Check out Patrick Rall's homepage article with the latest rumors on the next generation EcoBoost. What do you think? Does it sound like Ford is moving in the right direction?

 

I know that the engineering is there to let the small motors do the work of the big ones but something in my gut doesn't like the idea of high revving motor turboed or not.

A long time ago now one of my car blogs that I flow had a 06 Ford GT in a year long test fleet. The blog when they introed the car covered the racing history of the model and it was said several times that the reason why it did so well in Le Mans and other races compared to Ferrari and the other supercar makers, was because it made its power low in the revs where stuff didn't break so easily.

I just hope they do keep a V8 option for the "traditionalist" market otherwise you could see either a massive migration of customers to which ever company still has a traditional V8 or a large number of people leaving the truck market overall.

 

I agree...I hope...now hope is the key word here...But I hope that Ford keeps V8's around...But I just don't know anymore. Ford and most other automakers seem to be really hardcore about downsizing as much as possible when speaking modern day engines...And doing it quickly. Alot of people are barely warming up the idea of the 3.5L Ecoboost and already there is talk of downsizing it even more to as little as 2.6L's. At this rate trucks will be powered by turbocharged go kart engines in the next 30 years.

I'm not trying to hijack this thread by any means...But Obama raised the C.A.F.E standerds again...by 2025 he wants vehicles to meet a fleet avarage of 54.5mpg.

This could mean the end of V8's...At least as mainstream engines. I personally don't agree with the new standerds...I think the 2016 reg of 35mpg was more resonable for current day technology. But 54.5 is pushing it to far. So if I had to guess, just by the looks of things I predict one of three outcomes for the future.

#1 = There is a chance that we will only have V8's in specilty vehicles.

#2 = We still have V8's but they are smaller in displacement...(Think 3.5L or smaller) and they are heavily hybridized with gas/electric setups.

#3 = V8's vanish all together in favor of twin/quad turbo 4 and 6 cyl engines...Maybe 3 and 4 cyl engines.

Sorry, once again, not trying to hijack the thread here.

 

I'll simply just drive my 5.4 3v V8 forever!.........(LOL)

 

I was discussing this CAFE 54 mpg crapola with a buddy of mine, and he made an interesting point. He said they could do the 50+ mpg on V8's now, but big oil won't let that happen. He told me of a guy that invented a carburetor back in the 70's that enabled one of those land yachts to get 50-60 mpg! From what he says Big Oil found out about this and bought the thing and all the drawings and destroyed it all. Is this truth or rumor? You decide. I don't find that hard to believe AT ALL!

 

Most definitely and I'm extremely excited for Ford and future EB buyers. Hopefully these engines will be small enough for Ford to bring back the mid sized Ranger.

A member in the 2007+ Expedition forum alluded that Ford may offer the next gen EB in the redesign in 2014. That makes me wonder if there are larger EB engines in development stages that Ford isn't talking about.

 

I have heard that the 60-70mpg carburator was myth and nothing more. But I honeslty can't say for sure. I know I sure as hell hope it wasn't and I sure hope that if it wasn't someone has the ***** to bring it back into the spot light.

 

It would be nice, but carburetors are like 8-tracks these days. But if the technology is there it just isn't fair to keep it from us. Exxon/Mobil reported the largest profit ever this last quarter, somebody do something PLEASE!!!!! $3.70/ gal for gas is ridiculous.

 

If they made a Carbuarator that allowed a 5,000lb V8 powered 1/2 ton truck to achive 60+ MPG I would love to have one. Even if a Carburator is considered outdated technology.

And yeah gas is stupid expensive. They are going to get us used to 3.50$ to 4.00$ a gallon gas then they'll jack it up to 5.00$ or 6.00$ a gallon then slowly easy it back down to 4.50$ or so...That way everyone will feel relived to have 4.00$ gas again.

These' jerkoff's that run the oil companys are going to screws us sideways until we do something about it.

 

I think the EB line of engines is "moving in the right direction", but I also think Ford has a long ways to go when it comes to advertising meeting reality. I purchase a 2011 F150, mainly because of the EB claims of fuel economy along with the power.

The power is nothing short of outstanding, but the fuel economy is just not there. Now before anyone jumps on me about my driving habits....it's not that. I drive this truck lighter and easier than any vehicle I have ever owned, and for the first three months that best highway mpg I could achieve was 16. That was achieved on a flat, level road, with the cruise set at 64mph (I was traveling in Canada at the time).

