Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ford Confirms that 2.0L Eco-Boost Engine is On the Way

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Ford Confirms that 2.0L Eco-Boost Engine is On the Way

    http://www.bangshift.com/blog/Ford-C...n-the-Way.html

  • #2
    Re: Ford Confirms that 2.0L Eco-Boost Engine is On the Way

    Sounds like a future hot rodding motor to me.
    Act your age, not your shoe size. - Prince

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Ford Confirms that 2.0L Eco-Boost Engine is On the Way

      Stick one in a '63 Falcon/Comet with some 14" steelies, sure there's be some decent go without the V8 weight. That or stick it in a Maverick.
      sigpic

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Ford Confirms that 2.0L Eco-Boost Engine is On the Way

        A new SVO would be pretty cool; the originals have a cult following. Two other things I'd like to see it dropped into from the factory are a Fiesta and a Ranger. Putting it in an Escape seems like such a waste.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Ford Confirms that 2.0L Eco-Boost Engine is On the Way

          Originally posted by Matt Cramer
          A new SVO would be pretty cool; the originals have a cult following. Two other things I'd like to see it dropped into from the factory are a Fiesta and a Ranger. Putting it in an Escape seems like such a waste.
          Right on. But how do they drop the weight to the point that the SVO excercise works??

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Ford Confirms that 2.0L Eco-Boost Engine is On the Way

            You would be way farther ahead to go to Europe and buy a used Focus RS. Basically a road ready factory rally car with AWD and a bitchin 8) turbocharged Cosworth engine. Reported 300 hp :o these cars are animals on the street too bad we didn't get them over here. Maybe that will change now with this set up :P

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Ford Confirms that 2.0L Eco-Boost Engine is On the Way

              Originally posted by Matt Cramer
              A new SVO would be pretty cool; the originals have a cult following. Two other things I'd like to see it dropped into from the factory are a Fiesta and a Ranger. Putting it in an Escape seems like such a waste.
              I know I'm a nitpicker but it's SVT now not SVO. They haven't used the SVO moniker since the turbo 4 Mustang.
              I R Bob
              You can't drink all day unless you start in the morning!
              2007 LH, 2008 LH, 2009 LH, 2010 LH, 2011 LH, 2012 DNF/BLOW'D UP, 2013 LH, 2014 LH

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Ford Confirms that 2.0L Eco-Boost Engine is On the Way

                I totally agree with Brian Lohnes about the last generation SVT Focus (a/k/a ST170) (I still have one in my fleet and I drove it just today): Great handling (for a FWD) combined with nearly ZERO area under the torque curve.

                I also was an original owner of an 1986 SVO Mustang back in the day. It was another decent handling car (although not as good as some later SVT Cobras) that was seriously hamstrung by inadequate power and insufficient development.


                That being said, I'm totally underwhelmed that the tardy EcoBoost four will only pump out a piddly 230 h.p. A 16-valve DOHC head on the old 2.3 Pinto mill in the '80s SVO with no direct injection and no variable cam timing could have done that well (Sadly the conservative bean-counters in the Glass House never allowed mass production of a real cylinder head for the Lima four).

                Chrysler's SRT-4 can beat 230 in emission-legal trim.

                And "Government Motors" Ecotec turbo 4 slaughters Ford's new four-popper.

                Given how much time FoMoCo has wasted in bringing turbo engines back to the market (a market it should NEVER have abandoned to the Japanese), there's no excuse for their comparative weakness.

                And don't get me started on the lack of an EcoBoost V8 . . . .

                EcoBoost is shaping up to be an ECOBUST!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Ford Confirms that 2.0L Eco-Boost Engine is On the Way

                  Originally posted by Speedzzter.blogspot
                  "That being said, I'm totally underwhelmed that the tardy EcoBoost four will only pump out a piddly 230 h.p. A 16-valve DOHC head on the old 2.3 Pinto mill in the '80s SVO with no direct injection and no variable cam timing could have done that well (Sadly the conservative bean-counters in the Glass House never allowed mass production of a real cylinder head for the Lima four).

                  Chrysler's SRT-4 can beat 230 in emission-legal trim.

                  And "Government Motors" Ecotec turbo 4 slaughters Ford's new four-popper.

                  Given how much time FoMoCo has wasted in bringing turbo engines back to the market (a market it should NEVER have abandoned to the Japanese), there's no excuse for their comparative weakness.
                  I agree with you, but I see this a different way. I don't see this as a performance offering. I see this as a way to stretch fuel economy to a society that craves low end torque.
                  Now the real question will be, was it built to take the abuse of additional boost...?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Ford Confirms that 2.0L Eco-Boost Engine is On the Way

                    Originally posted by Speedzzter.blogspot
                    I totally agree with Brian Lohnes about the last generation SVT Focus (a/k/a ST170) (I still have one in my fleet and I drove it just today): Great handling (for a FWD) combined with nearly ZERO area under the torque curve.

                    I also was an original owner of an 1986 SVO Mustang back in the day. It was another decent handling car (although not as good as some later SVT Cobras) that was seriously hamstrung by inadequate power and insufficient development.


                    That being said, I'm totally underwhelmed that the tardy EcoBoost four will only pump out a piddly 230 h.p. A 16-valve DOHC head on the old 2.3 Pinto mill in the '80s SVO with no direct injection and no variable cam timing could have done that well (Sadly the conservative bean-counters in the Glass House never allowed mass production of a real cylinder head for the Lima four).

