• May 20th 2009 at 3:46PM
  • 22
On the same day that President Obama announced tough new CAFE standards for new cars in the coming half-decade, Ford began production of its new, more efficient EcoBoost engine in Ohio. As Green Car Advisor says, Ford couldn't have picked a better day. The new 3.5-liter EcoBoost V-6 engine will first make its way into the Ford Flex, Ford Taurus SHO, Lincoln MKS sedan and Lincoln MKT crossover vehicles. The turbocharged engines deliver a fuel economy boost of around 20 percent without an expensive hybrid powertrain. Ford says that 90 percent of its models will be available with EcoBoost engines by 2013.

Production started yesterday at the Cleveland Engine Plant No. 1, located in Brook Park, Ohio. This plant first opened in 1951 and currently employs 250 people. Ford announced that the plant, which had been closed since 2007, would be reopened to build the EcoBoost engines back in February. Read more about the EcoBoost technology here and here and after the jump.


[Source: Ford]

PRESS RELEASE:

FACT SHEET: CLEVELAND ENGINE PLANT NO. 1

Plant Information

* Plant name: Cleveland Engine Plant No. 1
* Location: Brook Park, Ohio
* Employment: 250 (210 hourly; 40 salaried)
* Products: 3.5-liter EcoBoostTM V-6 engine for Ford Flex, Ford Taurus SHO, Lincoln MKS sedan and Lincoln MKT crossover
* Year opened: 1951
* Site size in acres: 93
* Plant size in square feet: 1.6 million
* Product history: More than 35 million engines, including the renowned 351 Cleveland series and 24.3 million engines in the popular 302 and 5.0-liter V-8 family

Manufacturing Upgrades

* In 2004, Ford invested $350 million for plant redesign and installation of an all-new assembly line as well as block, crankshaft and cylinder head machining lines
* An additional $55 million was invested for tooling and equipment upgrades needed to produce the EcoBoost engine, including a flexible powertrain manufacturing system
* A new production database provides a "birth history" for each engine, tracking hundreds of metrics and allowing any quality control issues to be quickly and accurately isolated


Click above for a gallery of the 2010 Lincoln MKS

A NEW ERA DAWNS FOR FORD WITH START OF ECOBOOST ENGINE PRODUCTION AT STORIED CLEVELAND PLANT

Production of Ford's EcoBoost engine begins at Cleveland Engine Plant No. 1.
Login to download images.

* Cleveland Engine Plant No. 1 becomes the first Ford manufacturing site to produce advanced fuel-efficient EcoBoost engines
* Ford invests $55 million to retool and reopen Cleveland Engine No. 1; 250 jobs have been added to the plant to produce the new engines
* EcoBoost uses gasoline turbocharged direct-injection technology for up to 20 percent better fuel economy, 15 percent fewer CO2 emissions and superior driving performance versus larger displacement engines
* EcoBoost will first be available this summer on the 2010 Lincoln MKS, Lincoln MKT, Ford Taurus SHO and Ford Flex, expanding availability to 90 percent of Ford's nameplates by 2013

CLEVELAND, May 19, 2009 – Ford Motor Company today marked the start of production of its advanced fuel-efficient EcoBoost engines at Cleveland Engine Plant No. 1 – a key step in Ford's plan to deliver leading fuel economy across millions of vehicles.

Ford invested $55 million to retool and reopen the plant, which had been idled in 2007. Approximately 250 employees are returning to the plant to build the new engines.



EcoBoost technology combines turbocharging and direct gasoline injection to deliver up to 20 percent improved fuel economy, 15 percent fewer CO2 emissions and superior driving performance compared with larger displacement engines. The "downsize and boost" strategy provides consumers better fuel economy without sacrificing the power they want for driving performance.
For more information:
Ford Taps New Manager to Oversee Cleveland Site, EcoBoost Production
Fact Sheet: Cleveland Engine Plant No. 1
New EcoBoost V-6 Endures Engine 'Boot Camp'
Collaboration with Partners Key to EcoBoost's Industry-Leading Fuel-Charging System, Output
Technology Fact Sheets

"This launch of the first EcoBoost engine is a significant milestone in Ford's overall commitment to deliver affordable fuel efficiency for millions," said Barb Samardzich, vice president, Global Powertrain Engineering. "We've spent the past two years developing EcoBoost technology and now our customers will finally have the opportunity to experience what this engine delivers, the power of a V-8 with the fuel economy of a V-6."

