3.5 V6 or Ecoboost?

[NIFNIC]

So, my wife's 2007 Edge has 126k on it. It's in great shape, but we're considering upgrading to get some of the newer options like Sync, etc. We've been looking at 2015 and 2016's. It will be a similar platform for her - AWD, sunroof, etc. From there, we're now faced with the engine choice. We drove a rental Edge almost 800 miles with the Ecoboost. Frankly, it performed fine for us. It had the "go" we needed; though, I admit you had to get into a bit more than we were used to in the 2007.

 

My concern, though, with the 3.5 are the issues I read about with the water pump. I see it across the Explorers, Taurus and then the Edge. Clearly there's a design flaw/issue there. On the other side of the coin, the direct injection engine causes me to pause, too. I have that in my Explorer Sport and I can already tell it's starting to chug a bit after 75k - despite top tier fuel use and frequent oil changes.

So, what's the lesser of two evils - a chanced water pump failure that costs thousands, or a caked up direct injection engine?

 

We'll buy one with somewhere between 15k-30k on it as she puts about 8k a year on a car, so it will be with us for a while.

 

Look forward to the thoughts - thanks!
Shumax

[RC Mike]

I had a rental '15 with the 2.0L while on vacation last year, own a '16 Sport with the 2.7L, and had a '17 3.5L as a rental in March while ours was in the shop (steering wheel replacement). The Sport is just plain fun to drive. I'd be fine with the 2.0L, which seemed to have plenty of pep and torque. I wasn't very enthusiastic about the 3.5L. It just seemed flat and drove very similarly to my 2008 Town and Country with an old pushrod 3.8L.

 

Those are just my impressions from driving. You'll find a lot of different opinions on the longevity and reliability of the 2.0L vs the 3.5L. Having looked at this a lot last year, the general consensus at the time was that the 2.0L was too new for anyone to have any long-term opinions that were based on data. Lots of conjecture, but little hard data.

[akirby]

The 3.5L and 3.7L are strong engines but lack that off the line power you get with the ecoboost engines. They do perform better at higher RPM but I find myself flooring the 3.7L in the MKX to get it moving whereas with the EB (even the small 2.0) you get instant torque at low RPM.

 

It all depends on how hard you're used to accelerating. For my wife who hardly ever goes past 50% throttle she'd never notice the difference.

[haedgy]

Just got back from a trip up I-5 California to Washington. I have the ecoboost and it performed well. I averaged 28MPG heading up and 29MPG coming back. Power was fine through the mountains and driving through the rain and wet roads. I filled up with super the entire time and never had an issue. I have only 8600 miles on the car.

 

I have also driven a rental Titanium Ecoboost AWD 600+ miles, it was a nice ride. Though I did notice the AWD does seem more heftier when cornering and turning a corner. It took some time to adjust to how it handled.

 

I am like you I hear about the V-6 and the water pump thing makes me nervous. I would think cleaning the heads/valves maybe cheaper than changing the water pump but who knows. Have not gotten there yet. I am sure there could be a 1 in 500,000 failure rate with the water pump but the fact you could be that "lucky one" whose water pump fails is enough to detour that purchase, make sure I purchase an extended warranty and sell it before it expires. Either way for the torque of the EB as opposed to the 3.5L I would take the EB any day. The big seller for me was taking the 3.5 and the EB on the same steep hill and how much harder I had to push the 3.5 up the hill.

[enigma-2]

I have over 100k on my 3.5 and no problems. Dealer told me that changing the coolant wad the key to long life. When the warning signs on coolant loss finally show up, I'll drop the $1700 and get it changed. (I'll put it on my Ford Credit card and pay it off over time without interest. Can't beat OPM!)

 

On the other hand, installing a catch can on the 2.0l will catch most of the blowby and minimize the carbon buildup.

 

Remember that there are millions on both enginges on the road and the problems that do show up are (usually) on older engines and are reparable (not unlike any other engine). My 09 is at the dealer every three months so they usually look for and catch problems before they become large.

