Ford has yet to release its first EcoBoost engines but is reportedly already hard at work on the technology's next phase.
Rumors indicate that the new engine technology is codenamed Bobcat and uses small amounts of ethanol injection to improve power and reduce emissions. Ethanol carries a very high octane rating, which allows an engine to be tuned for more power. An engine with ethanol injection can run a much higher compression ratio along with a small turbocharger as the ethanol would be injected directly into the engine's combustion chamber, thereby eliminating precompression, which is more commonly referred to as knock and can be extremely hazardous to your engine's health. The alcohol injection would be performed on an entirely different fuel injection system as the gasoline, complete with its own fuel tank. It would have to be closely metered, but should only need refilled once every few months since the amount used would be so small.
Early estimates put the new Bobcat engine tech at about a $1,100 price premium over a standard gasoline engine, but the turbocharging and gasoline direct injection that makes up EcoBoost
accounts for $700 of that charge. While that may seem like a steep amount, consider that many truck buyers opt for high-power diesel engines that carry premiums of $5,000 or more.
[Source:
PickupTrucks.com]
_opt_thumbnail.jpg)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Hike15 5:33PM (9/02/2008)
why bobcat?
those are skids teers...i think they need a more creative name
but i like the overall idea of it
Reply
Randy 9:29PM (9/02/2008)
It's a codename for God's sake! It could be XR4Ti and it wouldn't matter!
It's a nice option at a nice price!
P.S. XR4Ti is taken (Merkur)
BobinCobb 5:46PM (9/02/2008)
thereby eliminating precompression, which is more commonly referred to as knock?????
Knock is Pre-ignition
Reply
Tsunami Racer 5:57PM (9/02/2008)
mercury bobcat!
Reply
why not the LS2LS7? 6:14PM (9/02/2008)
Ethanol (and methanol) also reduces charge temperature when it vaporizes, which helps prevent knock also. You can increase the compression ratio further.
Honestly, I don't like the idea of another consumable in my car, even if I can go to the hardware store to get it (denatured alcohol). I'm not a huge fan of urea injection either, instead preferring the regenerative-type cats.
Reply
dac 6:17PM (9/02/2008)
Knocking is preignition not precompression.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preignition
Reply
Hamud 7:11PM (9/02/2008)
THis is great, they can use some of the know-how from the Flex Engines here in Brazil. They use sensors in each cilinder to avoid pre-ignition, that made possible rising the compression rate even when using gasoline.
Reply
Bungle 7:59PM (9/02/2008)
An $1100 premium really isn't that much. I have no idea what kind of increase in fuel economy this could bring, but it would only need to save about 300 gallons of gas over the life of the car to pay for itself (assuming there aren't major extra maintenance issues with this hardware).
Reply
Nightcrawler 3:52PM (9/04/2008)
Bungle, it would need to save 300 gallons of gas to pay for itself only if you assume gas will stay at about it's current price. If I was making that calculation for a new car I'd be keeping for quite a while, I'd assume at least an average $5 a gallon cost for gas over the vehicles lifetime. That would be even less time to a break even point, 220 gallons.
MikeW 8:11PM (9/02/2008)
Weren't these engines supposed to be dual direct injection?
Ford should get the ZF 8hp70 first.
http://www.atzonline.com/index.php;do=show/site=a4e/sid=43022089548bdd5f96af3b205047995/alloc=3/id=8319
Reply
Domestic 6.0 9:03PM (9/02/2008)
Sounds Great
Reply
BoxerFanatic 10:33PM (9/02/2008)
Ok... so more weight... more complexity, more filters, more fittings, more expensive injectors.
For ethanol "boosting".
So, what, you go to the liquor store to fill up your car, and yourself (might as well, right?), before hitting a gas station, too?
Gas is expensive enough, without having to fill a second tank with vodka or moonshine.
Not to mention that leaving a tank half full of ethanol is great in cold weather, when the tank can condense water, and then the alcohol can absorb it, being hygroscopic, and all... I am sure that helps the "precise metering" by being diluted.
Not to mention that ethanol is about the least cost effective mass market fuel currently available, by difficulty, input costs, and energy density. And the price of corn for third world foodstuffs.
Maybe if another source of BILLIONS of gallons of pure ethanol from a non-agricultural source, like garbage, or something... and taking up crop land, and agricultural resources to burn inefficiently in a gasoline engine in larger quantities than a family of 4 can eat in a year. But that isn't anything more than research and conjecture at this point.
Ethanol is not the right answer, it is merely a convenient wrong answer that puts some cash in some pockets, and takes it out of others. Great for government work, if you can get it.
Reply
Panga 7:46AM (9/03/2008)
There is no two tanks. If everything goes like in Brazil, what you will have is a mixture of two fuels. For example, you fill up the tank with 80% gas + 20% ethanol for example. The car will understand and change compression in injection point. Everything runs smooth and you don't feel any diference.
We have much small engines here but my car for example 1.8L with gas runs 110HP, but with alcohol only it goes to 115HP. The mixture will be somewhere in the middle of that. But we don't mixture, we use only alcohol. Much cheaper.
I think is this kind of boosting they are talking about.
MikeW 11:26AM (9/03/2008)
Removing primary direct injection is a retrograde step, but if Ford could get 400hp 500ft-lbs from this 'EthaBoost' 3.5 liter V6 in a F-150... (on regular & E70, with a 90/10% tank size split)
It might be something to think about, if Ford's new 4.4 liter diesel goes away.
But the 8 speed auto would be worthwhile to have within two years.
moa 5:09AM (9/03/2008)
i can't see the point.
why install second fuel system if you can run engine on mixture of ethanol (or methanol) with gasoline? or even on pure alcohol?
Reply
Panga 7:38AM (9/03/2008)
Very new development. Brazil is using this for the last 40 years. LOL
And you say Ford is developing this now? We have hibrid cars where we can choose to put alcohol or gasoline or both at the same time for the last 7 years now.
This is nothing new.
Reply
Panga 7:51AM (9/03/2008)
Here the cost is very significant. I pay (in my currency) $2.5 per a gas/liter and 1.5 per Alcohol/Liter. So if I fill up my tank only with gas I would expent $0,22 per Kilometer but with alcohol I have $0.17 per kilometer. It seems not much but in the end of the month makes a difference.
Reply
arumage 8:45AM (9/03/2008)
Panga,
The technology is not a new one, but you've got it wrong. There would be two tanks. Ethanol would be injected via direct injection and gasoline would be injected via direct injection. There are two tanks and two injectors. So little ethanol is used that the tank would only need to be filled once a month (or so they say). It has it's positives and negatives. More complex... yes. More efficient as far as power and mileage... yes
Reply
Panga 9:47AM (9/03/2008)
But one thing is, you get the boost but compromise the Miles/Gallon. So you gain in one side and loose in the other.
It would be much better if you had one tank with both already mixed. Much cheaper, easier to maintain. Small tank to gain what? 5HP maybe a little more...
kry350 3:02PM (9/03/2008)
Panga, Did you read the article? The compression would be raised to a much higher level and/or add a turbo to achieve much more than 5 hp. If you do this, you can't rely on the driver to put the right mixture in the car, so you need 2 tanks. If you only had one tank, and the driver put in straight gasoline, the engine would destroy itself. This is not old news.
Reply