EcoNot? Ward’s Calls Out EcoBoost’s Economy
Turbocharging. In order to improve fuel economy and reduce emissions, while delivering the performance people expect from a car, companies have turned to turbocharging their engines.
Ford is one of the leaders in turbocharging with their EcoBoost line of engines. But according to Ward’s, who have awarded the 1.0L EcoBoost in the Fiesta a “10 Best Engine” for the last three years, the rest of the EcoBoost engines aren’t all that eco at all.
The 2.7L EcoBoost in the 2015 F-150 is a mighty fine engine for performance. I drove one back during the launch, and many on the staff have driven it since. It’s much more impressive than I thought it would be.
Ward’s also agrees that the new engine provides good power and performance. But it feel short on fuel economy for them. The best economy they saw was 19 mpg, a number that they can get from the 5.0L V8.
“Devoting resources to an aluminum-intensive pickup might pay off in the long run. But no matter how much weight you trim from a fullsize truck chassis, a smallish V-6 will require much work from its twin-turbochargers, which hurts fuel economy.”
The 2.3L in the MKC and the Mustang let Ward’s down in a different way. In the Mustang, they were able to get decent fuel economy out of the car, but were extremely disappointed with the engine noise. Even with augmentation, they don’t think the engine sounds like it belongs in a Mustang.
Lastly, Ward knocked the 1.5L EcoBoost in the Fusion for not delivering hybrid-levels of efficiency, and the 3.2L PowerStroke diesel in the Transit for not delivering Ram EcoDiesel-levels of economy.
Most of this just confirms what we already know. Turbocharged engines are efficient if you stay off the boost. However, smaller engines need to use more power to move bigger vehicles, which ultimately hurts the fuel economy. How you drive also makes a difference. It’s the reason why we say “your mileage may vary.”
Join the EcoFans in the forum.>>