 

My daughter has the 2.0 in her Escape and loves it. (No catch can). So somewhere around 150,000-200,000 miles she will have to get the heads pulled and cleaned; if she keeps it that long. All part of ownership.

[lildisco]

The 'coking' of the intake valves can be lessoned greatly by installing a catch can. For around $500 including the install, you can save yourself a lot of problems down the road. In nearly 2,000 miles of driving, my teamrxp.com catch can has stopped about 4-5 ounces of oil/gas/sludge from re-entering the intake manifold. The sooner you get a catch can installed, the sooner you prevent coking. The teamrxp.com design catches the 'gunk' in boost as well as when you're not in boost. Most catch cans only function when the car isn't making power, like idle, this design catches both & i'm very pleased with my can.

 

Keep in mind that it's not just ecoboost's having this issue. It's a design flaw with any direct injection & by the time it becomes an issue, the car is usually out of the original warranty period. Ecoboost's are more apparent because of the turbo which produces more blow by (the low friction piston rings don't help with this either). Here's a link to my install post:

http://www.fordedgeforum.com/topic/22063-oil-catch-can-on-the-20l-ecoboost/?p=166118

[2FAST4U]

Well, funny that you guys don't seem to like the 3.5 … I have one in my '16 and I'm so glad I chose that engine over the anemic 4 cyl. or the "full of gadgets" EB. It's true that it's no dragster when accelerating from a standing start, but that's not what I bought my Edge for. I wanted something reliable, no unnecessary gadgetry (turbos, wastegates, intercoolers, etc…). My Edge is my daily transportation vehicle and I wanted something proven, reliable, not a toy.

 

Claude.

Edited January 23, 2018 by 2FAST4U

[Mirage52]

Give me the 3.5L. Easier to work on and maintain IMO. And what is the difference between EB and 3.5 when it comes to towing? Just something to consider...

 

I'm going to change out the coolant at 60K and hope that prevents the water pump issue. Otherwise I'll probably only put around 120K miles on it before I want to trade it in while it still has some value. But I'll probably keep it for 6-7 years all said and done.

[akirby]

I'm so glad I chose that engine over the anemic 4 cyl. or the "full of gadgets" EB.

 

Which anemic 4-cylinder are you referring to? The 2.0 is also an EB and it's nowhere close to anemic.

[macbwt]

I will stick with the 3.5 until I start seeing 2.0 and 2.7 EB with 300,000 miles on them. The 3.5's I own have logged over 560,000 miles and not one water pump failure. Key: frequent coolant changes and oil changes using synthetic oil with good filters.

[chefduane]

3.5 for me. A few years ago we had a rented 2.0 for a while and frankly, it felt and sounded a little tinny and rattly (are those words?) When I started looking for an Edge, the 3.5 was all I would consider based on that experience.

[fishx65]

I guess I better change the coolant on my 85,000 mile 3.5!!!!

[enigma-2]

For me, I had my 3.5 in for a regular oil change. Service dept told me they were recommending a coolant flush before its schedule as they needed to use a different coolant than what originally in the car. The new stuff had been developed specifically in reaction to some corrosion problem. As I hadn't read anything about pump failure, I didn't ask anything about what the problem was. Check with your local dealer as to what is currently recommended.

[CARR142]

My service representative had no idea and tried to talk me out of changing the coolant.

[macbwt]

My service representative had no idea and tried to talk me out of changing the coolant.

That's not abnormal parts desk guy told me the upper and lower O2 sensors on the 3.5 duratec are interchangeable and I argued. Then he got a tech that was there that agreed with him. LOL They are not interchangeable one is three wire and one is four wire. Hummm

[fishx65]

That's not abnormal parts desk guy told me the upper and lower O2 sensors on the 3.5 duratec are interchangeable and I argued. Then he got a tech that was there that agreed with him. LOL They are not interchangeable one is three wire and one is four wire. Hummm

Mac, just watched your coolant change video and that's the way I've always done it. Did you do any research to make sure that Peak is cool to use?? Did you originally have the Ford Purple stuff in there????

 

Just talked to a mechanic friend of mine at a Ford dealership who said to use Ford Vc-10-a2 Specialty Green coolant.

