Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums > Performance, Engines & Troubleshooting > EcoBoost (3.5L, 2.0L)
Sign in using an external account
Register Forgot Password?


EcoBoost (3.5L, 2.0L) 3.5L Twin Turbo EcoBoost V6 and 2.0L I4 EcoBoost Engines

Welcome to Ford-Trucks Forums!
Welcome to Ford-Trucks.com.

You are currently viewing our forums as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Ford-Trucks Forums community today!





 
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #1  
Old 11-28-2011, 06:26 AM
tseekins's Avatar
tseekins tseekins is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hampton, Virginia
Posts: 19,173
tseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputation
Question 2.0L, a big disappointment?

I received my truck trend in the mail the other day and as always around this time, they had the SUV of the year contest.

The new Range Rover Evoque (sp) ended up taking the top honors. If you look closely at the Rangey, you'll notice a hint of Ford styling which could be similar to the Explorer / Edge.

Anyway, the 2.0L was in the test Explorer and the judges found it to be very disappointing in the heavy Explorer. This isn't the first time that read this.

It's a shame as the 3.5L has had nothing but rave reviews since it's existence. I'm thinking that the Ex is way too heavy for the 2.0L especially if the little engine that could isn't achieving better MPG's and overall power than the n/a 3.5l.

Thoughts?
__________________
Tim
SCPO United States Coast Guard Retired
2011 F-150 XLT 4x4 Ecoboost
2010 Ford Focus
2004 Expedition XLT 4x2

FTE Guidelines
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 11-28-2011, 09:54 AM
senix's Avatar
senix senix is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Frederick, MD
Posts: 19,790
senix has a superb reputationsenix has a superb reputationsenix has a superb reputationsenix has a superb reputationsenix has a superb reputationsenix has a superb reputationsenix has a superb reputationsenix has a superb reputationsenix has a superb reputationsenix has a superb reputationsenix has a superb reputation
There is a fine line between not enough motor and you end up working it to death.

Better to have a bigger motor that does not work so hard.

Probably the case here.
__________________
Scott-2013 F350 with a lot of tires.
2013 40' 4-slider stoneridge 5th wheel coming in at 15,400
http://www.ford-trucks.com/guidelines.html

Previous Truck 2008 F250 6.4 with lots of upgrades and a suspension upgrade from Torklift International StableLoads
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 11-28-2011, 06:19 PM
LSchicago2's Avatar
LSchicago2 LSchicago2 is offline
Posting Guru
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,404
LSchicago2 has a great reputation on FTE.LSchicago2 has a great reputation on FTE.LSchicago2 has a great reputation on FTE.LSchicago2 has a great reputation on FTE.
I drove the Evoque, and was not impressed with the power. I thought it was enough for the 4,000# vehicle, but it didn't inspire me. I can assume that the 500# heavier Explorer with a 2.0 will feel underpowered. I think it will be a real good engine for the new Escape at 3500#, and should fly in the Focus ST which should weigh about 3,000#.
__________________
2011 F550 XL V10 Rollback & 2013 F150 RCSB STX 5.0. Former trucks: 09 F550 Lariat S/C V10 4x4, 05 F450 S/C 6.0 F450 & 03 F450 V10 tow trucks. Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?...81&ref=profile
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 11-28-2011, 07:20 PM
fordmdb's Avatar
fordmdb fordmdb is offline
PREMIUM SPONSOR
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 2,002
fordmdb has a very good reputation on FTE.fordmdb has a very good reputation on FTE.fordmdb has a very good reputation on FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by senix View Post
There is a fine line between not enough motor and you end up working it to death.

Better to have a bigger motor that does not work so hard.

