Still no PowerBoost Tunes?

[Sentinel1201]

Same here, I think it ultimately comes to who they designed it for and what their intended audience was for this powertrain. it seems they mostly designed this first generation of hybrid to appeal to truck buyers that normally wouldn't even consider a hybrid by making it the most powerful engine option available and having all the generator features. Notice there aren't any "green leafs" or similar branding/badging on the truck. They chose to put a "beefy" looking POWERBOOST logo on the door, trying to make it sound big and tough. Again, appealing to those of who that think trucks should have V8s, be powerful, etc and normally wouldn't even consider a hybrid.

It definitely worked, I'll give them that, I think if they had paired the NA 3.3L V6 with a battery/motor to get the best MPG possible they would have had very little adoption, instead, what they did is selling like hotcakes. By coming out with this first generation and winning over buyers while building a reputation, I wouldn't be surprised if we see something later that's a little more geared towards efficient than straight power.

I think the perfect mix would have been the 2.7L EcoBoost with a battery probably twice the size of the current one paired with a bigger electric motor. I bet it could be pushed closer to an average of 30MPG overall, but the payload capacity would quickly become a petty serious problem. They already have a 500lb battery down there, essentially taking that much weight straight off the payload capacity of the truck; just imagine doubling that and losing that much more capacity. It would require some rework of the whole truck's design to accommodate anything bigger (Like they had to do on the Lightning), and that's probably just not something they wanted to deal with for this first generation of hybrid.

I seriously doubt the 1.5 KWH battery is 500 lbs. Teslas are around 4000-4200 lbs and they have a 100 kwh battery.

Sponsored

 

[xtraman122]

I seriously doubt the 1.5 KWH battery is 500 lbs. Teslas are around 4000-4200 lbs and they have a 100 kwh battery.

Oh I could be wrong then, for some reason I thought I read that somewhere. Maybe it was inclusive of all the cooling and power delivery mechanisms, which obviously wouldn’t scale linearly as the capacity increases.
Edit: Yeah I now think I was confusing the overall weight increase of the PowerBoost vs standard ICE 3.5, so I’m now more convinced the bigger battery should have been included.

 

[BHunted1]

I think that is my biggest disappointment. It's 1.78 miles round trip to the grocery store for me, 70% at 20mph and 30% at 35mph. I can't make it halfway there on electric only, much less roundtrip. I really expected to be able to make short low speed trips without the motor firing up.

Keep in mind, depends what's running in your truck too it seems. Experiment: Make sure your ac/heat is totally off. Idle in electric mode. Kick it on.... I've seen this for a few different things.

 

[xtraman122]

Keep in mind, depends what's running in your truck too it seems. Experiment: Make sure your ac/heat is totally off. Idle in electric mode. Kick it on.... I've seen this for a few different things.

Somewhat on that thought, does anyone know if there’s any sort of magic to the heat on a PowerBoost? I thought I had read there wasn’t, and I know the engine will come on when you need heat and it’s cold, but my PowerBoost seems to somehow generate heat in about half the time my ‘15 3.5 EB did. Much quicker than my wife’s Explorer with the 2.4 EB as well (Just judging it on how far from home I get until I can feel good heat coming out of the vents).

Just feels like it gets heat coming out way quicker than any normal engine could, was wondering if there is any special heating elements running off the battery or something like that.

 

[NiftyF150]

You chose an engine because you *may* at some point want to tune it? As opposed to a different engine that makes more power today?

Interesting rationale.

I had a 17 Raptor with an MPT tune. Both before and after the tune, that "HO" ecoboost and 10 speed tranny were never as smooth as the 21 powerboost. Power delivery was decidedly turbo and lumpy., compared to the 21 powerboost which is silky smooth.

How much power a motor makes and how smoothly it delivers it are two ENTIRELY different things.

That was a big part of it yes, I figured the standard 3.5 Ecoboost has 10 years of R&D and revisions behind it whereas the Powerboost is the first of its kind. The truck is 97% new Ford said right? But at least this power train has been put through the ringer. I might be completely off, but that was a lot of my rationale.

I sincerely hope the aftermarket can turn the Powerboost into a TRX killer in terms of power, but I’m not holding my breath for it to happen anytime soon. Take this with a grain of salt though, I’ve never owned a hybrid or electric vehicle, and the Powerboost didn’t sell me on trying one yet.