Edited April 28, 2017 by fishx65

[Tightanium]

I got the ecoboost in my F150 and I can say I'm so sick and tired of all the negative talk about that motor that it scared me into going with the 3.5 in my edge. I love the turbo low torqure and power it puts out though. The 2.0 felt good till highway speed then it was like a regular 4 cyl to me. Passing another car was bearly any better then a n/a 4 cyl. So far I love the 3.5...Gas mileage will be lower then the eco but I don't have that annoying black tailpipe. You Eco guys know what I'm talking about. Also don't have to think about a catch can you got to add and remember to empty. As for the water pump didn't ford update the pump to be better?

[macbwt]

Mac, just watched your coolant change video and that's the way I've always done it. Did you do any research to make sure that Peak is cool to use?? Did you originally have the Ford Purple stuff in there????

 

Just talked to a mechanic friend of mine at a Ford dealership who said to use Ford Vc-10-a2 Specialty Green coolant.

Peak meets Ford Spec. If it did not then PEAK lied. Besides the engine has almost 200K miles on it and I have used various universal fluids in the past with it. Pump is still spinning so I am going with the answer of yes it works just as well as the Motorcraft. I will add I think the last time MC coolant was used in this engine was over 100K miles ago.

[sylvainm]

​I owned a 2012 AWD Ltd V6 (3.5l):

​+ good power to overtake

​+ nice engine sound

​+ very smooth transmission

​- lack of torque at low rpm

​- big lag waiting for kickdown

​

​Now I drive a 2016 AWD Titanium EB 2.0l, which I drive most of the time in the city on "S". I put it on "D" when cruising on the highway.

​+ plenty of torque when flooring at the green light (especially on "S")

​+ slightly better fuel consumption than the 3.5 (12.5 l/100km vs 14 l/100km)

​- lack of power at high rpm's (I tried with premium fuel which helped a bit but it's not worth the price difference).

​- rattling sound when engine is cold

​- not much compression power to slow down (compared to the 3.5)

​When I shopped for my 2016, I wanted a V6 but there was none in stock (equipped the way I wanted); so I went with the EB. So far I'm happy with it, except for the engine sound.

​

[macbwt]

Still looking for a 2.0 or 2.7 with 200,000 miles on the ODO

[fishx65]

Still looking for a 2.0 or 2.7 with 200,000 miles on the ODO

Get the Eco in your next Edge Mac and see if it can be done!!!!:) Isn't that only about a year and a half of driving for you??

[macbwt]

Get the Eco in your next Edge Mac and see if it can be done!!!! :) Isn't that only about a year and a half of driving for you??

Might be longer I am aiming for at least 500,000 on this 3.5 this time. Last one went to nearly 300,000. Might end up getting the wife a 2.5 refresh with the 10sp

[shady28]

Still looking for a 2.0 or 2.7 with 200,000 miles on the ODO

 

I checked autotrader when I was looking a while back, you can't find 4cyl Edges with over 200k. They are DOA by then is my conclusion. Plenty of 3.5s with over 200k though.

 

Then you've got this, which reinforces my feeling that automakers are putting hopped up 4cyl engines in big heavy SUVs to hit EPA numbers - and those engines won't last. I want to say those engines are fine for compact up to mid size sedans, but I'm starting to see *tiny* displacement turbo engines in small - mid size.

 

 

 

http://www.jdpower.com/press-releases/2014-vehicle-dependability-study

 

"Increased Engine and Transmission Problems Contribute to Decline in Vehicle Dependability for The First Time in More Than 15 Years "

"The decline in quality is particularly acute for vehicles with 4-cylinder engines, where problem levels increase by nearly 10 PP100. These smaller engines, as well as large diesel engines, tend to be more problematic than 5- and 6-cylinder engines, for which owners report fewer problems, on average."

...

"However, while striving to reduce fuel consumption, automakers must be careful not to compromise quality. "

[pherbst]

Being a newby here could someone post some information on this water pump issue with the 3.5 liter engine.

[blockisle9]