Ford’s 1.0 EcoBoost

By | February 26, 2012

Ford has been boost crazy for the past couple of years as they’ve been developing the line of Ecoboost engines that are now finding their way into Ford’s across the world.  The headliner has been the F-150 with the boosted V6 under the hood.  With monster torque and fuel economy over 20 MPG, the EcoBoost F-150 can pull with the best of them and does it in a not so conventional way.

While the F-150 EcoBoost has been the star of the show, it’s about to take a back seat to the new 1.0 EcoBoost.  Sure, 23 MPG is good for a truck but the new 1.0 EcoBoost Ford Focus will supposedly hit 50-55 MPG and thats without any orange cables.  Conventional gasoline engines haven’t been able to achieve those kinds of numbers sine the CRX HF and Geo Metro.

Of course the new Ford engine isn’t exactly conventional compared to the Honda and Geo.  This new motor, now going on sale in Europe but not due for the States until 2014, gets goodies like direct injection, variable valve timing, and a turbo.  With the advancement of technology the old adage of “no replacement for displacement” has lost its relevance.

The 1.0 Focus isn’t going to be a hot rod for sure but 125 horsepower and 147 ib-ft of torque is stellar for a 1.0 liter 3-cylinder. With an engine block that’s shorter than a Subway sandwich and weighs less than your average NFL running back, the Ford Focus Ecoboost will be a major alternative to hybrids, diesels, and other fuel sippers.  55 MPG will sound pretty good this summer when fuel prices are supposedly going to be approaching $5 a gallon, especially if you can’t afford an expensive EV or hybrid.

[Source: Motor Trend]

 

 


7 Comments

AJ Wilcox on February 26, 2012 at 10:25 pm.

Haha! I laughed out lout when I read that the 3cyl was shorter than a Subway sandwich. That’s gold.

Matthew on February 27, 2012 at 8:48 am.

ha a, yeah.  I thought it was a good correlation.

AJ Wilcox on February 27, 2012 at 9:02 am.

Five….Five Dolla….Five Dolla Direct Injection

Mark Penrice on April 10, 2012 at 9:56 am.

The block footprint is less than that of a piece of printer paper. Even by small car standards – in fact even by regular 3 or 4-pot 1-litre standards – it’s damn small. And by the sound of it doesn’t weigh much more altogether (inc turbo, flywheel, fluids…) than the head plus pistons alone of the last more conventionally designed 1-litre I took apart. It’s an astonishing piece of work.

And given the HP and torque they’ve dragged out of it, I’m already wondering how good a 2-cylinder 659cc (Kei-car applicable) version could be, maybe with licensed throttle-less active valve technology and some minor hybridising (plenty of room left when your engine is half the length of a normal one), in a second gen model with some radical weight reduction. After all, that focus must have a porky body; I just scrapped a 2001-vintage direct rival with a more conventional, 105hp, 110lbft, 1.6 litre engine and a 5-speed transmission… that was more than a second quicker from 0 to 62mph, and reached a couple mph higher terminal velocity, than this 123hp, 147lbft, 6-speed 2012 car. And that wasn’t exactly a featherweight, short on optional equipment, or saddled with a poor safety rating. I’m driving an 80hp (and 140ish lbft) turbodiesel that’s just one size-class down from it and it’s but a half second and 5mph slower… Imagine how quick said TD would be if we dropped out that heavy oil burning lump and replaced it with the Ecoboost? It’d probably be just as efficient if not more so, too, with the further advantage of burning cleaner, cheaper fuel.

(Hell, a 2-pot, 660cc version of a 123hp/200Nm engine would have a good chance of holding its own against my current 4-pot, 1460cc, 80hp/185Nm in the same body… less torque, aye, but a much wider usable rev range (= shorter gearing and fewer shifts more than makes up for it), slightly better top end power, and lower overall weight…)

AJ Wilcox on April 10, 2012 at 10:46 am.

 Wow, Mark…wow. Right on!

Leave Your Comment

Your email will not be published or shared. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>