Ford to launch 1.0-liter 3-cylinder EcoBoost engine

  • Thread starter Thread starter JCE
  • 25 comments
  • 3,272 views
JCE

JCE

Messages
6,769
Germany
Little Elm, TX
Messages
JCE3000GT
Clicky for article.

GREG GARDNER
Ford will produce 1.0-liter, three-cylinder EcoBoost engine and a new 8-speed transmission sometime in the next two years to raise the fuel economy of its small cars, company executives said today.

Derrick Kuzak, head of global product development, declined to say which Ford model will get the new engine or transmission. He also declined to say where Ford will make the products, other than to say the new transmission will be made in the U.S.

But Ford is escalating efforts to take fuel efficiency to the next level. Three-cylinder engines have been widely available in Europe and emerging markets, but the only other car Americans can buy with a three-cylinder engine is the Smart fortwo, which has a 1.0-liter engine. Ford showed a concept car, the Start, at last year’s Beijing Auto Show that featured a 1.0-liter three-cylinder.

The 1.0-liter would be offered in Ford vehicles throughout the world, Kuzak said.

EcoBoost engines combine turbo-charging and direct-injection fuel technology to provide about 20% better fuel economy than larger engines and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Ford launched its first EcoBoost engine in 2009 on the Taurus SHO sedan, and has since offered it in the Flex, Lincoln MKT and F-150 pickup, as well as on three models in Europe – S-Max, Mondeo and Galaxy. Later this year the automaker will launch a 2.0-liter EcoBoost version of the Edge and Explorer.

The 8-speed transmission also will improve fuel efficiency by streamlining the way gears shift. That transmission will be Ford’s first 8-speed. Chrysler will launch an 8-speed transmission this summer and fall on the Chrysler 300 and Dodge Charger.

Separately, Ford will begin production later this year at its Van Dyke plant in Sterling Heights of a new transmission for hybrid vehicles.
Click to expand...
 
Interesting, I wonder will the Ka come to the states........haha. If anything it will be in the Fiesta and maybe Focus
 
95GTIVR6
Interesting, I wonder will the Ka come to the states........haha. If anything it will be in the Fiesta and maybe Focus
Click to expand...

If Ford NA was smart they'd indeed do just that. Put that 1.0L I3 turbo into a Fiesta and Focus as an "extended mileage" trim option. One could imagine a 45-60mpg (US) rating on the Fiesta with that engine.
 
Ford can't make a good 6spd auto and they're already planning an 8spd?
 
@JCE
A tiny engine wont improve Gas millage especially on the highway, Sometimes a lil bigger engine for bit bigger car is needed , in case a Focus has 2.0 and Fiesta has 1.6 (something like that) both get 40mph highway. If they put 1L in focus even with turbo, it wont make that much difference in fuel economy over 2.0L version. Its good for a small car tho.

Did they say Ford Focus has a good 6 speed auto? for fuel economy that is.
 
Could be interesting. I'd imagine it'd have to be fairly well turbocharged to uh... move... in a car the size of a Focus. I've driven a 1 litre 3 cylinder Corsa and that was almost bearable with only 2 people on board, so I can't see any issue with sticking a similar thing in the Fiesta with an extra boost bolted on. Though when I say 'almost bearable', I'm of course talking to UK standards. In North America it and its 17 second 0-60 time would be very very out of place.

Also worth mentioning that a 3cyl 1 litre works very nicely in the Toyota Aygo, but that weighs as much as a wicker flip-flop compared to the Corsa's German Doc Marten.
 
NoxNoctis Umbra
@JCE
A tiny engine wont improve Gas millage especially on the highway, Sometimes a lil bigger engine for bit bigger car is needed , in case a Focus has 2.0 and Fiesta has 1.6 (something like that) both get 40mph highway. If they put 1L in focus even with turbo, it wont make that much difference in fuel economy over 2.0L version. Its good for a small car tho.

Did they say Ford Focus has a good 6 speed auto? for fuel economy that is.
Click to expand...

You're missing the part where it says the engine is turbocharged. Ford claims it will give the same power as a 1.6, so likely about 120 bhp and around 120-140 ft-lbs of torque. Which means that highway economy will be good. A turbocharged 1 liter might weigh less than the 2.0, especially considering it will only be a 3-pot.

The 2.0 gasser could do with better economy. While the main hindrance is the transmission, it's difficult to get a lot out of a big gasoline engine without cylinder deactivation (which would suck on a four pot) The 2.0 diesel with the DCT can already hit over 45 mpg (US), the 1.0 gasser should be able to hit that mark, also.

It probably won't be nearly as quick as the diesel, but it may cost a lot less. It will certainly weigh a lot less than the diesel ironblock... diesel Focii already weigh as much as a bus!
 
17 seconds 0-60? That would get you run over in these here parts.
 
NoxNoctis Umbra
Did they say Ford Focus has a good 6 speed auto? for fuel economy that is.
Click to expand...

The 6spd would make sense if it had a taller 5th and 6th(I'm talking about the fiesta, which I think shares the 6spd with the focus). 6th gear at 60mph is almost the same rpm as the Fit in 5th. It means more gear hunting and shifting on the fiesta when driving, which gets pretty annoying.
 
The 6 speed in the Focus isn't awful, but it's nothing to write home about. It feels smoother then a lot of other cars in it's class that I have driven but it's not a class leader or innovator in any way.
 