About EcoBoost
The 3.5-liter EcoBoost V-6 engine, the first V-6 direct-injection twin-turbocharged engine produced in North America, will make its debut in the 2010 Lincoln MKS, Lincoln MKT, Ford Taurus SHO and Ford Flex this summer. A V-6 EcoBoost engine will be available for the F-150 in 2010.



Ford will deliver EcoBoost across the full range of its product portfolio, from small cars to large trucks and by 2013, will offer EcoBoost engines, V-6s and I-4s, on 90 percent of its North American nameplates. Within three years, Ford expects to deliver 750,000 EcoBoost-equipped vehicles per year in North America and 1.3 million vehicles globally.

The 3.5-liter EcoBoost V-6 engine delivers 355 horsepower and a responsive 350 ft.-lb. of torque across a broad RPM range.

New Life for Historic Plant
Cleveland Engine Plant No. 1 opened in 1951 as Ford's first engine plant in Ohio. Since then it has produced more than 35 million engines, including 24.3 million engines in the famous 302 and 5.0-liter V-8 family. In 2004, Ford invested $350 million into the plant for redesign and installation of an all-new assembly line as well as block, crankshaft and cylinder head machining lines.

Cleveland Engine Plant No. 1 has been outfitted with a flexible powertrain manufacturing system that can be easily reprogrammed to perform new tasks with minimal disruption to production.

"The ability to reprogram on the fly is a key feature of this new manufacturing system," said Charles Binger, Cleveland site manager. "We don't have to shut down an entire plant in order to make major changes to the line, helping to speed up modifications and keep downtime to a minimum."

Plant upgrades also included a special turbocharger installation and test line. After the turbos are added, each EcoBoost engine is turned on speeds between 60-600 RPM using an electric motor to simulate running conditions. Unique to the Cleveland site, this "cold test" checks for proper buildup of pressure on the turbo output side before the engine ever leaves the factory.

To ensure quality is built into the engine from the outset, Ford developed a new, internal database for its operations. Each engine will be built with a sophisticated, embedded engine "birth history" that allows plant engineers to track every stage of production.

The engine history, maintained in a microchip database, includes hundreds of metrics and allows engineers to trace the precise path taken by any part so any quality control issue can be traced back to its source.

Extensive Employee Training
To prepare for production of the EcoBoost engine, Cleveland Engine Plant No. 1 work force participated in intensive quality training. Along with learning basic manufacturing operations, employees also learned to manage their own equipment and work area through "manufacturing work teams" at the facility.

"Training workers to do their jobs is one thing," said Kevin Heck, Cleveland Engine No. 1 manufacturing manager. "But we've gone beyond that by giving team members significant responsibility for their output. It's up to the hourly team members to produce a high-quality engine, and we've empowered them to make that happen."

"We're proud of the efforts we've made to improve quality," said Mike Gammella, president, UAW Local 1250. "We have an outstanding work force at the Cleveland site, working together to ensure we're not just competitive, but the best in the industry."

Production Innovations through Supplier Collaboration
The twin-turbocharged 3.5-liter EcoBoost V-6 engine's enhanced fuel-charging system can deliver as much as 2,150 PSI of fuel pressure – more than 35 times the pressure seen in a conventional port-fuel-injected V-6. Ford worked in tandem with Bosch, the fuel system supplier, to ensure that manufacturing and assembly was prepared for the demands of the advanced design.

"The EcoBoost line has a fully automated fuel-charging assembly and rundown station," said Joseph Basmaji, Ford direct injection fuel system technical specialist. "It's a new technology in manufacturing that's only been made possible by close collaboration between Ford and our suppliers."

###

About Ford Motor Company
Ford Motor Company, a global automotive industry leader based in Dearborn, Mich., manufactures or distributes automobiles across six continents. With about 205,000 employees and about 90 plants worldwide, the company's automotive brands include Ford, Lincoln, Mercury and Volvo. The company provides financial services through Ford Motor Credit Company. For more information regarding Ford's products, please visit www.ford.com.


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
  • 22 Comments
      • 5 Years Ago
      Hi All-

      Re: engine comparisons.

