• Jan 6, 2008
Ford is using the 2008 Detroit Auto Show to kick off the transition of a significant portion of their engine lineup to what they are calling EcoBoost technology. EcoBoost consists of smaller displacement engines with direct fuel injection and turbocharging (GDTI) to provide a fuel economy boost without any loss of performance. Ford first showed the idea in the 2007 Lincoln MKR concept when it was called Twin-Force. The Twin-Force name has been set aside in favor of one that emphasizes the efficiency aspects of the technology. Thanks to the combination of small low-inertia turbos, the direct injection and variable valve timing, the new engines should have no lag and a much fatter, flatter torque curve.
The first EcoBoost engine out of the gate is the 340hp 3.5L V-6, This will be the optional engine in the Lincoln MKS starting in 2009 in place of a V-8. Besides having higher specific efficiency than a larger normally aspirated engine, the smaller EcoBoost units also save weight and size. The 3.5L saves over 150 lbs. compared to the 4.6L V-8 also helping contribute to fuel efficiency savings of up to 20%. Following the MKS with EcoBoost will be the Ford Flex and the new Explorer based on the Explorer America concept. The new SUV is expected to use GDTI engines exclusively, with a 275hp 2.0L four as the base engine and the 3.5L six as the option. Ford is by no means the first to do this, with Volkswagen pushing the tech for several years already on their TSI and TFSI engines. aMazda and GM also use the same principle. Ford really wants to make it mainstream, however, with over half a million EcoBoost engines annually within five years. Read more about EcoBoost over at AutoblogGreen.

[Source: Ford, AutoblogGreen]


Ford press release

FORD TO EQUIP HALF A MILLION VEHICLES WITH ECOBOOST ENGINE TECHNOLOGY FOR UP TO 20% BETTER FUEL ECONOMY


DETROIT, Jan. 6, 2008 – Ford Motor Company is introducing a new engine technology called EcoBoost that will deliver up to 20 percent better fuel economy on half a million Ford, Lincoln and Mercury vehicles annually in North America during the next five years.

The EcoBoost family of 4-cylinder and 6-cylinder engines features turbocharging and direct injection technology. Compared with more expensive hybrids and diesel engines, EcoBoost builds upon today's affordable gasoline engine and improves it, providing more customers with a way to improve fuel economy and emissions without compromising driving performance.

"EcoBoost is meaningful because it can be applied across a wide variety of engine types in a range of vehicles, from small cars to large trucks – and it's affordable," said Derrick Kuzak, Ford's group vice president of Global Product Development.

"Compared with the current cost of diesel and hybrid technologies, customers can expect to recoup their initial investment in a 4-cylinder EcoBoost engine through fuel savings in approximately 30 months. A diesel will take an average of seven and one-half years, while the cost of a hybrid will take nearly 12 years to recoup – given equivalent miles driven per year and fuel costs," he said.

Ford will introduce EcoBoost on the new Lincoln MKS flagship in 2009, followed by the Ford Flex and other vehicles. By 2013, Ford will have more than half a million EcoBoost-powered vehicles on the road annually in North America.

In 2009, Ford first will introduce EcoBoost on the Lincoln MKS featuring a 3.5-liter twin-turbocharged V-6. It will produce the power and torque of a V-8 engine with the fuel efficiency of a V-6. In fact, with an estimated 340-horsepower and more than 340 lb.-ft. of torque, the Lincoln MKS will be the most powerful and fuel-efficient all-wheel-drive luxury sedan in the market.

More With Less
EcoBoost's combination of direct injection and turbocharging mitigates the traditional disadvantages of downsizing and boosting 4- and 6-cylinder engines, giving customers both superior performance as well as fuel economy.

With direct injection, fuel is injected into each cylinder of an engine in small, precise amounts. Compared to conventional port injection, direct injection produces a cooler, denser charge, delivering higher fuel economy and performance.

When combined with modern-day turbocharging – which uses waste energy from the exhaust gas to drive the turbine – direct injection provides the best of both worlds: the responsiveness of a larger-displacement engine with fewer trips to the gas pump.

Ford's 3.5-liter EcoBoost V-6, for example, can deliver upwards of 340-plus lb.-ft. of torque across a wide engine range – 2,000 to 5,000 rpm versus 270 to 310 lb.-ft of torque for a conventional naturally aspirated 4.6-liter V-8 over the same speed range. At the same time, this V-6 gives customers an approximate 2 mpg improvement and emits up to 15 percent fewer CO2 emissions to the environment.