After compiling three typed pages of issues with the truck over the first 3 months of ownership, and finally getting an appointment at the dealership.....the truck was there for over a week. When the dealer could find nothing in the way of codes, they turned to Ford for help. Three days later Ford told them to "reflash" both the PCM and TCM.
It was then that I learned that since my truck was built, Ford has issued 2 completely new versions of software for all engines built between 1 Jan-1 Apr 2011 (mine was built 19 Feb). This has helped most of the issues my truck is having, including the MPG. The kicker is that Ford had released the software, but unless a truck owner goes into the dealership complaining of issues, they will never know.
Personally, as I understand more about software/hardware integration on these trucks, I realize that it would be a simple matter for Ford to offer 2-3 "tunes" from the factory....one for MPG, one for performance, and one for towing. Let's face it, right now these engine/trucks are tuned to a "one size fits all" configuration, and in my my case, experience with the truck has proven that Ford's top priority is NOT MPG.
I purchased the EB because of the advertised fuel economy...the power was just icing on the cake.
Back to the specific topic.....yes, the EB is a move in the right direction, BUT, I believe the engine is capable of a lot more MPG than what Ford is currently allowing.
I can remember in the mid 80s...my Father-in-Law was running the Ford Explorer assembly line in Louisville, KY....and he talked about a carb that Mobile oil had purchased the rights to in a "closed door" deal, that was suppose to get 60mph out of a 400cid engine.

I agree....auto makers have always been "in bed" with big oil...the government knows it, but those people are "in bed" with them too. When you see oil companies REPORTING billions in profit, I have little doubt that they are actually profiting MUCH more than what they report. Heck, when you see that Exxon/Mobile gets tax refund checks in the millions, and at the same time get subsidized by the government........

 

I understand your concerns but what I'm experiencing has left me feeling differently. This isn't some brag about crazy MPGs either. I've consistently pulled 17-18 MPG in my regular commuting/driving for awhile now. Pretty darn good for a SCREW. I've now hit 5,500 miles and with about 50 miles remaining on this tank, I'm pulling 19.3 MPG. If I can get that going forward on my 50/50 hwy/city commute, I'll be estatic. I've never pulled anything less than 20 MPG on the highway. Under those parameters, I consider the Eco engine a huge success. If a majority of owners are in that area, then I think Ford did themselves well. If a lot are more in your range, then maybe you are more right.

 

IMHO the next big jump in MPG will not be the engine technology alone. There is only so much energy in a gallon of 85 octane fuel. And it takes a quantifiable amount of energy to move a 2-1/2 ton mass. Lighten the vehicle and you will see improvements.

But, what if we could get all of the crankshaft hp to the wheel?

Just sayin'.

EDIT: And Ed - you are absolutely correct about mutliple 'tunes'. Clearly the technology exists. I've yet to figure out why Ford hasn't already implemented it.

 

I sort of doubt the 60 MPG carb claims as the 250cc street bike that I bought for my wife to learn on gets around 70 MPG. It weighs about 530 lbs. with rider and makes a whopping 26 rwhp. Granted, it makes 113 hp/liter (crank), so fuel economy was not the highest priority here. While aerodynamics are less than ideal with a bike, it takes a certain amount of HP to move a certain mass. And of course it takes a certain amount of energy to produce that HP. There is no free lunch. If one were to use an EcoBoost to its advertised max capacity (PUTC F150 trailer towing test for example), it won't see any difference in fuel consumption from an equivalent V8 powered truck moving the same load as it takes practically the same amount of fuel to move the weight. Now empty or lightly loaded is a different story as the EB can use less fuel due to fewer cylinders/less displacement. But 360 HP is 360 HP and it takes a (relatively) fixed amount of gas to produce that much power. Gasoline only has so much energy in each gallon and beyond a certain point technology can't get more power from gas no mater what. We're getting very close to that point in practical terms now. As has been stated many times, lower weight is the key, but how light can a modern full-sized truck be without giving up capacity? Something drastic will have to change to get a full-sizer up to 30 MPG, and just putting in smaller motors won't get us there.

 

I'm not buying it. I think "they" can do it, they just won't. I have no basis for my theory I'm just pissed over the whole thing! Flip you Exxon Mobil and all the rest of 'em! Oh and all the speculators that drive up the price of gas? Same to them! I'll get off my soapbox now

 

The talk of 60 mpg carburetors is an urban legend. Modern fuel injection systems are far more sophisticated than any carb could ever be in terms of how they meter fuel, shut fuel flow off when the throttle is closed, etc.

The next step in efficiency is direct injection, which is being used by the EcoBoost engine and other engines on the market. However, there are potential problems with direct injection in terms of intake valve deposits from EGR, and DI therefore still makes me nervous.

There is a maximum efficiency for every drop of gas, and there is simply no magic that is not already being done with fuel injection that some "mystery carb" could accomplish. It is a great urban legend, but in general, if something sounds too good to be true, it usually is.

George