 

[Snakebitten]

I am that target guy. I have had a few F150 Ecoboosts since they entered the market. In fact the family fleet currently is 3 3.5 Ecoboost and 2 2.7's, as well as my recent Powerboost acquisition.

While I AM enjoying the fuel mileage part of the equation, that is NOT why I traded my finely tuned 2018 KingRanch for this new Platinum. Instead it was for that amazing concept of 7.2KW generator and the very impressive torque now available from the mighty 3.5

Just amazing truck

 

[xtraman122]

I am that target guy. I have had a few F150 Ecoboosts since they entered the market. In fact the family fleet currently is 3 3.5 Ecoboost and 2 2.7's, as well as my recent Powerboost acquisition.

While I AM enjoying the fuel mileage part of the equation, that is NOT why I traded my finely tuned 2018 KingRanch for this new Platinum. Instead it was for that amazing concept of 7.2KW generator and the very impressive torque now available from the mighty 3.5

Just amazing truck

I am as well. If it hadn’t been the most powerful option and had the generator I don’t think I would have sprung for it, I was originally planning on just a regular 3.5 EB, but finally talked myself into splurging the extra for the PB. Very glad I did, and I don’t think I honestly would have spent all the money to have less power than other drivetrains.

 

[Ajzride]

The generator options are what pushed me from a powerstroke to a powerboost. I do a lot of interstate driving so the mpg of the powerboost would have been really nice on the wallet, but they are harder to find, don't have the propower options, and you always hear the stories of how when things do go wrong with a diesel how expensive they can be. The only thing I pull is a 20' enclosed car hauler, so the power stroke probably would have done better with that than the EB, but since I only pull it once or twice a year that was not a huge factor.

 

[GolfR]

I bought the regular EB rather than the power boost specifically because I assumed that tunes would jump the regular EB by close to 100 hp and ftlbs while the power boost tune might take years. I also didn’t want to lose 300 lbs of payload.

 

[Tosh]

I bought the regular EB rather than the power boost specifically because I assumed that tunes would jump the regular EB by close to 100 hp and ftlbs while the power boost tune might take years. I also didn’t want to lose 300 lbs of payload.

Very good point. If you want to tune up a car, start with a simple and widely used platform.

When I got my 2009 TDI Jetta, all my buddies got 2006 models instead. They were much more tuneable than the 2009.

And honestly, the Powerboost is already quicker than a scalded cat, so I'm not on the hunt for a tune right now!

 

[joejamesatou]

The encryption, complexity of the electric motor points, and transmission being integrated with the electric motor ensure this is a tough beast to tune. Honestly the only thing I really want is a brake torque setting in sport mode so I can spool the turbos with the electric motor on standby. Launching now has a lull in the first half second. Getting a launch mode is all it needs.

 

[PungoteagueDave]

Now that I have about 3,000 miles on my KR Powerboost, am convinced it is a pure compliance vehicle, used by Ford to meet its fleet efficiency targets, while convincing some of us to purchase it for its power and ability to pose as a “real” truck when not actually tasked to do real work.

When I took delivery last month, the first thing I did was put on E-rated 185 Michelin truck tires and threw away the useless Scorpion tires. I also added Airlift airbags and a Weigh-Safe hitch receiver, instaled tint and paint protection, and a dashcam system.

I drove the first 1,000 miles in break-in mode, all stop-and go with a small amount of highway driving, and got almost exactly 24 mpg. It drove my wife crazy, hypermiling, driving in eco mode, with an eggshell under my foot, roughly 20% in electric-only mode. Then we hooked up our 9,750-pound boat trailer for the next 1,500 miles, a trip up I-95 from Delray Beach, FL to Lake George in upstate New York, via a stop at our farm on the Eastern shore of Virginia. That trip averaged 5.5 mpg, with some tankfulls below 4 mpg (Adirondacks) and one acheiving 6 mpg. My typical tank range was only 150 miles, way less than in our Tesla.

I traded in a ‘17 F-350 King Ranch diesel on this truck, mostly due to HOA rules at our new house in Boynton Beach that preclude any truck over 1/2-ton. The Powerboost claimed to be just the thing, with it’s 12,200-pound towing capability, high torque and horsepower. Total fail. It is about half as efficient as the F-350 that it replaced in terms of fuel mileage when towing, gets about one third of the range per tank, yet cost about the same to purchase.

