I think you may have a set of rose tinted glasses on. The automakers would have us still driving 1950's designed engines with a carby if they had a choice. That is how a business makes money. Selling yesterday technology at todays prices for as long as they can get away with it.

Direct injection, turbocharging, multiply valve engines are all old school technology in 2012. Advertising that this is the best thing since sliced bread is ridiculous.

Not everyone walks around with a bag on their head believing everything marketers say is the truth.

 

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j...N8JRAEnBtof4Rw

I think that any of us could over simplify Ford's ecoboost program. Here's a very quick read that may shed a little light if one is willing to have a look.

 

Thanks, I read this link and found it to be informative. While the output numbers are respectable for the sized engine, the basic setup isn't any different to anyone else's. Alloy block, VCT, twin turbo, direct injection and so on isn't new by any means.

So I have decided that ecoBoost doesn't imply that it is fantastic technology but a poorly choosen engine name that could be mistaken as "Fords Boosted Fuel Economy Engine" but could also mean "The Engine that Boost Fords Fiscal Economic bottom line"

As a side note, I have had turbocharged cars in my driveway in 1982. Once you will need to pay to have a turbo or two replaced you will be sorry that you didn't keep a big diesel in your F Series.

 

The term ecoboost must have a significant impact on the market as the 2012 Chevy Malibu is boasting an eco-engine of it's own that achieves 37 hwy mpg's.

Unlike the turbos of yesteryear, these turbos are water cooled, the engine oil is water cooled at the filter mounting block and we're using a thinner oil than in the past.

Frankly the turbos are the least of my concern.

 

"Fords Boosted Fuel Economy Enigine" is a "poorly choosen" name. That is a mouth full and it's not even close to being grammatically correct. FBFEE is freaking 9 symbols! You did good describing the engine as a stand alone unit, but as a name, we could do better.

Let's start from the beginning as if we were the marketing team naming the engine:

Yes, it is made by Ford, but do we need to say that twice while talking about the truck? Fords new F-150 featuring the new "Ford's Boosted Fuel Economy Engine" (I fixed the grammar). No, everybody already knows it's a Ford engine by perhappenstance of it being located between the frame rails of an F-150. So we can drop the "Ford's" also while were at it drop the "Engine" from the end since we know were already talking about an engine.

So, now we have "Boosted Fuel Economy". This seems a little ambiguous. Is it just the fuel economy boosted? Why is it boosted and the other engines are not? Is there a special feature doing the boosting? Are there other features that are boosted besides the fuel economy? Too many questions can be asked about this motor and not enough information given about the "Boosted".

The ecoBoost features higher hp numbers and more tq than previous 6 cylinder design engines that have been offered from ford in the half ton pickup, ex. the (venerable) 240/300 inline, (gas fueled slug) 3.8/4.6 V6. Both of the previous motors, inline and V6, were very old and dated carbureted designs The higher hp/tq can be directly attributed to the direct injected turbo design and most importantly, the efficacy of the turbo. So, we can say that the overall power has been efficiently boosted from previous design.

Okay, so what does that mean? How does that affect the motor? More power means more towing capability. So, indirectly, the towing capability has been boosted. What else? More power also means better performance; better 0-60 and overall acceleration. So, we have a boosted towing capability and a boosted performance.

What else? You guessed it, fuel economy. More efficiently made power makes it easier to move a heavy truck to traffic speeds. The indirect result of this increased efficiency is that less fuel is used. So, while the fuel economy has been improved over previous designs, more is being offered from this motor than just that.

The phrasing of "Boosted Fuel Economy" is too narrow to describe the many increased features this motor has over others. Plus, Boosted is left in past tense, "BoostED", which sounds really clunky when talking about a new motor design being offered. Let's just leave it at Boost.

While were talking about efficacy lets talk about double entendre. "Eco" is a root to many different words, but to cut to the chase (I need more coffee) were talking about Economy and Ecology. Choose your own adventure.

Economy directly refers to the efficacy, but the word economy draws too many negative connotation: the current state of the American economy, economy class aircraft seating, a person who is cheap, republican ideals...all negative emotions.

