to pay some extra bucks for the gas... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PrinzII Posted October 21, 2012 Report Share Posted October 21, 2012 Now, a diesel Edge would be strongly considered. However, give me the an SVT Edge with the following: a) Sport Appearance EcoBoost 3.5 V6 with 435 hp (...with a high-po package that tweaks to 480 or even 500 hp but returns 25 mpg highway or better) c) Beefed up AWD and Transaxle d) Brembo 6 piston brakes up front, 4 piston rear e) Rear Sway Bar f) H&R or Eibach Springs with improved shocks/struts g) Upgraded exhaust 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UnfocusedEdge Posted October 22, 2012 Report Share Posted October 22, 2012 Now, a diesel Edge would be strongly considered. However, give me the an SVT Edge with the following: a) Sport Appearance EcoBoost 3.5 V6 with 435 hp (...with a high-po package that tweaks to 480 or even 500 hp but returns 25 mpg highway or better) c) Beefed up AWD and Transaxle d) Brembo 6 piston brakes up front, 4 piston rear e) Rear Sway Bar f) H&R or Eibach Springs with improved shocks/struts g) Upgraded exhaust I would buy one in a heart beat if I could afford that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PrinzII Posted October 24, 2012 Report Share Posted October 24, 2012 Can't forget the front strut tower brace. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laminar Posted November 27, 2012 Report Share Posted November 27, 2012 Everyone is different. Although, I just can't believe that people are finding the Ecoboost lacking. Before purchasing our 2013, I had the wife test both for herself, Being she didn't believe a 2.0 would out perform the 3.5 with two less cylinders. She thought the Eco was a much hotter engine. If she was to bad mouth anything, it was that without traction control, anything over 50% throttle made the Eco almost uncontrollable. Even with both of us in it, the Eco will break the tires with traction off at 30 mph. The 3.5 could barely squeak them from a stop. Did both vehicles have the same tires? It takes almost nothing to squeak the tires on my 3.5. It will roast them from a stop and even in dry weather they'll break loose all through first. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.