      Don't forget that the actual useful horsepower generated using turbocharging is greater than the horsepower gained by simply using a larger displacement, normally aspirated engine. (ie 355 hp from a turbo is more than 355 hp from a non-turbo in most instances.)

      Engine horsepower is measured as if at sea level. Most autos are not run at sea level, but at some distance higher. In fact, quite often extra power is needed in higher altitudes, such as when trailering in mountains. Turbo engines are much less susceptible to loss of power due to increase in altitude (and temperature too) than normally-aspirated engines, a point often overlooked when comparing the two.

      The marketers should grasp a hold of this fact and use it. But... never mind...come to think of it- marketing people don't really concern themselves with fact!
      • 6 Years Ago
      Whatever the reason, they need to step up with saving the environment.
      Here is another absolutely mind blowing new reason http://walydopts.blogspot.com/2009/05/frozen-killers-in-antartic.html
      • 6 Years Ago
      The 2009 Lincoln mks has a 3.7L engine and gets 19mpg combined. So with a 3.5L engine with 20% improvement this new engine should bring that up to a whopping 24mpg combined. woo.
      alexacoon
      • 6 Years Ago
      Anyone know when the 4's will go into production? I've waited this long I might wait for one in a Fiesta or even a Focus if it comes along first.
        • 6 Years Ago
        @alexacoon
        Supposedly by 2013 90% of fords will have eco boost engines with 6 cylinders or 4 cylinders, and I think (assuming that I read the article correctly) that there will be two 4 cylinder sizes, one will be "Ford Fiesta" sized and the other will be "Ford Fusion sized". So by 2013 there will be three engines that re installed into all Fords with comparable power to the current V8, V6, and 4 cylinder.
      • 6 Years Ago
      Isn't that what all turbocharged engines do? My Subaru WRX got about the same performance as a Mustang with base V8 and gas mileage like a V6. Is it the policy of replacing naturally aspirated large engines with smaller turbocharged engines that is the EcoBoost? The policy of making better engine choices at Ford has a green name? I thought there was some special EcoBoost technology there like the VW TSI engines. How disappointing.
        • 6 Years Ago
        It isn't marketing, it is a different engine. It has fewer cylinders, has more hp and the same fuel economy as a larger engine. So Ford creates 6 cylinder engine that performs like an 8 cylinder engine. Ford sill also create a 4 cylinder engine that performs like a V6 and replace the V6 in the fusion with said 4 cylinder.

        Eco boost = more hp for the same amount of gas. This can be reversed so that you get the same hp for less gas.
        • 6 Years Ago
        Ecoboost takes it to the next level. The Ecoboost in the MKS actually outperforms a V8. It has low end torque that nears a diesel and maintains it throughout most of it's rev range. Your turbo can't do that. A V8 can't do that. A diesel can't do that.

        With such a nice torque curve, I wonder if maybe they can save a few bucks and go back to 4-speed automatics.
        • 6 Years Ago
        I just watched Ford's video and am afraid it does not change anything. The revolutionary new tech is what you can buy right now in a VW Passat. Direct injection, turbocharging, and maximum torque(exceeding the 200 HP) from 1800 rpm. So what we have is a policy change to build adapt existing tech to their engines as a policy and call it EcoBoost. Well, it is a good thing that they do. I just object, I guess, to the unique invented here boast. But the drag race between the Lincoln and the Cadillac sort of says it all when it comes to who it is aimed at. VW, by the way, finds that 7 speed transmissions are optimum with that type of engine.
      • 6 Years Ago
      Yes, the oil / coal industry have already terraformed the planet with a 2 degree C, temperature increase. So, we are paying a Global Warming Tax right now, especially in California, where the nation will soon have to bail them out.

      - Global Forest Fires
      - Global Drought's AND Floods!

      And Ford keeps pumping out more HP HypeBoost as if 355 hp in an SUV was some kind of Eco solution. For the last 5 years I no longer give a Damn about the Quarter Mile times a car, and especially an SUV, can make. A quarter Mile is equal to 440 YARDS, and then you need another 440 YARDS to slow down. Guess What? On the EAST Coast we don't have ANY open Roads where you've got 880 YARDS of free travel.

      FORD seems to be betting the America Public will buy their SUV's with their 355 "ECO" horsepower. A turd by any other name is still a turd.

