1.0L EcoBoost Slated For The EU Based C-MAX Family

[xcel]

Not the hybrid but downsizing with boosting at its finest.

Wayne Gerdes - CleanMPG - Oct. 19, 2012

2013 European Ford C-MAX with the 1.0L EcoBoost - $24,156 USD to start not including VAT or “On the Road” fees tacked on in the UK.

Ford customers will shortly have the option of purchasing a C-MAX or Grand C-MAX with either the 99 or 123 HP versions of the 1.0L EcoBoost vs. the anemic 1.6L out of the US Fiesta, the 1.6L EcoBoost or 1.6L/2.0L TDCi super diesel the C-MAX family arrives with overseas currently. While the current 1.6L non-boosted engine (Fiesta) with a stick provides enough oomph to move the C-MAX to 62 mph in 12.3 seconds, the boosted 1.0L should knock off at least another .75 seconds as a best guess?

On the very easy NEDC fuel economy test cycles, the Ford C-MAX with the low or low-mid-power 1.0L EcoBoost delivers 46mpgUS combined, while the Grand C-MAX achieves 45 mpgUS. If Ford were going to offer either in the US (they are not), the EPA results would prove to be a whole lot less then the predicted 37 mpgUS combined as the 1.0L would be tapped out when trying to move even the base C-MAX let alone Grand C-MAX mass.

Ford stated they have already sold more than 27,000 new generation C-MAX and Grand C-MAX automobiles in the UK since their introduction in 2010 supplanting the original that went on sale in 2003.

As most here know, the three-cylinder 1.0L EcoBoost engine uses direct injection, turbo charging, and variable valve timing on both the intake and exhaust to deliver the power of a larger engine with the fuel efficiency of a B-Segment.

Ford predicts that by 2015 more than half of the vehicles it produces for Europe will be powered by EcoBoost engines – which are also available in 1.6 and 2.0L displacements.

The updated C-MAX and Grand C-MAX also offer SYNC with Emergency Assistance; and optional advanced driver assistance technologies Active City Stop, Lane Keeping Aid, Lane Departure Warning, Auto High Beam, Driver Alert and Traffic Sign Recognition, Blind Spot Information System (BLIS) plus a Power Tailgate.

All C-MAX and Grand C-MAX models for the UK are produced in Ford’s Valencia Plant in Spain.

We will more than likely see the new 1.0L EcoBoost in a 2013 or 2014 Fiesta alongside the current 1.6L. Since the US is not required to reveal 0 to 60 times, the average Joe and Jane will look at the similar power output figures and say no to whatever premium Ford will attach to the EcoBoost propelled Fiesta when (“if”) it arrives as I suspect. It will however be very interesting what kind of EPA numbers the Ford team can squeeze from it however

[Carcus]

I always wondered where the dividing line was on "anemic" horsepower. Now, I know.

Oh wait, ...

"Ford customers will shortly have the option of purchasing a C-MAX or Grand C-MAX with either the 99 or 123 HP versions of the 1.0L EcoBoost vs. the anemic 1.6L out of the US Fiesta..."

"Anemic" 1.6 out of the Fiesta = 120 hp...... , ... . . . ??

[xcel]

Hi Carcus:

That aging 1.6L Ford brought over in the Fiesta is kind of gutless due to lack of torque. The EcoBoost will cure that but the smaller displacement will be a challenge for anything larger. As in no go for replacing the US based Focus' DI 2.0L which itself needs a lot of work to bring its FE numbers up.

Wayne

[PaleMelanesian]

He's right. It feels like a lot less than 120 hp. My Civic with 106 hp has more get up and go, even though they have comparable power-weight ratios. It has no torque down low where you actually drive. My car has more usable torque. You heard that from a Honda owner!

Look at these two dyno charts: (
Fiesta: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v6...STA_DYNO_1.jpg
Civic (lower "stock" line): http://sms-products.com/images/smsd164-1vsstock.jpg

At 3000 rpm, the 2550 lb Fiesta is at 50hp-85tq, while my 2300 lb Civic puts out 45hp-78tq. That's 10% more power, in a car that weighs 10% more. Somehow, it still feels a lot slower.

[seftonm]

Torque is where it's at. The Fiesta felt very underpowered compared to my old 90hp TDI. The TDI was heavier as well. The difference is that the Fiesta is barely making 30hp at 2000rpm. The TDI makes twice the power at that point and will make more power than the Fiesta up to around 4000 rpm where the diesel starts to fall off but the Fiesta still has another 2000rpm to go. Many of the efficiency focused turbo gas engines coming out are similar to a turbo diesel in that they have better power down low. So they may still be slow but don't feel that way. The amount of time spent at full throttle above 4000rpm is the amount of time where the non-turbo engine will feel more powerful. For me, that's not very frequent in any vehicle I drive.

[thunderstruck]

and the TDI is pumping out 177 ft lbs of torque at 1700 RPM.

[CRT1]

Originally Posted by PaleMelanesian

At 3000 rpm, the 2550 lb Fiesta is at 50hp-85tq, while my 2300 lb Civic puts out 45hp-78tq. That's 10% more power, in a car that weighs 10% more. Somehow, it still feels a lot slower.

Gearing could be a factor.

[PaleMelanesian]

Similar gearing, with the Fiesta slightly higher. 2700 vs 2500 at 60 mph.

[herm]

I think that all cars should be fitted with acceleration and speed governors, for fairness sake, to save the planet and the children.

[RedylC94]

Hmm ... Ignoring the political impracticality of such radical ideas, I'd favor restricting fuel flow of new passenger cars to perhaps 1 gallon/hour. That would soon lead to big improvements in drag coefficients, tires, excess weight, and energy-wasting gizmos.