Like so many high-efficiency vehicles, these things are tuned to produce their top numbers in perfect conditions, driven empty, on flat roads, good temps, and super-careful driving. That’s what I simulated for the first 1,000 miles in my new Powerboost, which was produced just last month in Dearborn (May 7) and delivered on May 26, so barely a month ago. But the SECOND that I began to use it as the truck that claimed to be, it dropped to the very bottom of the efficiency list - way worse than any truck I’ve ever owned - the very things that make it efficient and powerful when essentially unstressed and empty, make it inefficient and LESS useful when stressed to capacity.

I love the technology, but this is a dangerous truck used as pictured. I balanced the trailer at a CAT scale to get the axle and tongue weights just inside spec, moving some luggage to the boat, and had new E-rated trailer tires installed, serviced the trailer brakes and surge system, and set off northward, tracking the same route that we had come south on last year in the F-350. No comparision. Braking, acceleration, fuel mileage, comfort, are all far inferior. The technology is “interesting”, not up to my Teslas’s specs, zapped out enroute a few times. The main screen went black and rebooted at highway speeds three times, and the NAV system screen was blue and inoperable for an entire day, then recovered.

I miss my Superduty. It gets twice the miles per gallon when towing, three times the range per tank, and is a way safer tow vehicle. There’s a whole saga of overheated brakes, overheated engine and transmission, but suffice it to say, the Superduty did this route multiple times acting like the rig wasn’t even back there. The F-150-made it, but with smoking brakes, almost zero engine braking assist on mountain downhills in the Catskills and Adirondacks, and the most nerve-wracking towing experience I’ve ever had on the last over-mountain haul into Hulett’s Landing last week, with the trailer brakes smoking all the way down due to nonexistent engine braking on the powerboost (I topped the mountain at 3 mph, tried to keep it below 10, but engine brakes were essentially not there when needed, had to ride the foot brake to stay below 30 and heading into the lake at the bottom). When we leave next month, I’m not even going to try - we’re piloting the boat to a town on the south of the lake and trailering empty to load it for the southbound trip so as to avoid the biggest mountain pass haul - something I never had to do with the F-350. As a tow vehicle, I conclude the Powerboost is a complete fail.

Pictures below include my old F-350 at the dealer next to the new Powerboost on delivery day. The dealer gave me $60k for the trade, and $6k off the new $81k PB, so my check to “upgrade” was $16k with taxes and tag transfer. I thought it a great deal to have driven the old just-out-of-warranty truck 37k miles over four years for that little money, and upgrade to the newest and most efficient technology. Little did I know that the PB is a facade to meet a spec, with no guts. Oh well. Next time, I’ll get a real truck.

 

[Sentinel1201]

Now that I have about 3,000 miles on my KR Powerboost, am convinced it is a pure compliance vehicle, used by Ford to meet its fleet efficiency targets, while convincing some of us to purchase it for its power and ability to pose as a “real” truck when not actually tasked to do real work.

When I took delivery last month, the first thing I did was put on E-rated 185 Michelin truck tires and threw away the useless Scorpion tires. I also added Airlift airbags and a Weigh-Safe hitch receiver, instaled tint and paint protection, and a dashcam system.

I drove the first 1,000 miles in break-in mode, all stop-and go with a small amount of highway driving, and got almost exactly 24 mpg. It drove my wife crazy, hypermiling, driving in eco mode, with an eggshell under my foot, roughly 20% in electric-only mode. Then we hooked up our 9,750-pound boat trailer for the next 1,500 miles, a trip up I-95 from Delray Beach, FL to Lake George in upstate New York, via a stop at our farm on the Eastern shore of Virginia. That trip averaged 5.5 mpg, with some tankfulls below 4 mpg (Adirondacks) and one acheiving 6 mpg. My typical tank range was only 150 miles, way less than in our Tesla.

I traded in a ‘17 F-350 King Ranch diesel on this truck, mostly due to HOA rules at our new house in Boynton Beach that preclude any truck over 1/2-ton. The Powerboost claimed to be just the thing, with it’s 12,200-pound towing capability, high torque and horsepower. Total fail. It is about half as efficient as the F-350 that it replaced in terms of fuel mileage when towing, gets about one third of the range per tank, yet cost about the same to purchase.

Like so many high-efficiency vehicles, these things are tuned to produce their top numbers in perfect conditions, driven empty, on flat roads, good temps, and super-careful driving. That’s what I simulated for the first 1,000 miles in my new Powerboost, which was produced just last month in Dearborn (May 7) and delivered on May 26, so barely a month ago. But the SECOND that I began to use it as the truck that claimed to be, it dropped to the very bottom of the efficiency list - way worse than any truck I’ve ever owned - the very things that make it efficient and powerful when essentially unstressed and empty, make it inefficient and LESS useful when stressed to capacity.