Direct injection coupled with turbocharging allows for the downsizing of engines that deliver improved torque and performance. A small 4-cylinder EcoBoost engine has the capability of producing more torque than a larger 4-cylinder engine – nearly an entire liter larger in displacement – with better fuel efficiency.

The real-world fuel economy benefit is consistent no matter the drive cycle, meaning the engine is efficient in the city as well as on the highway – unlike hybrids, which are most efficient in stop-and-go traffic. In addition, customers who tow and haul – and have long turned to more expensive diesel powertrains for their superior towing capabilities – can find the engine performance they need from an EcoBoost powertrain.

EcoBoost – combined with multi-speed transmissions, advanced electric power steering, weight reductions and aerodynamic improvements – is part of Ford Motor Company's strategy to deliver sustainable, quality vehicles that customers want and value. Additional hybrid offerings and diesel engines are planned for light-duty vehicles.

Longer term, Ford plans to remain aggressive in the development of plug-in hybrids and hydrogen fuel cell-powered vehicles.

"We know that what will make the biggest difference is applying the right technology on volume vehicles that customers really want and value and can afford," said Kuzak. "EcoBoost puts an affordable technology within reach for millions of customers, and Ford's systems approach adds up to a big idea that differentiates Ford's sustainability strategy in the market."


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 62 Comments
      • 7 Years Ago
      Wow, 275 hp from a 2.0L turbo? VW/Audi only gets 200 from their 2.0L turbo; and can't even get 275 hp from the 3.2L in the A4/A5. Way forward, indeed.
      I just hope the fuel economy gains actually come through, though. Acura (allegedly) went with a 4 cylinder turbo in the RDX for fuel economy reasons, but the six cylinder X3 (which is slightly heavier and has 20 more hp, though less torque) gets noticeably better fuel economy, in both EPA numbers and in real life driving (check C&D's comparo with the cars and Edmunds' review of the RDX).
        • 7 Years Ago
        ... Audi gets 265hp from the 2.0T in top spec form (as seen in the S3) - while it's not on sale in North America, that doesn't remove the fact that the 2.0T mil currently tops out at 265hp (or 220 in North America as see in models like the A4).
        • 7 Years Ago
        Doc Lucas - the only point i was making to RT, who i don't think knows anything about the TFSI engine, is that the 200 hp number that he has a problem with is the most conservative output that engine makes. Its output can be raised dramatically and RELIABLY either through the aftermarket or through VW AG itself. I'm not sure how you interpreted that to mean anything else.

        A 2L turbo engine can be made to produce nearly any HP number - that isn't the issue here.
        • 7 Years Ago
        RT, it sounds like you're not very well informed about the VW group 2.0 TFSI engine. 200 hp is it's most detuned power rating... you can get 30-40 hp plus 2-3 mpg simply by having the ecu flashed by any of several companies for a few hundred bucks. some turbo engines are light boost, small turbo on purpose - the 200 hp version of the TFSI engine being one of them.
        • 7 Years Ago
        @Zach

        A guy in a performance shop who charges "a few hundred bucks" to perform a simple ROM flash does not trump VW's engineering department. I have all the respect in the world for VW/Audi engine tech, so lets compare apples to apples here. I've never owned a Ford, but if this engine has long term reliability with these numbers, they should be given credit.
      • 7 Years Ago
      this idea sounds great, but ( I hate to say but), 8 cylinders always, always will have better panache than v6s in luxury cars, maybe an I6 but not an v6, no matter how great they are(only exception Nissan GT-R). Of course, it will be excellent in an explorer but not in an lincoln nor in a high level mustang(except for the GNX, muscle car=v8).

      It doesn't mean that i hate v6s( I love alfa and nissan v6s) but in a high end luxury car( what is aspiring lincoln). or in a muscle car(Mustang gt), a v8 is the best option.

      the best option i think that it would be to add DI and a turbo to a V8 and you can have high, really high power having good economy(torque is all). Of course you can have the v6s there but never ever kill the v8. its an american trademark

      • 7 Years Ago
      drool, 40 more hp and 150 less pounds for the mustang?? BUILD IT!

      • 7 Years Ago
      I can't wait to rent one and pull those vacuum lines.
      • 7 Years Ago
      So for a marginal boost to efficiency we need to add an ultra high pressure fuel pump, and a turbo. That adds significant cost and creates potentially expensive repairs.

      I'd pass. I'll bet the fuel savings will never offset the cost.
      • 7 Years Ago
      4=6 and 6=8 cylinders

      sounds like ford is trying to prepare people for the idea of a turbo v6 mustang gt

      if it can combine more power with less weight, then i think it will work out. maybe save the v8s for 450+ hp shelby models.
      • 7 Years Ago
      I wouldn't mine seeing these engines in a Mustang.

