Just one year after launching the all-new 2013 Fusion, Ford is reportedly set to alter the sedan's powertrain lineup with the addition of a new 1.5-liter turbocharged three-cylinder EcoBoost engine. A member of Blue Oval Forums apparently got their hands on the ordering guide for the 2014 model year Fusion, and this 1.5-liter mill is set to be introduced with late availability.

This lines up with other news about the Chinese-market Mondeo being offered with a new 1.5-liter EcoBoost – a derivative of the 1.0-liter triple that will come to North America under the hood of the Fiesta. In the Chinese application, the larger three-pot engine produces 177 horsepower and 177 pound-feet of torque, which is very close to the current 1.6-liter inline-four's output numbers of 178 hp and 184 lb-ft.

What's interesting, however, is that the 1.6-liter engine will reportedly still be offered in the Fusion, but only with the six-speed manual transmission. The smaller 1.5-liter EcoBoost will only be mated to a six-speed SelectShift automatic, and will feature start/stop. This means that while the 1.5 is slightly down on power compared to the 1.6, it could easily improve fuel economy numbers, allowing the Fusion to regain the title of having the best mileage in the segment, likely besting the 38 miles per gallon of the Nissan Altima. Currently, the Fusion 1.6 is rated at 23 mpg city and 36 mpg highway.

Blue Oval Forums also states that the 2014 Fusion will get a number of other changes, including an optional heated steering wheel, cooled seats, summer tire options for select models, and a couple of new exterior paint colors.

A Ford spokesperson could not be reached for comment at this time, but stay tuned for updates as they become available.