Ecology refers to the indirect result of increased power of the engine that you hinted at; Fuel Economy. The silly and hopeless idea that less fuel means less drilling and less CO2 and other pollutants spewed into the air from the industrial complex. Eco as an abbreviation has hopeful and guilt free connotation: green, efficacy, progressive, no foreign oil, all doe eyed emotions.

Now we can drop the rest of the word and just have Eco. A reference to your individualism (there is nothing more American than individualism), either one of your politically backed means to the same nihilistic cold entropy known as heat death.

Now were left with Boost and Eco. Boost Eco.

ecoBoost. Boooyaaa!

FYI, all of Ford's diesel motors have been turboed since 92. So while it's amazing that you own a 1982 turbo-boogaloo repair bill. The diesel Ford have had no other option but but tubro for a while. Also, the design and machining practices have increased so much since 82 or 92. More use of the technology leads to more improvement. Look at the first ipod, then the latest iphone. It went from just playing music, to playing music while talking to somebody in china, researching old Ford motor tech, and out grumping some dude on the internet

Groucho>Grumpy Uncle

 

I must first fix my mistake about my '82 turbo remark in my previous post. I did have a turbo in '82 but have also consistently had them since. I currently have two twin turbo'd Volvo S80's at home as well.

You are right, the term "eco" is used very regularly whether it means fuel ecomony or lower "greenhouse" emissions.

I find the water cooled oil an interesting feature. Do they also have an external oil cooler fitted as well? Oil plays a very important part in a turbo's life , so does maintaining a strict servicing regime. I think that implementing turbos in mainstream vehicles will be sure to demonstrate this fact in the future as they get older. I am not sure how much benefit the oil weight will have, be it 5-50 10-40 or 0-60 or are the oil galleries smaller to keep a higher pressure?


Thanks Groucho for fixing my spelling mistakes. I am only a simple and uneducated person.

I believe you have correctly identified the key point to the "ecoBoost" engine in this statement.

It is only now that the current domestic vehicles are finally catching up to what the European and Japanese manufactuers have been doing for decades, research and development or if you are cynical buying the company, stripping the technology and assets, run the company into the ground and then sell the leftovers to someone else.

As far as the fuel ecomony and emissions go, who cares, I don't. Gas is still dirt cheap in the US.

FYI, Turbo diesels have been around and popular since the seventies, this may imply that '92 is a late start to improving the product and refers to my earlier post where I mentioned "selling old technology for as long as they can get away with it".

 

So what exactly is your problem with it then?

The name, you seem to think, is marketing gimick? I thought I had explained that.

Are you mad at the free market that the consumer dictates?

In the 90s gas was cheap, not many people cared about fuel economy, so your choices were big, bigger and biggest naturally aspirated fuel guzzling V8s (old tech). Even if the ecoBoost technology was around for 40 years before; why would Ford go out of there way to offer a new tech that is more fuel economic, but more expensive to produce, and more difficult to market half ton truck to a consumer that doesn't care about fuel cost in the first place? It is like your mad because Ford didn't go way out of their way too introduce the ecoBoost, as soon as the technology was available, and without regard if there was a market ready to receive it. You said yourself that you don't even care about gas prices Rich Uncle Pennybags, but for consumers today, like me and most people interested in an ecoBoost, gas prices are a major concern for a long term purchase.

Are you mad that Ford advertises about the ecoBoost as a first? Are you confusing first with new? Because you can be the first in a race, such as the 100th Tour de France, but that does not mean that you were first in all of the previous 99 races, nor does that mean you invented the bicycle as a new technology.

First can be new, but not always. New is always A first.

Until you can show me where: in the US market, a gas powered, half ton pickup, that utilizes the same technology as, that has a similar performance specs as the ecoBoost, that dates before the ecoBoost, be it Japanese, Russian, Martian or whatever, then it is disingenuous to say that Ford is just now catching up to what others have been doing. Being the "First" to offer such technology is a billion dollar risk, alot rests on their shoulders for market acceptance. It would be irresponsible for a corporation to not advertise, to the best of their abilities, an accomplishment such as the first ecoBoost.

There was no demand for anything like the ecoBoost when gas was cheap in America. As demand increases, markets are created, and supply follows.