      That means the Mustang and Mustang GT's weight could drop to 3,300lbs with even more power than current stock V6/GT's. Pretty awesome stuff.

      There would still have to be V8 stangs, but I could see them starting at ~450hp and going up from there (like the Corvette). I think Ford could get away with that.

        • 7 Years Ago
        When the new Mustang comes out, it's supposed to be offered with the 3.5/3.7L pushing 280+ HP in stock V6 trim, with the new Boss V8 in GT trim, pushing 400 HP, with significantly improved fuel economy for both engines. The turbo'd V6 "ecoboost" engine is rumored to be an optional slotting between the V6 and V8 versions. I know, another special edition...Mustang haters, shut up before you even start.
      • 7 Years Ago
      I hate those God damn greenies. Because of all of the global warming BS, Ford was forced (no pun intended) to go with a name that is both powerful and green.

      F-THAT...should have kept Twin Force.
        • 7 Years Ago
        i actually like ecoboost more than twinforce
        • 7 Years Ago
        It's not the greenies, it's Ford Marketing's lemming-like ability to change names. These are the people that resurrected "Taurus" and changed Zephyr to MKZ after less than a year. Committee-think twerps, the lot of them.

        I mean, I'm a greenie and GM's "Ecotec" brand doesn't do anything for me. But naming engines with brands (Duratec, Hemi, Vortec) makes the old-school marketing people in American car companies feel good. "Duratec" used to piss me off most of all: having to add "durability" to your engine names doesn't fool anyone--in fact, it makes it sound like you're trying too hard to make a point.

        I'd be happy if Ford called this, oh, MZR20GTDI or something. I mean, Honda and Nissan can get respect with B18C and VQ35DE, why does Ford need a brand?
      • 7 Years Ago
      Recently traveled from FL to MI in 2.0T Audi A4 achieving 33 mpg (manual trans).... not bad and the car scoots well.

      As for the differing Hp figures- be nice to see some real testing of the stock HP that manufacturers are claiming through some dyno's.

      IMO- car manufacturer 'A' @ 250 hp can feel much stonger/ weaker than another manufacturer claiming 250 hp.

      When they've been caught inflating MPG figures, one cannot trust the marketing dept's true intentions.
      • 7 Years Ago
      I think 275 hp and 280 ft of torque from a 4 cylinder are awesome! But in real dat-to-day driving, when will you use all of that power. I would love for Ford to come out with a power/ecomony dial like Subaru has on some of their cars. I would dial back the power for increased ecomony when I do most of my driving since I live close to work and drive mostly in stop and go traffic. However, I'm a nut for power and would like to have the option of more power when I need it!
        • 7 Years Ago
        every car has that "dial" you speak of

        most simply take the form of a pedal that you use to "dial" in more power
      • 7 Years Ago
      Let's look at what Ford is doing and why.

      First they are pushing engines which will easily meet future emisssion targets.
      Second they are entering production with high volumes in mind so the engines need to be bullet proof.
      Third they need to improve performance and gas mileage and weigh a lot less.
      Ford's new engines achieve all 4.

      Yes other companies have pushed some form of this technology but usually the engines have been muchj lower volumes and haven't been as reliable as the Ford needs to be out of the door. And yes I've owned an Audi and was paid of of a class action suit setlement when the engine loxcked solid. Ford cannot risk that chance in the numbers they will put on the road. Also just the other day GM cancelled the replacement for the Northstar engine, probably for many of the resons Ford have introduced this new engine range.

      This is the future. Lower weight, equal or more performance, better emmisions and better mpg and equal quality to the big V8s. The only tweak missing is a supercharger for low end torque, or have Ford solved this already?
        • 7 Years Ago
        ... not sure but like gas turbo direct injection, VAG already has with TSI (turbo and supercharger) so I guess that places ford roughly four years out if we follow the current timelines :).

        Also, I wasn't aware there was a class action lawsuit re: the 2.0T, would you mind providing a link?
      • 7 Years Ago
      I'm not a hater, bring it on - lets see what it can do!

      Imagine that 275 HP I4 in a Mazda or something else that already has a 'sporty' disposition (Mazda 3 or 6).
        • 7 Years Ago
        Soon to be superceded Mazdaspeed 6 put out 266 horsepower, so basically Mazda have already done something similar with direct injection and turbo etc.

        Of course Ford are going mainstream with the technology, so thats good.
        • 7 Years Ago
        It already is - see MazdaSpeed6
        • 7 Years Ago
        The Mazdaspeed6 already has a 2.3L direct injected turbo 4 making 275HP.
    • Load More Comments