R-pod Owners Forum Homepage

This site is free to use.
Donations benefit a non-profit Girls Softball organization

Forum Home Forum Home > R-pod Discussion Forums > Reviews and General Information
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed: Towing rpod 192
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Calendar   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedTowing rpod 192 - Event Date: 28 May 2020 - 30 Jun 2020
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 6>
Author
Message
  Share Topic Share Topic  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
StephenH View Drop Down
podders Helping podders - pHp
podders Helping podders - pHp
Avatar

Joined: 29 Nov 2015
Location: Wake Forest, NC
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6288 		Direct Link To This Post Calendar Event: Towing rpod 192
    Posted: 01 Jun 2020 at 2:07pm
There are two things that would help the Frontier. One is to improve the transmission. Our 2010 Frontier's 5 speed transmission could use more gears which would help in cases where it kicks down on uphill climbs. Sometimes, 3rd gear isn't sufficient and it kicks down to 2nd (I think), and the RPMs climb into the screaming range. The second is a turbocharger. Putting a  turbo (or super) charger on the engine would really help in the mountains.

The Escape we used to have had a 2L Ecoboost engine and six speeds. In the mountains, it performed better than the 4L naturally aspirated V6 in the Frontier. Specs for the 2016 Ecoboost are 240 hp @ 5500 rpm and 270 ft-lbs @ 3000 rpm. The Frontier is rated at 261 hp @ 5600 rpm and 281 ft-lbs @ 4000 rpm. While it seems like the Frontier is better, that is at sea level. When accounting for the 3% power loss per 1000 ft, it isn't hard to see why the turbocharger just works better. At 6,000 ft, the 18% power loss in the Frontier is felt while the turbo engine still acts like it was at sea level.

I just looked and the specs on the 2020 Frontier were better with a 9 speed transmission and 310 hp @ 281 ft-lbs or torque, but I could not find out the rpms at which those numbers were generated. It is, however, still naturally aspirated and would have the same power loss at altitude that the current Frontiers have.
StephenH
Happy is the man that findeth wisdom,...

ouR escaPOD mods
Former RPod 179
Current Cherokee Grey Wolf 24 JS
Back to Top
lostagain View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 06 Sep 2016
Location: Quaker Hill, CT
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2587 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Jun 2020 at 2:28pm
StephenH, sounds like you'd really enjoy an F-150 with an eco-boost engine.  I'll bet you could get a good price for your Nissan.  Right now there are probably some pretty good deals on F-150's.  Ermm
Never leave footprints behind.
Fred & Maria Kearney
Sonoma 167RB
Our Pod 172
2019 Ford F-150 4x4 2.7 EcoBoost
Back to Top
StephenH View Drop Down
podders Helping podders - pHp
podders Helping podders - pHp
Avatar

Joined: 29 Nov 2015
Location: Wake Forest, NC
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6288 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Jun 2020 at 2:36pm
I've been thinking about it. The question would be whether to get the 2.7 or the 3.5.
StephenH
Happy is the man that findeth wisdom,...

ouR escaPOD mods
Former RPod 179
Current Cherokee Grey Wolf 24 JS
Back to Top
CharlieM View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 23 Nov 2012
Location: N. Colorado
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1797 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Jun 2020 at 3:29pm
Originally posted by StephenH

I've been thinking about it. The question would be whether to get the 2.7 or the 3.5.

No decision here. Get the 3.5. Better to cruise up the hill than listen to that little engine scream.
Charlie
Northern Colorado
OLD: 2013 RP-172, 2010 Honda Pilot 3.5L 4WD
PRESENT: 2014 Camplite 21RBS, 2013 Supercharged Tacoma 4L V6 4WD
Back to Top
jato View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2012
Location: Kewadin, MI
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3219 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Jun 2020 at 3:33pm
We just picked up a 2017  F-150 last November with the 3.5 EB.  Hopefully we will finally get to pull our pod with it soon for the first time.  I did check a couple weeks ago when I pulled it out of our horse barn if the bargman plug is functional (yes and all the lights work) as well as the electric brakes (and they work as well) so we are off to a good start.  Want to do a shakedown run in the UP of Michigan next week and then we still plan on having the Traverse City R-Pod Roundup June 18-21.  
God's pod
'11 model 177
'17 Ford F-150 4WD 3.5 Ecoboost
Jim and Diane by beautiful Torch Lake
"...and you will know the Truth and the Truth will set you free."
Back to Top
offgrid View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 23 Jul 2018
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5290 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Jun 2020 at 3:56pm
I'd get the 3.5 as well. There is a 3 mpg difference between the 2 engines but that's with an unloaded vehicle.  Bet it disappears or even goes the other way towing. 
1994 Chinook Concourse
1995 RV6A Experimental Aircraft
2015 Rpod 179 - sold
Back to Top
lostagain View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 06 Sep 2016
Location: Quaker Hill, CT
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2587 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Jun 2020 at 11:06pm
StephenH, our towing capacity is 7800# and we have plenty of power pulling a trailer that similar to the rPod 190 series.  We pulled up and over a 7500 ft pass in a head wind and had power to spare.  Right now onboard dash computer says we're getting 24.1 mpg.  I do drive with a very light foot, though.  While towing with no wind, we were getting around 14 mpg.  When the high head winds came up, we got down as low as 12 as we climbed into Tonapah and over the other passes north of there.  The 10 speed tranny really helps with getting the right gear for the load.