      • 6 Years Ago
      EcoBoost is such a stupid name for what is just common sense in building engines. Glad Ford finally figured it out, must have been hard, just reverse engineer any non-american engine and you're done, but still better a stupid name than huge bloated V8's that do 20l/100km.

      Anyway, they couldnt have picked a darker, more gloomy part of the factory than that to do their little press meet? Where are the windows? The lights? Darker than Gollums dungeon in there.
      • 6 Years Ago
      So 20% better than what?

      Come on Ford get out some real world data this type of non info report is meaningless.
        • 6 Years Ago
        I don't want to take away from the G8. I've driven the G8 GT and it's a wonderful car to drive, the motor being a major reason.

        "I suspect that in comparison with the Econoboost the GM engine is lighter and smaller (cheaper to produce & maintain) than the Econoboost V6 Ford unit!"

        Cheaper to produce and maintain is probable. High tech is always riskier. As for which would weight more, we'd only be guessing at this time.

        "Both give 355HP and both have excellent low down torque ( a characteristic of the GM OHV design). I sincerely doubt that the Econoboost engine out grunts the GM OHV V8 as the latter does 0-60 mph in 5.3 seconds."

        This is where I'm not sure you're correct. The GM V8 does have excellent torque. From looking at the graphs (haven't driven one), the Ecoboost 3.5L has a much wider torque curve than a V8 does. For an old timer like myself, it's difficult to accept that a turbo 6 is going to have a better power curve than a V8, but this is where the Ecoboost really shines.

        "The GM gets 16/24 mpg whereas, as you state, the non boost Ford V6 gets 16/23 on "only" 265 HP. Thus the Econoboost is likely to get similar (I doubt it) or more likely rather worse mpg."

        Interestingly, the 3.5L Ecoboost engine gets slightly better mpg than the normally aspired 3.7L in the MKS (16/25 vs 16/23).

        "On the subject of size etc the G8 is the longer car in wheelbase by some 2 inches."

        Wheelbase only. In body length, the G8 is eight inches shorter. The MKS is longer, taller, wider, and heavier. Then again, these two cars serve very different purposes, so we may be getting off track. The G8 GT costs a heck of a lot less. :)

        "By the way the design of the Ford/Lincon necessitates 4WD for this econoboost power as in normal form it's a FWD and few wuld want all that power thru a FWD trans."

        I hadn't looked at it that way. Quite possible.

        "So IMHO here we have a classic case of manufacturer unwarranted HYPE for this new "econoboost" engine. I see nothing "economic" about it versus the big GM car and engine."

        Hype? You bet it's hype. Unwarranted? That I'm not so sure about. They've addressed the issues with turbos at low rpms, through the use of direct injection. The result is near diesel like torque on the low end and turbo power on the high end. It's an achievement that deserves some degree of credit. How much of it is over hyped, we'll see.

        "6.0L OHV GM V8 which is sadly NOT recognised for the incredibly efficient engine it really is."

        Again, I agree here. The 6.0L is a complete dream to drive and deserves recognition for combining that with relative efficiency. It does deserve more attention than it gets.
        • 6 Years Ago
        "The V8 6.0L Pontiac G8 Gt gets something like 16/24 with its 360HP and massive torque."

        15/24/18 mpg with 355hp on the 2009 G8 GT. The G8 is to be commended to for it's power/weight/mpg ratings. Excellent example. The Ecoboost MKS is a larger and heavier vehicle. It has a broader torque curve. It's also AWD. All this and it manages to get 6% better mpg.

        To put it another way, put that 3.5L ecoboost in the G8. You'd get better power delivery and better mpg, quite possibly 20%.

        "So again what is this econoboost a 20% improvement? It's very easy to say that "20% improvement" and provide NO factual data."

        I mostly agree. We're not seeing enough to be satisfactory anyway. I'd like to see a proper comparison. Without it, we're just speculating.

        "Actually a NON econboost Linoln MKS AWD V6 gets around 17/24 so that would mean an econoboost should get 20/29. If that's so job well done!"

        Now, you're getting silly. You know very well that they're talking about an improvement, given a particular amount of power. For this comparison to be fair, you'd want to compare the non-ecoboost MKS to a 2.5L ecoboost MKS. I suspect you'd see at least a 20% improvement in mpg.