Probably the case here.
x2 well said, If Ford would work on reducing weight of these vehicles
__________________
Custom Tuning for F-E-Series Engines 6.8L V10 / 5.4L V8 / 4.6L V8 / 6.2L V8 / 5.0L V8 / 3.7L V6 / 3.5L EB and more!
SCT Custom Tuning Dealer
www.5startuning.com email me here:mike@5startuning.com 843-536-1244
https://www.facebook.com/pages/5-Sta...92086367552400
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 11-29-2011, 12:43 PM
dkf's Avatar
dkf dkf is offline
Post Fiend
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Pa
Posts: 9,199
dkf is a splendid one to beholddkf is a splendid one to beholddkf is a splendid one to beholddkf is a splendid one to beholddkf is a splendid one to beholddkf is a splendid one to beholddkf is a splendid one to behold
I'm still trying to figure out why exactly Ford even has the new Explorer in their lineup. It doesn't sell nearly as well as the Edge and is only slightly larger. The Edge is available with the 3.5l, 2.0l EB and 3.7l but the Explorer is only available with the 3.5l and 2.0l EB. The Edge should be tweaked to maximize interior room and the Explorer should be axed. You want something more roomy buy the Flex or Expedition.

When you think about it 240hp is not exactly a lot these days. If the 2.0l didn't have a nice flat torque curve mpg would probably be worse. Add the extra power robbing AWD system and the engine has to work even harder which will result in reduced gas mileage and feel more down on power. The Explorer could probably do pretty well mpg wise with the 3.5l EB.
__________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." (Thomas Jefferson)
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 09-15-2012, 12:06 AM
DBubba's Avatar
DBubba DBubba is offline
Freshman User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 39
DBubba is starting off with a positive reputation.
2.0 EB

I agree with the statements made here about use of the 2.0 GTDI in the Explorer. I test Explorer and Edge with this plant before the Escape's hit the ground.

In the Explorer it moved, but did not appear to have adequate power for passing or merging at highway speeds. In the Edge it felt adequate and well suited for the weight of this vehicle. In the Escape it feels perfect! I purchased an Escape 2 weeks ago and it moves along effortlessly and when pushed a little it moves without high RPM's. I am still in the break in period at 560 miles but look forward to a full throttle highway test when I get to 1K. Mileage is averaging 22-23 at this point however I have spent quite a bit of time idling setting up nav, phone and playing with feature settings.

D
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 09-15-2012, 05:28 AM
tseekins's Avatar
tseekins tseekins is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hampton, Virginia
Posts: 19,173
tseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputation
Quote:
Originally Posted by DBubba View Post
I agree with the statements made here about use of the 2.0 GTDI in the Explorer. I test Explorer and Edge with this plant before the Escape's hit the ground.

In the Explorer it moved, but did not appear to have adequate power for passing or merging at highway speeds. In the Edge it felt adequate and well suited for the weight of this vehicle. In the Escape it feels perfect! I purchased an Escape 2 weeks ago and it moves along effortlessly and when pushed a little it moves without high RPM's. I am still in the break in period at 560 miles but look forward to a full throttle highway test when I get to 1K. Mileage is averaging 22-23 at this point however I have spent quite a bit of time idling setting up nav, phone and playing with feature settings.

D
Sounds great! I can't wait to get some read feedback on this one.
__________________
Tim
SCPO United States Coast Guard Retired
2011 F-150 XLT 4x4 Ecoboost
2010 Ford Focus
2004 Expedition XLT 4x2

FTE Guidelines
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 09-15-2012, 10:36 AM
YoGeorge YoGeorge is offline
Postmaster
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,583
YoGeorge is a splendid one to beholdYoGeorge is a splendid one to beholdYoGeorge is a splendid one to beholdYoGeorge is a splendid one to beholdYoGeorge is a splendid one to beholdYoGeorge is a splendid one to beholdYoGeorge is a splendid one to behold
Agree completely on engine size. The Explorer with a couple people in it is gonna be over 5,000 lbs. 2 liters simply is NOT enough engine, turbo or not.

I remember buying a 1979 SAAB 900 back in 1983 and was concerned that the 2 liter engine in it was tiny for a 2600 lb car. (It was not a turbo, but the engine was fine in the end.)

I recall Ford making a big deal about making the Explorer lighter with the redesign. In fact it is bigger, but the weight reduction was, as I recall, about 100 lbs. With a clean sheet redesign, I sure would have expected a bigger weight reduction.

George
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-15-2012, 07:27 PM
tseekins's Avatar
tseekins tseekins is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hampton, Virginia
Posts: 19,173
tseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputation
Quote:
Originally Posted by YoGeorge View Post
Agree completely on engine size. The Explorer with a couple people in it is gonna be over 5,000 lbs. 2 liters simply is NOT enough engine, turbo or not.