If you have the do-re-mi, to get the 3.5 eco, it'd be nice, but we're very happy with the 2.7 and don't feel the need for more power.  We also have no plans for a heavier trailer in the future, so getting a bigger engine would be a waste of my Social Security check.
Never leave footprints behind.
Fred & Maria Kearney
Sonoma 167RB
Our Pod 172
2019 Ford F-150 4x4 2.7 EcoBoost
Back to Top
offgrid View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: 23 Jul 2018
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5290 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Jun 2020 at 7:32am
lostagain, you have to look at total cost of ownership not just first cost or fuel economy. What rpm were you turning on that engine climbing that grade? I think charlieM's point about screaming is that to develop the hp the little engine is going to be turning faster and the boost is going to be higher. That inevitably will effect long term reliability. The $1500 first cost difference between the 2.7 and the 3.5 is easy to eat up in repair bills, and the resale value of the 3.5 will always be higher as well. The fuel economy difference will save you all of about $130 per year if you drive 10000 miles a year not towing. I doubt there is any fuel economy difference towing. 

In fact, after looking into this a bit more and watching a couple of videos polling Ford service techs on what they would pick, I think I'd personally go for the old school 5.0 V8. The techs picked that over the 3.5 eb by about 4 to 1. Not one picked the 2.7 as their favorite engine. These guys have to maintain this stuff after all. 

I'm not a big fan of turbos myself. I keep my stuff forever and maintain it myself as much as possible. The normally aspirated V8 is long time proven tech and doesn't have all that plumbing to break. It has the same fuel economy as the 3.5eb and more hp if I ever needed it.  If I lived and drove all the time at high altitudes maybe I'd get a 3.5 eb but there's nowhere to go in the East where I'm ever over 4000 ft so its not an issue.  Its also $600 cheaper than the 3.5eb. 

Anyhow while I like the F150's I'm not in the market for a pickup so it doesn't matter, just my opinion. 
1994 Chinook Concourse
1995 RV6A Experimental Aircraft
2015 Rpod 179 - sold
Back to Top
lostagain View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 06 Sep 2016
Location: Quaker Hill, CT
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2587 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Jun 2020 at 8:06am
OG, you haven't driven an F-150 with the 2.7.  You don't know what the rpm is going up the hills.  I do and it isn't all that high, well under 4000.  Indeed, I recall you once telling me that it was better to run a higher rpm because it circulates the cooling water through the system faster.  

As for whether the 3.5 is better or worse than the 2.7, that's not the point and I could care less.  The 2.7 meets our needs to tow a trailer in the same weight class as the 190 series and does a good job.  It has plenty of reserve power where we travel in the Sierra Nevada mountains and is comfortable and economical.  For others, they'd find the larger engine much more satisfying.  

We each have our preferences for what works for us.  You chose what worked best for you.  More than one person can be "right" at the same time.  
Never leave footprints behind.
Fred & Maria Kearney
Sonoma 167RB
Our Pod 172
2019 Ford F-150 4x4 2.7 EcoBoost
Back to Top
CharlieM View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 23 Nov 2012
Location: N. Colorado
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1797 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Jun 2020 at 8:09am
Offgrid,

I think your point on 5.0 vs 3.5EB is right on for low altitudes. At low altitudes the larger and simpler engine is adequate and more reliable. However, at high altitudes and climbing the lack of air takes over. That's the reason I bought the supercharger for my Tacoma. It sure makes a difference.
Charlie
Northern Colorado
OLD: 2013 RP-172, 2010 Honda Pilot 3.5L 4WD
PRESENT: 2014 Camplite 21RBS, 2013 Supercharged Tacoma 4L V6 4WD
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 6>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.64
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz