Ford plans four-cylinder for every model by 2013
Ford has made a public commitment to industry-leading fuel economy, and the most important component of that plan comes in a small but efficient package. Product Development chief Derek Kuzak told Automotive News that the Blue Oval will sport a four-cylinder option in every car and crossover by 2013. Ford is going to lean heavily on its forthcoming Ecoboost engines to accomplish this feat, as turbocharged four-cylinder engines can provide V6 punch without the same thirst for fuel. With far stricter CO2 and fuel economy mandates on the way, Ford is going to need all the Ecoboost engines it can make.Ford foresees the need for 750,000 Ecoboost engines per year by 2013, and two thirds of that total will be four-bangers. V8 engines will be relegated to large pickups, SUVs and the Ford Mustang, but Kuzak says the company is even looking at turbocharged four-cylinder engines for the full-size F-150 pickup. If Ford can produce enough power from an Ecoboost engine to power an F-150, we'd love to drive a Mustang with that engine. Light weight and 300+ turbocharged horsepower coming from America's original pony car sounds good to us.
Gallery: Ford EcoBoost GDTI engines
[Source: Automotive News, sub. req'd]
Get a WordPress.com Blog
_opt_thumbnail.jpg)
_thumbnail.jpg "2011 Audi A8: Live from Miami")
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
Robert O 11:34AM (2/16/2009)
Yes, a powerful 4 in a pony would be awesome fun.
Reply
Eric 11:42AM (2/16/2009)
so wrong. just like the mustang II and the svo.
Kattleox 11:46AM (2/16/2009)
Thats what I thought. Nobody wants another pintostang.
But at least V8 will still be an option this time around.
Rob 11:51AM (2/16/2009)
I said the same thing about the Challenger, but the hicks hated the comment. Personally, the idea of a musclecar is a RWD car with good power to weight, IMHO.... and it doesn't matter how many cylinders that takes. A boosted 4 banger seems like a win win.... on the highway, when you aren't really on boost, it returns decent MPG, and in town, or for passing, you still have a lot of power. Of course, I'm sure the hicks will be in here soon saying how 4 bangers are for sissies, etc. Whatever. Go flip some burgers.
Dude 12:17PM (2/16/2009)
The Mustang is supposed to be a Pony Car that can be equipped as a Muscle Car. A modern 4 (with a turbo) would likely prove faster than the current truck V6 in their now, but that's not the problem.
The problem Ford will have is that the Mustang V8 crowd is so ingrained in their hate for any other engine type. Ford would need to not only offer the smaller engine, but also offer an extremely sporty package that made the car far more athletic than a V8 in the turns to shut down the haters. They also would need to advertise it and race it. Only then could a 4-cylinder Mustang get any respect.
fixitfixitstop 1:03PM (2/16/2009)
Eric, the Mustang SVO was awesome.
Mike 1:44PM (2/16/2009)
Rob,
The Charger is a lot more car than the Mustang (weight wise) it may not have been a great idea.
Dude, the Mustang with a lighter 4 cylinder and an off the shelf Ford racing suspension would easily out handle the V8 car and be a compelling argument against the V8.
I think the reality of it is, that those who typically buy Pony or any other type of performance car for modifying, see the smaller displacement engine as a hinderance. You will always be able to make greater amounts of power for less money on a car with more displacement. I do, however, see the ecoboost engines able to get a good response in this day and age, if you're looking for a car to handle better and get better fuel economy and maximum HP/sound isn't of concern, there's no reason not to go FI 4 over NA 8.
naggs 1:52PM (2/16/2009)
a turbo 4 would be less expensive, significantly lighter, be more efficient.
think of all the room you would have inside the mustang engine bay if it only had a 4cyl inside?
Eric 2:48PM (2/16/2009)
fixitfixitstop: i completely agree. one of the best handling Fords ever. i just don't want another 4 cyl stang.
to me, if it does not have 8 cylinders, its not a muscle car. maybe a sports car, not a muscle car.
Sea Urchin 11:35AM (2/16/2009)
More proof that CAFE works. Without it Ford right now would be selling a F-150 that can tow 4 soccer moms (12,000 Lbs)
But on serious note, this is one way Ford can out Honda Honda and Toyota, offering smart choices, so people can buy cars with smaller engines if they feel like gas is getting too expensive.
Reply
Noah 1:41PM (2/16/2009)
4 soccer moms...nice!
Yeah, I don't know how well a turbo 4 would work on such heavy vehicles. First, I'm concerned about the lifetime of the engine, put under such stress. Plus, if you look at the Mazda CX-7, its turbo 4 gets about the same mileage as the NA v6. That is only one example, but I'm willing to bet you'd get better mileage out of the 5.4 V8 on the F150 than a turbo 4 cylinder.
naggs 1:47PM (2/16/2009)
yeah, they wipped this up in the last 6 months...
gas being almost $5 a gallon for a while had nothing to do with it at all
BoxerFanatic 11:37AM (2/16/2009)
Well, an over-stressed engine is one way to go...
But having to ram-rod an engine to get a heavy vehicle to move, is not the most fuel efficient thing, especially when pressurizing the engine with a turbo or supercharger. It requires even MORE fuel.
I drive a turbo 4, and I love it. It also weighs ~3500lbs, and gets an average of about 23mpg on premium. On highway trips, trip average can be up around 26-27, but in town, it is in and out of boost more often.
The harder you have to work an engine, the more fuel it drinks...
I would be much more interested in Ford saying they were going to cut 300-500lbs of curb weight off of all of their cars, and then using appropriately sized engines, with cruising gear ratios in top gear.
Reply
Sea Urchin 11:44AM (2/16/2009)
Hey, this is America, nobody is losing weight.
(P.S. i make so many fat comments, you'd think that i am this super fit, 6 pac kind of guy)
stg 5:31PM (2/16/2009)
well. with the sho taurus it gets around 25mpg highway with 365hp wheres a v8 with that power gets 20 if lucky
henrykrinkle 12:19PM (2/16/2009)
"In the near term we will focus on technologies that can be delivered affordably -- EcoBoost powertrains, electric power steering, six speed transmissions, and battery management system. In the mid-term -- 2013-- you will start to see substantial reductions in weight."
http://blogs.motortrend.com/6447961/editorial/the-anti-lutz-once-around-the-block-withford-product-chief-derrick-kuzak/index.html
Looks like you'll have to find something else to complain about but that's getting harder and harder to do with Ford.
zamafir 12:26PM (2/16/2009)
"
Looks like you'll have to find something else to complain about but that's getting harder and harder to do with Ford."
Not really, there are plenty of examples of cars on the market with the features you just quoted which way more then their previous Gen. I think ford's doing the best of any of the big 2, but I'm not going to let that impair my perception of automotive reality.
henrykrinkle 12:40PM (2/16/2009)
@zamafir
What? My point is that Kuzak says substantial weight reductions are coming. Many people complain about overweight cars and Ford will be addressing that. Therefore, one less thing to complain about for those who always find something negative to say anytime there's good news from Ford.
zamafir 1:24PM (2/16/2009)
The weight reduction's already here, just look at the fiesta, engineered from the ground up to be lighter then it's outgoing predecessor without anything you quoted. My concern is everything you've tossed up is already being utilized and hasn't shown huge weight savings. Engineering from the ground up does, but up to this point, Ford's only really focused effort like that in Europe. It'll be good for us when the Fiesta gets here but I'll be surprised if it starts extending to the rest of the range given the automotive design and development process, especially in the time frame quoted.
Ian 1:45PM (2/16/2009)
"But having to ram-rod an engine to get a heavy vehicle to move, is not the most fuel efficient thing, especially when pressurizing the engine with a turbo or supercharger. It requires even MORE fuel"
That is incorrect. It takes X fuel to make Y power with Z air/fuel ratio at a specified BSFC. The point of a turbo is the power is there when you want it, and if you don't, the turbo just freewheels and its a normal 4 cylinder.
I think the smarter thing to do would be to do an EcoBoost 6 with cylinder deactivation. That way you get V6 low end, V8 mid and high end with the boost, and 4 cylinder fuel consumption when you're just freeway riding. And let the CUSTOMER choose to use the cylinder deactivation. Have a switch from 4 -> 6 cylnders so that if you don't like how it feels you can turn it off.