In foreign countries the market has already been created, tested and is accelerated because of initial higher gas prices.

Gas prices are different in different countries, so in turn, consumer spending, are different in different countries, so that makes, the markets different in different countries. I know you know this stuff. It's not hard.

Some Parting Questions:

Do you understand markets and how they differ?

Do you feel like you have been cheated by Ford knowing about turbo technologies, but not using them?

Do you believe in conspiracy theories?

Are you upset because corporations have a financial responsibility to make money?

What do you do for a living?


With a sentence, can you articulate exactly what you are upset about?

I am 100% serious about all of these questions.

 

Uncle grumpy obviously prefers his Volvo over the 150. Let him be...

 

Wow that's a lot of questions. I'll try to be concise with my answers.


If they are marketing the term “ecoBoost” as a new engine name as a “First” then so be it. If it refers to the overall principle of the engine design it is debatable. As they mention 120 or so new patents, they may have made changes to the original engine design to improve it enormously and be considered a possible “First” or the patents could just be for the special service tools needed to change the spark plugs etc.


The analogy of a bike race is not quiet appropriate. While there may have been 1 winner for each year the race was run, they were first on race day. It could be considered that using pre developed engine technology and calling it a “First” would be similar to riding around the track and coming first the day after the race was over.


Petrol is still dirt cheap. A lot of the domestic vehicles do not have an oversea market and therefore are not designed to worry about customers petrol pricing concerns and/or stricter emissions, yet the foreign imports are generally exported to all parts of the world and the advanced technology used is irrespective of the destination. So in theory the introduction of the ecoboost could just be an attempt to compete with imports rather than customer demands. Ecoboost engines are not solely used in the F series.


In reply to your parting questions, Yes, No, Maybe, No and Work almost as hard as everyone else. I am not upset about anything, I am trying to determine if the hype actually means anything at all or is it just marketing dept's spin.

 

The Volvo is a very lovely vehicle, but I only have two Volvo's. I have three F series.

 

We can wrangle over the name and hype all we want. It's here and most likely here to stay.

Much skepticism comes from Ford's attempts at Gas turbo engines of three decades ago. Remember the SVT Mustang? The T-bird SC? These seemed to be a hit or miss with reliability.

I think the ecoboost program will do very well and will likely pave the way for other automakers.

 

Other manufacturers have been using similar technology for a while. VW has TSFI, BMW has their N54 engine and derivatives, ect. In the U.S., these engine sell in small numbers, mostly to enthusiasts.

What Ford is doing with the Ecoboost, is marketing it to the widescale American audience. They're getting the average consumer to look at this technology package and think that it's something they actually want to have in their next car (and more importantly, are willing to pay for).

This is extremely important, as Americans tend not to embrace new and expensive engine technology on a wide scale. Especially in the realm of pickup trucks, where you still have people complaining to Ford that they should go back to carburetors.

All in all, it seems to be working out for them, as the take rate on the Ecoboost in the F150 is around 42%. That's about on par with the take rate for the 5.0L V8 and the 6.2L V8 combined. Add in the 3.7L V6 F150 sales, and the 6's are outselling the 8's. We haven't seen that here in over 25 years.

 

Great points! I was pretty active here with my new 2011 6.2 F-250... UNTIL i picked up the wife's Flex which just happens to have the EcoBoost! The Flex is here daily driver and was all set to just get her the NA 3.5... but the EcoBoost really intrigued me and I took one an EcoBoost for a test drive!

Well, after the test drive, i was in fact, as you pointed out "willing pay for it"! Yep, spent more than I wanted to but I knew I would kick myself if I didn't opt for the EcoBoost... and I can honestly say I've had more fun with the Flex than I had with any other car including my Mustangs!

I don't care what Ford calls this motor... it simply ROCKS!!!

 

I made the "mistake" of taking a test drive in an Ecoboost. Now my F250 diesel is gone and I have an Ecoboost in the driveway. They are new and perform much better than you would think they should. When I tried to describe how it performs to someone at work without him having a frame of reference of driving one I felt like I was trying to explain to someone who never had sex how that feels...

 

People couldn't possibly understand. I've never driven anything like it.