I love the technology, but this is a dangerous truck used as pictured. I balanced the trailer at a CAT scale to get the axle and tongue weights just inside spec, moving some luggage to the boat, and had new E-rated trailer tires installed, serviced the trailer brakes and surge system, and set off northward, tracking the same route that we had come south on last year in the F-350. No comparision. Braking, acceleration, fuel mileage, comfort, are all far inferior. The technology is “interesting”, not up to my Teslas’s specs, zapped out enroute a few times. The main screen went black and rebooted at highway speeds three times, and the NAV system screen was blue and inoperable for an entire day, then recovered.

I miss my Superduty. It gets twice the miles per gallon when towing, three times the range per tank, and is a way safer tow vehicle. There’s a whole saga of overheated brakes, overheated engine and transmission, but suffice it to say, the Superduty did this route multiple times acting like the rig wasn’t even back there. The F-150-made it, but with smoking brakes, almost zero engine braking assist on mountain downhills in the Catskills and Adirondacks, and the most nerve-wracking towing experience I’ve ever had on the last over-mountain haul into Hulett’s Landing last week, with the trailer brakes smoking all the way down due to nonexistent engine braking on the powerboost (I topped the mountain at 3 mph, tried to keep it below 10, but engine brakes were essentially not there when needed, had to ride the foot brake to stay below 30 and heading into the lake at the bottom). When we leave next month, I’m not even going to try - we’re piloting the boat to a town on the south of the lake and trailering empty to load it for the southbound trip so as to avoid the biggest mountain pass haul - something I never had to do with the F-350. As a tow vehicle, I conclude the Powerboost is a complete fail.

Pictures below include my old F-350 at the dealer next to the new Powerboost on delivery day. The dealer gave me $60k for the trade, and $6k off the new $81k PB, so my check to “upgrade” was $16k with taxes and tag transfer. I thought it a great deal to have driven the old just-out-of-warranty truck 37k miles over four years for that little money, and upgrade to the newest and most efficient technology. Little did I know that the PB is a facade to meet a spec, with no guts. Oh well. Next time, I’ll get a real truck.

You lost me half way through your 'longest post in the history of the internet' rant. Not sure why a photo of your lake house or Tesla is relevant to this discussion. Anyway... if I understand your dissatisfaction correctly, you were complaining the Powerboost was not as good as your F350 when towing a 9750 lb trailer?

No shit.

Every vehicle needs to be evaluated for the 80-20. 80% of most half ton trucks will be used as unloaded dailys and the powerboost shines in that use case. The other 20% when its put to heavy use it will perform as any other half ton would, no better and no worse. And even in those use cases, the 7200 generator is a game changer. For those that need a generator, not having to lug around a 275 lb Honda EU7000 (the equivalent of what you get in the powerboost), gas it up, change its oil, keep its battery healthy, do spark plug changes and most of all, not unload it and load it in trailer every time you use it is a complete game changer.

 

[xtraman122]

Now that I have about 3,000 miles on my KR Powerboost, am convinced it is a pure compliance vehicle, used by Ford to meet its fleet efficiency targets, while convincing some of us to purchase it for its power and ability to pose as a “real” truck when not actually tasked to do real work.

When I took delivery last month, the first thing I did was put on E-rated 185 Michelin truck tires and threw away the useless Scorpion tires. I also added Airlift airbags and a Weigh-Safe hitch receiver, instaled tint and paint protection, and a dashcam system.

I drove the first 1,000 miles in break-in mode, all stop-and go with a small amount of highway driving, and got almost exactly 24 mpg. It drove my wife crazy, hypermiling, driving in eco mode, with an eggshell under my foot, roughly 20% in electric-only mode. Then we hooked up our 9,750-pound boat trailer for the next 1,500 miles, a trip up I-95 from Delray Beach, FL to Lake George in upstate New York, via a stop at our farm on the Eastern shore of Virginia. That trip averaged 5.5 mpg, with some tankfulls below 4 mpg (Adirondacks) and one acheiving 6 mpg. My typical tank range was only 150 miles, way less than in our Tesla.