        Btw: the 2010 Non-ecoboost gets 16/23.
        • 6 Years Ago
        I chose the Pontiac as a comparison for a reason. It's possible to use a large (6.0L V8)engine in a really effective near "green' way, using none of the extra weight and size of a DOHC engine, even a smaller V6. I suspect that in comparison with the Econoboost the GM engine is lighter and smaller (cheaper to produce & maintain) than the Econoboost V6 Ford unit! Both give 355HP and both have excellent low down torque ( a characteristic of the GM OHV design). I sincerely doubt that the Econoboost engine out grunts the GM OHV V8 as the latter does 0-60 mph in 5.3 seconds. OHV designs such as this get really good torque at low revs.
        The GM gets 16/24 mpg whereas, as you state, the non boost Ford V6 gets 16/23 on "only" 265 HP. Thus the Econoboost is likely to get similar (I doubt it) or more likely rather worse mpg.
        On the subject of size etc the G8 is the longer car in wheelbase by some 2 inches. The Lincoln "winds" in 4WD weight by an extra 250 lbs. AWD may make perhaps one mpg difference. By the way the design of the Ford/Lincon necessitates 4WD for this econoboost power as in normal form it's a FWD and few wuld want all that power thru a FWD trans.

        So IMHO here we have a classic case of manufacturer unwarranted HYPE for this new "econoboost" engine. I see nothing "economic" about it versus the big GM car and engine. Plus the V8 boosted engine has so many more parts, is more costly to manufacturer and is likely larger and heavier than the 6.0L OHV GM V8 which is sadly NOT recognised for the incredibly efficient engine it really is.
        GM should rename their OHV engine "econoOHVV8".
        • 6 Years Ago
        The G8 isn't really an apples to apples comparison. It's RWD, 8" shorter, and 300 lbs. lighter. It also forces a 1 to 4 upshift under slight acceleration when equipped with a manual to get around gas guzzler laws (see Edmunds.com roadtests for an example of this technology on the new Dodge Challenger).

        The real applications where Ecoboost will shine will be in a Fusion or Focus. The 1.6l Ecoboost motor produces 180hp and 180lb ft of torque and is supposed to return up to 43mpg on the highway. Sure a diesel can make these numbers but this ought to offer pretty darn good performance as well. A 2.0l 275hp Ecoboost motor would replace the V6 Fusion and provide similar gains and performance.
        • 6 Years Ago
        The 20% reduction is in comparison to an engine with comparable power. In the turbo V6 example, it is compared to a non-turbo V8. For the 4 cylinder, it is compared to a V6 of equivalent power....

        However, these engines do not significantly boost the fuel economy when compared to a non-turbo engine of the same configuration and displacement.
        • 6 Years Ago
        20% better than the equivalent engine. The Lincoln MKS AWD w/ Ecoboost is supposed to return somewhere around 16-17/24, although I don't think it's been officially tested yet. That's pretty good mileage for a 4300 lb AWD luxury sedan, and the torque curve is magnificent. Some people are betting the MKS will go 0-60 in the low 5's. That's about the same straight line performance as a E55 4-Motion which gets about 13/19, not to mention that the MKS is about a foot longer and 500 lbs heaver than the E55.
        • 6 Years Ago
        Arumage,

        The V8 6.0L Pontiac G8 Gt gets something like 16/24 with its 360HP and massive torque.

        So again what is this econoboost a 20% improvement? It's very easy to say that "20% improvement" and provide NO factual data.
        Actually a NON econboost Linoln MKS AWD V6 gets around 17/24 so that would mean an econoboost should get 20/29. If that's so job well done! But if that's what Ford expects then take the risk and state it. Me? I doubt they will achieve those gains and that's why they don't want to state them.
      • 6 Years Ago
      Actually, the Ecoboost will get the same gas mileage as the 3.7L V6, but it has 75hp more. It's meant to replace a V8.

      Ecoboost V6 replaces normally aspirated V8
      Ecoboost 4-cyl replaces normally aspirated V6
        • 6 Years Ago
        I believe the better longer term answer is in a technology which GM has been working on for some time.
        The homogeneous charge-compression ignition (HCCI). In efffect this uses diesel technology process, but uses gasoline to provide say 30% better fuel economy and much lower emisssions (the temperature at which the fuel ignites is too low to form nitrous oxide..as an example).
        • 6 Years Ago
        So they should call it HpBoost-EcoMeh.
    • Load More Comments