I remember buying a 1979 SAAB 900 back in 1983 and was concerned that the 2 liter engine in it was tiny for a 2600 lb car. (It was not a turbo, but the engine was fine in the end.)

I recall Ford making a big deal about making the Explorer lighter with the redesign. In fact it is bigger, but the weight reduction was, as I recall, about 100 lbs. With a clean sheet redesign, I sure would have expected a bigger weight reduction.

George

Previous gen Explorers didn't have the full air bag canopy like this one has. The roof line had to be raised to accommodate the extra safety equipment. You raise the roof, you raise everything else proportionately so it looks right and that adds weight.

Right from the launch date the new Explorer should have come with your choice of 3.5L engines, only.
__________________
Tim
SCPO United States Coast Guard Retired
2011 F-150 XLT 4x4 Ecoboost
2010 Ford Focus
2004 Expedition XLT 4x2

FTE Guidelines
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 09-15-2012, 07:36 PM
YoGeorge YoGeorge is offline
Postmaster
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,583
YoGeorge is a splendid one to beholdYoGeorge is a splendid one to beholdYoGeorge is a splendid one to beholdYoGeorge is a splendid one to beholdYoGeorge is a splendid one to beholdYoGeorge is a splendid one to beholdYoGeorge is a splendid one to behold
Quote:
Originally Posted by tseekins View Post
Previous gen Explorers didn't have the full air bag canopy like this one has. The roof line had to be raised to accommodate the extra safety equipment. You raise the roof, you raise everything else proportionately so it looks right and that adds weight.

Right from the launch date the new Explorer should have come with your choice of 3.5L engines, only.
Thanks, Tim...plus the new Explorer is 10 inches longer and a few inches wider as I recall, so there are size reasons for it to have picked up some weight. It is startlingly large, actually. The 2 liter turbo makes a lot of sense in the Escape. I know Ford can't make 50 different engines, but a good size for the Explorer might have been something like a 3 liter V6 Ecoboost based on the original Duratec size.

Still, I really like the new Explorer, and if someone were to give me one (or sell me one at half price) with the 2 liter turbo, I would definitely drive and enjoy it. I focus more on fuel economy than performance in daily driver type cars these days. Actually a 2 liter turbo Edge would suit me very nicely as a daily driver.

Problem is that my next vehicle is gonna have to be a replacement for my E150, and I have no clue what that will be. Maybe the new 2014 Transit Connect, or a short version of the 2014 big Transit. We shall see what engines will go in those.... I think the TC is going to have the 2 liter turbo.

Thanks,
George
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 10-07-2012, 08:24 PM
KSCRUDE KSCRUDE is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 455
KSCRUDE is starting off with a positive reputation.
Just bought a new escape last week with the 1.6 ecoboost. Was the only one on the lot with 4X4 drive in a color we wanted. Test drove it and bought it. They ask if we wanted to drive one with the 2.0 Eco and we said no. Probably would of wanted the bigger engin if we had driven one. The 1.6 was very spunky and will run 80+ mph with the cruse on very easy. FTE needs to add the 1.6 to the Eco lineup as I didn't see one here so I just jumped on the big ecoboost site. We need a 5.0 Eco for the SD line. Maybe mustangs some 150s and expeditions. Just saying, or asking!
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 10-08-2012, 10:25 PM
kermmydog's Avatar
kermmydog kermmydog is offline
ALIEN FTE AZ CL
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: OUTERSPACE, SOMEWHERE
Posts: 8,118
kermmydog has a spectacular reputation.kermmydog has a spectacular reputation.kermmydog has a spectacular reputation.kermmydog has a spectacular reputation.kermmydog has a spectacular reputation.kermmydog has a spectacular reputation.kermmydog has a spectacular reputation.kermmydog has a spectacular reputation.kermmydog has a spectacular reputation.kermmydog has a spectacular reputation.kermmydog has a spectacular reputation.
Truly the real test will be when we see 100,000+ miles on these engines. 240 HP is plenty for an Explorer 4x4, The problem is the Cubic Inches. I question that with the 3.5 EB in the F150 4x4. That is where I hold out judgement until I hear what people are saying when they have 100-150 thousand miles on them. Ford has had some impressive diesels when new but down the road the real issues popped up. Ford is betting the ranch on the EB. I hope it works for them.
Craig
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 10-09-2012, 05:06 AM
tseekins's Avatar
tseekins tseekins is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hampton, Virginia
Posts: 19,173
tseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputation
Quote:
Originally Posted by KSCRUDE View Post
Just bought a new escape last week with the 1.6 ecoboost. Was the only one on the lot with 4X4 drive in a color we wanted. Test drove it and bought it. They ask if we wanted to drive one with the 2.0 Eco and we said no. Probably would of wanted the bigger engin if we had driven one. The 1.6 was very spunky and will run 80+ mph with the cruse on very easy. FTE needs to add the 1.6 to the Eco lineup as I didn't see one here so I just jumped on the big ecoboost site. We need a 5.0 Eco for the SD line. Maybe mustangs some 150s and expeditions. Just saying, or asking!
Excellent point sir, I'll bring this up to the powers that be.
__________________
Tim
SCPO United States Coast Guard Retired
2011 F-150 XLT 4x4 Ecoboost
2010 Ford Focus
2004 Expedition XLT 4x2