I traded in a ‘17 F-350 King Ranch diesel on this truck, mostly due to HOA rules at our new house in Boynton Beach that preclude any truck over 1/2-ton. The Powerboost claimed to be just the thing, with it’s 12,200-pound towing capability, high torque and horsepower. Total fail. It is about half as efficient as the F-350 that it replaced in terms of fuel mileage when towing, gets about one third of the range per tank, yet cost about the same to purchase.

Like so many high-efficiency vehicles, these things are tuned to produce their top numbers in perfect conditions, driven empty, on flat roads, good temps, and super-careful driving. That’s what I simulated for the first 1,000 miles in my new Powerboost, which was produced just last month in Dearborn (May 7) and delivered on May 26, so barely a month ago. But the SECOND that I began to use it as the truck that claimed to be, it dropped to the very bottom of the efficiency list - way worse than any truck I’ve ever owned - the very things that make it efficient and powerful when essentially unstressed and empty, make it inefficient and LESS useful when stressed to capacity.

I love the technology, but this is a dangerous truck used as pictured. I balanced the trailer at a CAT scale to get the axle and tongue weights just inside spec, moving some luggage to the boat, and had new E-rated trailer tires installed, serviced the trailer brakes and surge system, and set off northward, tracking the same route that we had come south on last year in the F-350. No comparision. Braking, acceleration, fuel mileage, comfort, are all far inferior. The technology is “interesting”, not up to my Teslas’s specs, zapped out enroute a few times. The main screen went black and rebooted at highway speeds three times, and the NAV system screen was blue and inoperable for an entire day, then recovered.

I miss my Superduty. It gets twice the miles per gallon when towing, three times the range per tank, and is a way safer tow vehicle. There’s a whole saga of overheated brakes, overheated engine and transmission, but suffice it to say, the Superduty did this route multiple times acting like the rig wasn’t even back there. The F-150-made it, but with smoking brakes, almost zero engine braking assist on mountain downhills in the Catskills and Adirondacks, and the most nerve-wracking towing experience I’ve ever had on the last over-mountain haul into Hulett’s Landing last week, with the trailer brakes smoking all the way down due to nonexistent engine braking on the powerboost (I topped the mountain at 3 mph, tried to keep it below 10, but engine brakes were essentially not there when needed, had to ride the foot brake to stay below 30 and heading into the lake at the bottom). When we leave next month, I’m not even going to try - we’re piloting the boat to a town on the south of the lake and trailering empty to load it for the southbound trip so as to avoid the biggest mountain pass haul - something I never had to do with the F-350. As a tow vehicle, I conclude the Powerboost is a complete fail.

Pictures below include my old F-350 at the dealer next to the new Powerboost on delivery day. The dealer gave me $60k for the trade, and $6k off the new $81k PB, so my check to “upgrade” was $16k with taxes and tag transfer. I thought it a great deal to have driven the old just-out-of-warranty truck 37k miles over four years for that little money, and upgrade to the newest and most efficient technology. Little did I know that the PB is a facade to meet a spec, with no guts. Oh well. Next time, I’ll get a real truck.

Bummer to hear of the poor experience. I think they honestly just overrate the towing capacity of these 1/2 ton trucks a bit. Probably just better off with a Super Duty for that size boat like you said.

 

[PungoteagueDave]

Bummer to hear of the poor experience. I think they honestly just overrate the towing capacity of these 1/2 ton trucks a bit. Probably just better off with a Super Duty for that size boat like you said.

I agree that I’m trying to use a half-ton pickup like a Superduty. I am well aware of that. I have owned seven F-150’s and five Superduties. I know the difference.

There’s a difference here folks - Ford is touting the Powerboost truck as a towing beast. It is essentially saying that it can do what 3/4 ton trucks can do. And it is that claim on which I relied a little bit in trying to solve my new HOA issue. There are a TON of review articles out there suggesting the Powerboost makes diesel superduty engines obsolete. I still have an F-250 at my Virginia farm. But in Florida, where I keep this boat on a lift, I can’t have a Superduty. And then Ford comes along and makes big claims for this truck and shows it doing all kinds of heavy duty work things with big trailers and tractors, with huge specs that fully cover my needs. So I trade in my F-350, not quite taking them at their word, knowing the tires are garbage, and ordering the air bags before the truck arrived. So yeah, the suspension and ride is on me. But holy cow, 5.5 mpg? Really? It’s a joke. The definition of not the right tool for the job. Shame on me for sure. I bought their BS. But folks, it WAS Ford’s BS. This is from a Ford ad. Many are more dramatic. I was super-careful with specs.

Sponsored