The Fiesta had a weird mid shift power loss, stuttering, car not sure what gear to pick going up hill or around a corner, don't know what to call it problem. It was happening to me all throughout the test drive. I have a rather light accelerating driving style that I've developed over the past few years and this trans did not work well with my style. The sales guy said it was normal and that the car had to be broken in. I thought he was full of it and when I got home and looked into it, I knew for sure he was blowing smoke up my ass.
I read that the problem was resolved before it ever got to the focus though.
 
There's issues with the logic of the DCT... issues made even more annoying by Ford's decision not to offer paddle-shifters in the Fiesta.

The Focus has a slightly different DCT, and being mated to a more powerful engine may mask these issues, as well.

0-60 in 17 isn't too bad for a 1 liter. The turbocharged one should do the business in a Focus in about 12-13 seconds with the automatic.
 
Is it a true torque converter automatic or a fancy dual-clutch gearbox? I don't think Ford was ever all that specific. I've heard less-than-pleasing things about the Powershift gearboxes, but I think that's to be expected on a first generation setup. Volkswagen had many of the same problems with the earlier DSG gearboxes, as I recall. Especially as they began to place it in more "practical" applications with the Eos, Jetta and Passat.

Still, I find the news exciting. The fact that Ford is at least considering it for North America is pretty impressive, and is certainly a sign of the times. I'd have to wonder that, if Ford were to introduce the 1.0L engine, Fiat would give us the two-cylinder setup that they offer in the 500. That'd be cool, in a weird way.
 
The Focus DCT is a "wet" dual-clutch set-up. No TC, I think... when speeds get low enough, the transmission decouples completely from the wheels. The Fiesta is a dry clutch system. The Focus system is more responsive and consistent... the Fiesta is a bit indecisive. It works better in "L" mode, eliminating some of the hunting on deceleration, but IMHO, that indecision shouldn't be there at all.
 
No no no NO.

No amount of turbocharging will make the 1.0 appropriate in the Focus.
 
Rotary Junkie
Lies.

Also 3-bangers sound good.
Click to expand...

Bleugh, disagree personally. As far as I'm concerned both the C1 and Corsa I drove sounded like Korean troop carriers. Made quite a nice revvy noise I suppose, but starting one doesn't exactly give off the illusion of refinement. Or of being a car from this decade.
 
Jondot
Bleugh, disagree personally. As far as I'm concerned both the C1 and Corsa I drove sounded like Korean troop carriers. Made quite a nice revvy noise I suppose, but starting one doesn't exactly give off the illusion of refinement. Or of being a car from this decade.
Click to expand...

That's why they were so bad. :p
 
Jondot
Bleugh, disagree personally. As far as I'm concerned both the C1 and Corsa I drove sounded like Korean troop carriers. Made quite a nice revvy noise I suppose, but starting one doesn't exactly give off the illusion of refinement. Or of being a car from this decade.
Click to expand...

I wish you'd have heard Kermit with a broken silencer. It was like if Vespa made a moped for Le Mans.
 
Despite the assumption that it will accelerate slowly I think this is a GOOD THING to do for North America. With this engine and it's fuel economy will allow a better "average" rating for Ford which means more gas sucking V8's can be used for the performance division (if they so choose). And with a successful attempt maybe the other 2 NA automakers will do the same. I just hope a Fiesta with this engine wouldn't be more expensive than a larger I4 base model. That would be retarded if they offer this engine with luxuries and stuff. Just shove it in stripper models with a manual and watch them sell like hotcakes.

Besides, who's to say that a Fiesta with this engine won't still do 0-60 in 9-10 seconds. The official power numbers aren't out--Ford could manage to squeeze out enough turbo boost to make the car lively. Let's not judge before we see it. ;)

Testosterone aside, seriously guys this is a good thing. This means you can drive a normal car with normal practicality and get a good MPG number without seeming like some hippie tree hugging socialist. Drive a Prius or Smart around here and you will get that label. I'd rather drive a normal looking car that averages 35-45 MPG (combined) that has a normal profile, normal interior and a normal boot than some fish-shaped Prius or tiny 2 seat Smart car. Realistically the only super "economy" car that has an appeal to me is the Civic Hybrid. It's a normal bloody car with a good economy power plant. Everything else out there for the super fuel economy conservationist is just rubbish to look at and drive.

Omnis
17 seconds 0-60? That would get you run over in these here parts.
Click to expand...

Actually, I will disagree. There are PLENTY of people that have the ability to do 0-60 in half of that number that still pull out and drive slower than molasses. Just because a car can do 0-60 quickly doesn't mean the driver will do it. :lol:
 
JCE
Actually, I will disagree. There are PLENTY of people that have the ability to do 0-60 in half of that number that still pull out and drive slower than molasses. Just because a car can do 0-60 quickly doesn't mean the driver will do it. :lol:
Click to expand...

That's not the point. Remember 0-60 is WOT. I don't want to have to hoon it in my car just to keep from being rear-ended.
 
Normal people will refuse to go WOT no matter how slow their car is. I've written a huge rant before about how 90% of Americans are absolutely petrified to use more than 60% throttle.
 
Exactly. So the 1.0 liter will be a moving chicane since it will take them 30 seconds to get up to the speed limit.

And if they're trying to haul ass in that car they're not going to get good fuel economy anyway. Remember that Top Gear test with the M3 chasing the Prius?
 
A turbocharged 1.0 won't be any slower at part throttle than the naturally aspirated 2 liter in the car already... And they'll get a better transmission to boot. In other words... Point is moot, let's move on.

Let's talk about the wonderful, mellifluous sound of three pots... Which are, you know, about 1/4th of a Lamborghini V12...
 

Latest Posts

Back