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
  • 108 Comments
      MrMonkaroo
      • 1 Year Ago
      This is a bit of memory lane, but does anyone remember when Mazda back in the early 90s had the 1.8 liter V6? I wonder with days technology direct-injection, and valve timing how much power/economy they could squeeze out of that motor. The original motor had 130 HP and 115 lb·ft torque.
        carguy1701
        • 1 Year Ago
        @MrMonkaroo
        I've heard of it in passing, but I haven't read up on it. I'm guessing it was a really short stroke design.
      bbimmer7
      • 1 Year Ago
      Will this one burst into flames?
        • 1 Year Ago
        @bbimmer7
        [blocked]
      Suke Madiq
      • 1 Year Ago
      The ECO boost is not very eco. The 1.6 liter gets worse mpgs than an Accord with a 2.4. And the Accord will not need a new turbo down the line.
        chechnya
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Suke Madiq
        I thought you were BS'ing.. but it appears you aren't. I'm very surprised. The mpg numbers are negligible.
      churchmotor
      • 1 Year Ago
      What is Ford's obsession with these ecoBOOM motors? They are failing miserably in real world comparison test. Failing in Performance, failures in refinement, failures in economy.
        TrueDat
        • 1 Year Ago
        @churchmotor
        ever owned one? didn't think so....
        David
        • 1 Year Ago
        @churchmotor
        Can you say CAFE? Reality has no role to play when politicians are driving the rules. I paid $400 for a TPMS system, because someone was too lazy/stupid to monitor their tire pressure. Tell me this will end well for those who care about cars...
      desinerd1
      • 1 Year Ago
      "Currently, the Fusion 1.6 is rated at 23 mpg city and 36 mpg highway." translation: in real world conditions, it gives 15 mpg city and 25mg highway
        FIDTRO
        • 1 Year Ago
        @desinerd1
        You're a Hyundai/Kia fan and you're bashing Ford for incorrect MPG numbers?
      domingorobusto
      • 1 Year Ago
      The 1.6 is already too weak, now they want to make it worse? I really don't see the appeal. i test drove a 1.6L manual Fusion, and that really isn't enough engine for a 3500 lb car. There's sacrificing some power for efficiency, and then there's making the engine too small and losing efficiency because it's working too hard all the time and still having a slow car. That sounds like a nearly perfect engine for the Focus (where the 1.0 is too small), but it's simply not enough for the Fusion. But I do agree with everyone else that what we really want is a Fusion SVT with the 2.3 EB.
        domingorobusto
        • 1 Year Ago
        @domingorobusto
        Side note: They're really going to put a 1.0L EB into the Mondeo? Are they going for the slowest car in history award? Yeah, it's an awesome little engine and I love it....in a Fiesta where it belongs. But basically all the reviews (mostly european ones) I've read of the Focus 1.0 say that it's almost too small an engine for the Focus, and they want to tack 500 more lbs onto it? I mean come on. A 20 lb per hp ratio is slow. A ratio of 27 lbs per hp is just abysmal. I can basically guarantee you it will get lower mileage than the 1.6L version in real world conditions, because you'll have to beat it to death to get anywhere with the tiniest modicum of alacrity.
        Dean Hammond
        • 1 Year Ago
        @domingorobusto
        the 1.6 is basically the mainstream engine for those that really dont care, personally the 2.0 works WAY better, and I think its MPG numbers could actually be pretty close in everyday driving to the 1.6. This 1.5 will only work if its lighter, which I beleive it is, and if its similar in size to the 1.0 the enginge could be placed further back improving weight distribution....so I guess we will wait and see....
        2 wheeled menace
        • 1 Year Ago
        @domingorobusto
        Actually, a motor working hard all the time tends to be the most efficient due to pumping losses getting worse and worse at partial throttle.... this is what sucks about internal combustion engines, and is why the most anemic motors always return excellent efficiency. This of course means that the motor never has much spare power on tap, which definitely sucks..
        TrueDat
        • 1 Year Ago
        @domingorobusto
        "i test drove a 1.6L manual Fusion, and that really isn't enough engine for a 3500 lb car." I drive and 09 fusion with the 2.3L mated to a manual trans.. it's 165 hp and 170 torques. it's plenty of power if you're a person concerned about mpg's. when mine was stock, it would do 0-60 in under 8 seconds consistently, which is respectable. And the performance version won't where the SVT badge.. it will be labeled sport just as it has been in the past.
          domingorobusto
          • 1 Year Ago
          @TrueDat
          Your 09 is also about 350 lbs lighter than the lightest new Fusion while not giving much at all up in power.
          xxmixedxtapexx
          • 1 Year Ago
          @TrueDat
          I could see a Fusion ST over a Sport, that way it would keep consistency with the Focus and Fiesta ST
        SpikedLemon
        • 1 Year Ago
        @domingorobusto
        We've been spoiled with higher performing engines. 170-odd hp in a mid-sized car sounds reasonable to me for a base engine. In the same ballpark as the VW Passat and Honda Accord.
          • 1 Year Ago
          @SpikedLemon
          [blocked]
          domingorobusto
          • 1 Year Ago
          @SpikedLemon
          It's just that the new Fusion is significantly heavier than the last one, and base power has not increased enough to match.
          SpikedLemon
          • 1 Year Ago
          @SpikedLemon
          domingorobusto: it's the base engine; nothing fancy. Enough to do the job and keep a price point. If you want more power: there are engines available for you. I wouldn't slam it for being low-frills.
      S40Powered
      • 1 Year Ago
      Ugh Ford. Small engines on these large cars? People looking for "economy" they'll go with a Fiesta or Focus but they're also lying about MPG numbers. They're trying to save the new Fusion, is already dead.
        capn233
        • 1 Year Ago
        @S40Powered
        It's the wave of the future: engine downsizing.
      shomare
      • 1 Year Ago
      Seems like a very bad idea. I had a Fusion with auto and the 4 cyl and it could barely get out of its own way. Passing and merging required lots of planning. Maybe I'm just the wrong customer for this car...
        2 wheeled menace
        • 1 Year Ago
        @shomare
        Was it a turbo?
        Spec
        • 1 Year Ago
        @shomare
        Did you have a Fusion HYBRID? If not then maybe you don't understand the way the hybrids work. The hybrid combines the power from the gas engine AND electric motor such that you'd probably have more power with a 3-cylinder hybrid than with a non-hybrid 4-cylinder car.
        EZEE
        • 1 Year Ago
        @shomare
        I have a 4 cylinder Fusion - it isn\'t a mustang, but I gun it and people yell out, \'Drive it like you stole it!\' No complaints.
      rmkensington
      • 1 Year Ago
      That poor engine is going to work itself to death in such a big car. No thanks.
        • 1 Year Ago
        @rmkensington
        [blocked]
      Stridenttube
      • 1 Year Ago
      So is the V6 dying or what? I want a sedan with some power to move out of the way. This makes me never want to sell my Bonneville, Supercharged 3800 and about 310 ft-lb.. and Ive gotten 30 MPG on the highway too. Now we are talking about 3 cylynder midsize sedans?
      Charles Wayne Jackso
      I would purchase the 2.5 non Ecoboost......for me simple is better..infact rather have the 3.0 V6...non Ecoboost.
      CaddyV8
      • 1 Year Ago
      I'm all for improving fuel economy but tiny engines in big, heavy cars is not the way to do it.
        SethG
        • 1 Year Ago
        @CaddyV8
        Amen. We've learned this with the Explorer with the Ecoboost 4. You can program these cars to deliver great efficiency on the EPA test cycle but small engines in big cars do much worse in real world driving. But marketing and CAFE make that EPA MPG number really important.
    • Load More Comments