Ford’s 1.0L EcoBoost Receives International Accolades

[xcel]

Wins ‘International Engine of the Year’ award plus wins “Best New Engine” and “Best Engine Under 1.0-Liter”.

Wayne Gerdes - CleanMPG - Jun 17, 2012

We will surely see this in a US spec 2013 Fiesta sometime next year… I hope?

Ford’s new 1.0L EcoBoost was named 2012 “International Engine of the Year” for the first time in the 13-year history of the awards. The voting was cast by a select group of 76 journalists from 35 countries.

The 3-cylinder engine also hauled in two other awards – “Best New Engine” and “Best Engine Under 1.0-Liter.” The awards were presented by Engine Technology International magazine.

The engine was designed at Ford’s technical centers in Dunton, U.K., and Merkenich, Germany and is being built in Ford’s plants in Craiova, Romania, and Cologne, Germany.

1.0L EcoBoost innovations and cost saving measures (highlighted by bolding) include:

• An exhaust manifold, cast into the cylinder head, lowers the temperature of exhaust gases to enable the optimum fuel-to-air ratio across a wider RPM range.
  
  
• A cast iron block warms the engine more quickly than a conventional aluminum block to cut the amount of “warm-up” energy required by 50 percent, and cut fuel consumption.
  
  
• Two main engine drive belts are immersed in oil to deliver a quieter, more efficient engine.
  
  
• Offsetting the engine configuration by deliberately “unbalancing” the flywheel and pulley instead of adding energy-draining balancer shafts.

The 1.0L EcoBoost debuted this year on the Focus in Europe and will be offered next in C-MAX and B-MAX in Europe later this year. It will be made available in the U.S. next year.

The 98 HP 1.0L EcoBoost delivers best-in-class fuel efficiency of 47 mpgUS combined on the NEDC or approximately 38 mpgUS combined on our own 08 EPA.

The 123 HP variant which is surely what we will receive is only 4% more thirsty while providing 25% more power at the limits.

In determining International Engine of the Year, judges consider drivability, performance, economy, refinement and the successful application of advanced engine technology. The popularity of the 1.0L EcoBoost engine with judges saw it receive 28 percent more points than its closest rival and the highest points total of any engine in the history of the competition.

U.K.-based journalist John Simister:

“If downsizing is the way ahead, there is currently no better example than this. Same power as the naturally aspirated 1.6L engine it replaces, and much punchier to drive.”

The 1.6L currently shod in the US based Fiesta is only mediocre when it comes to power and efficiency. The 1.0L EcoBoost may change all of that.

[RedylC94]

Originally Posted by xcel

A cast iron block warms the engine more quickly than a conventional aluminum block to cut the amount of “warm-up” energy required by 50 percent, and cut fuel consumption.
Two main engine drive belts are immersed in oil to deliver a quieter, more efficient engine.

The hacks who write this sort of PR fluff have never heard that iron blocks are as conventional (and as cheap) as you can get??

How come nobody introducing a new aluminum-block engine brags that it increases "the amount of warm-up energy required" by 100% and increases fuel consumption?

The oily belts must be a new strategy to provide lucrative work for dealer service departments.

[Carcus]

"The 1.6L currently shod in the US based Fiesta is only mediocre when it comes to power and efficiency. "

Gotta disagree with you on that one -- at least on the efficiency part. Real world reports a lot of happy owners consistently beating EPA with the 1.6 ti-vct + 6sp auto (check fuelly and owners forums, 35+mpg in mixed (normal human) driving is quite common [NOT the case in Hyundai competition]. This is what I experienced with a days worth of driving a 6AT fiesta (assuming the aFCD was accurate). Too bad the cleanmpg review was on the "not so great at highway speed" manual tranny.


It's going to be tough to beat the 1.6 ti-vct + 6sp auto in the current Fiesta where mpg and True Cost to Own are concerned.

/not verified, but the internets say the 1.6 has a carbon fiber timing belt good for 150,000 miles(?).

[xcel]

Hi Carcus:

35 mpg in this day an age is Sonata (66.7 mpg), Altima (64.7 mpg) and Camry territory making the under powered 1.6L in the Fiesta a poor comparison. When it receives the 1.0L EcoBoost, it may finally become competitive.

I would personally prefer a chain that never needs a replacement vs. an overly expensive belt and the associated costs at some point in the future… Just like everybody else.

Wayne

[Carcus]

Hey Wayne,

Altima base price = $21,500
Sonata base price = $20,900
Fiesta base price = $13,200
?? -- yah, I guess I'd call that a poor comparison.


Being of "efficiency mindset", I figured you'd prefer a dry efficient belt over the heavy, lubricated, energy sucking (and noisy) chain.

I think 150,000 miles is approaching never needs replacement.

[Carcus]

I just hate to see ford run up the price on every single model they've got with expensive maintenance intensive tech that'll never pay for itself -- and quite likely end up shortening the life expectancy of the car.

The common man's car is rapidly becoming not so common.

[RedylC94]

A well designed chain drive system is unlikely to suck enough energy to to justify the risks and high maintenance costs of a belt---even if the belt is claimed to last 150,000 miles. At that rate, I would've had to replace the belt 3 times on my car, if I'd been lucky enough not to have had any disastrous premature failures. Instead, the original chain is still fine.

[Carcus]

"A belt drive can increase power over a timing chain through less frictional loss, more precise timing, smoother valvetrain motion and eliminating windage caused by the timing chain and gears running in oil. A belt drive also isolates the crankshaft's torsional vibrations from the camshaft better than a chain (and certainly better than gear drives, which can amplify crank harmonics). Think of it as a second harmonic damper for the rotating assembly. And with all that engine builders are doing to stabilize cylinder-to-cylinder camshaft timing, such as larger-diameter cams, doesn't it make sense to do what you can to precisely phase the camshaft to the crankshaft?"

Belt Drives Vs. Timing Chains
http://www.mobiloil.com/USA-English/...ng_Chains.aspx

[xcel]

Hi Carcus:

Timing chains mean lower TCO and much higher reliability. It is the reason most manufacturers have moved to them.

Regarding the comparisons, it is indeed interesting that the smallest B-Segment with 120 HP on tap receives the similar FE as the D and E-Segment offerings with anywhere from 178 to 200 HP available. The 1.0L EcoBoost will change this for everyone’s benefit but the 1.6L is severely lacking given the lightweight and small frontal area.

Wayne

[Carcus]

Originally Posted by xcel

Hi Carcus:

Timing chains mean lower TCO and much higher reliability. It is the reason most manufacturers have moved to them.

Regarding the comparisons, it is indeed interesting that the smallest B-Segment with 120 HP on tap receives the similar FE as the D and E-Segment offerings with anywhere from 178 to 200 HP available. The 1.0L EcoBoost will change this for everyone’s benefit but the 1.6L is severely lacking given the lightweight and small frontal area.

Wayne

I realize some are going back, but a 150,000 mile (carbon fiber) timing belt sounds like the best of both worlds to me.

Fuelly's got a mountain of evidence that says fiesta beats Sonata (ICE) and 2012 Altima mpg (not even close). I'll wait and see what the new Altima gives in the real world.

I'm anxious to see what the ecoboost will do in a lightweight car -- we haven't seen ecoboost and lightweight put together yet. I'm more apprehensive than anxious to see how it's priced out.