FTE Guidelines
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 10-09-2012, 05:12 AM
tseekins's Avatar
tseekins tseekins is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hampton, Virginia
Posts: 19,173
tseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputation
Quote:
Originally Posted by kermmydog View Post
Truly the real test will be when we see 100,000+ miles on these engines. 240 HP is plenty for an Explorer 4x4, The problem is the Cubic Inches. I question that with the 3.5 EB in the F150 4x4. That is where I hold out judgement until I hear what people are saying when they have 100-150 thousand miles on them. Ford has had some impressive diesels when new but down the road the real issues popped up. Ford is betting the ranch on the EB. I hope it works for them.
Craig
You're right Craig, Ford has jumped in with both feet. Every Ford vehicle except the E-series van, superduty, Fiesta and the Mustang offers an EB engine. When the T-series vans come to stable, the base engine will be the 3.5L EB engine with a Euro diesel as an option.

I've read t hat the next gen Mustang will offer an EB engine as well, most likely a small but spirited and fuel sipping I-4.
__________________
Tim
SCPO United States Coast Guard Retired
2011 F-150 XLT 4x4 Ecoboost
2010 Ford Focus
2004 Expedition XLT 4x2

FTE Guidelines
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 10-09-2012, 10:15 AM
YoGeorge YoGeorge is offline
Postmaster
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,583
YoGeorge is a splendid one to beholdYoGeorge is a splendid one to beholdYoGeorge is a splendid one to beholdYoGeorge is a splendid one to beholdYoGeorge is a splendid one to beholdYoGeorge is a splendid one to beholdYoGeorge is a splendid one to behold
Speaking of the 1.6 EB, I'm on the lead vehicle team for the upcoming Detroit Marathon, and we pre-drove the course--I rode with a woman who had a new 1.6 EB Escape. There were 4 of us in the car, I had good rear seat legroom (behind the woman, who is admittedly pretty short), and the engine seemed to pull nicely (up a few long rises), and was quiet, smooth, and unobtrusive. As a gearhead, I would actually prefer more turbo whine I suppose if I was driving I would have more of a chance to get the engine to whine a bit. NICE Escape, 2WD SEL(?) with leather, a HUGE glass sunroof, etc.

George
Reply With Quote
Old 10-09-2012, 10:15 AM
Reply

Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums > Performance, Engines & Troubleshooting > EcoBoost (3.5L, 2.0L)

Tags
20, ecoboost, engine, i4, l

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Not missing my Powerstroke....at all! Mavic19 Modular V10 (6.8l) 12 07-13-2014 11:46 AM
'12 Super Duty has been a real disappointment marcs724 Super Duty & Heavy Duty 67 12-09-2013 05:35 PM
First Heavy Tow 5.0 after Owning Diesel jakeharp 2009+ F150 17 09-10-2013 10:46 PM
disappointed in the A4wd jprix Expedition & Navigator 11 01-22-2013 05:32 PM
96 explorer sport 4.0 shift points please screamersusa Explorer, Sport Trac, Mountaineer & Aviator 2 08-07-2012 11:46 PM



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:44 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertising - Terms of Use - Privacy Statement - Jobs
This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. FordŽ is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company.

vbulletin Admin Backup