                    Chrysler's SRT-4 can beat 230 in emission-legal trim.

                    And "Government Motors" Ecotec turbo 4 slaughters Ford's new four-popper.

                    Given how much time FoMoCo has wasted in bringing turbo engines back to the market (a market it should NEVER have abandoned to the Japanese), there's no excuse for their comparative weakness.

                    And don't get me started on the lack of an EcoBoost V8 . . . .

                    EcoBoost is shaping up to be an ECOBUST!
                    The SRT-4 is also a 2.4l, rather than a 2.0 like this.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Ford Confirms that 2.0L Eco-Boost Engine is On the Way

                      Bill,

                      Having owned an SVT Focus since new, I can tell you that saying "it's just a two liter" doesn't make up all the losses in impromptu jousts with larger fours. (Thankfully, the Focus is just a commuter car and I've got some V8s to even the score when necessary) Only the technophiles will care that the lower-tech SRT-4 is larger.

                      The rest of the folks will make apples-to-oranges comparisons that don't favor the underwhelming EcoBoost four (e.g. "American cars $#@k! My S2000 makes 237 h.p. 'all motor.'"(notwithstanding that an S2000 is a 2.2 liter with a peaky 8,000 r.p.m. redline))

                      It's just like when the LS V8 fans dog the Modular.


                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Ford Confirms that 2.0L Eco-Boost Engine is On the Way

                        We're comparing apples to apples, a 2.0l and a 2.4l is not a good comparison.
                        BTW, the SRT-4 was rated at 240hp, 230 is pretty damn close, and the ecoboost
                        has better heads, and thankfully isn't a late model Chrysler(i.e.-trash)IMO.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Ford Confirms that 2.0L Eco-Boost Engine is On the Way

                          The Focus was an interesting case. I really liked that little car for the time I had it. A chance encounter that involved me sitting still and a 3/4 ton Ford Van going 35mph using my BRIGHT YELLOW SVT Focus as a cushion to stop, ended that relationship.

                          Best seats in any car I have ever had. Most tossable, responsive, nimble car I've had as well. The 6-speed was cool, but the shifter definitely did not have a really good feeling to it. Just felt fragile (although I never broke it even though I tried )

                          It was quick enough around town to be fun but even with the cool Cosworth head and factory tube header, your toupee was firmly attached despite the fact you were wringing it out as hard as it would go. Holding speed around the corners was a different story though and that's where the car really shined.

                          I'm hoping that there's some room to build more power out of these motors.

                          I think the 3.5 V6 model with the twins would look awesome in an old Ford roadster.

                          Brian
                          That which you manifest is before you.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Ford Confirms that 2.0L Eco-Boost Engine is On the Way

                            Originally posted by BluLightning
                            Originally posted by Matt Cramer
                            A new SVO would be pretty cool; the originals have a cult following. Two other things I'd like to see it dropped into from the factory are a Fiesta and a Ranger. Putting it in an Escape seems like such a waste.
                            I know I'm a nitpicker but it's SVT now not SVO. They haven't used the SVO moniker since the turbo 4 Mustang.
                            That was why I called it "a new SVO" - we've had SVT Mustangs after the turbo 4 Mustang, but nothing quite like the SVO. I didn't mean the badging so much as the idea.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Ford Confirms that 2.0L Eco-Boost Engine is On the Way

                              Originally posted by Brian Lohnes
                              Best seats in any car I have ever had. Most tossable, responsive, nimble car I've had as well. The 6-speed was cool, but the shifter definitely did not have a really good feeling to it. Just felt fragile (although I never broke it even though I tried )

                              It was quick enough around town to be fun but even with the cool Cosworth head and factory tube header, your toupee was firmly attached despite the fact you were wringing it out as hard as it would go. Holding speed around the corners was a different story though and that's where the car really shined.

                              I'm hoping that there's some room to build more power out of these motors.

                              Brian
                              There should be a lot in the EcoBoost four. If the turbo sizing is similar to the EcoBoost 6, then a larger turbo will probably be a common upgrade. The real issue will be hacking the DI system.

                              As for the SVT Zetec, the internals are the same doorstop-quality, cracked-cap-hypereutectic junk that FoMoCo chucks into the Mustang V8s. Combine that with a high 10.2:1 compression ratio, and adding a decent amount of forced induction to an SVT Focus requires an expensive engine rebuild.

                              When stock , if you don't pummel the clutch to keep the revs up, you'll even get walked at the line by soccer moms in (non-turbo) minivans . . . . Don't even think about challenging a Cobalt SS or an SRT-4! Even a Marauder can hammer it off the line. However, the trick, SVT-only "variable geometry" intake manifold does broaden the torque some (and seems to be curiously absent from any of the EcoBoost lumps)

                              The only real downsides to the Getrag six-speed (except that John Coletti won (via-boss' fiat) the debate on keeping a true fuel economy overdrive ratio out of it) are that the shifter has the typical FWD imprecision and that once you get used to having a sixth speed down and to the right, it's too easy to forget you don't in a T-5 or T-45-equipped V8 Mustang . . . .

                              BTW, the SVT Focus front seats aren't as good as the front seats in an SVO Mustang (which other than the old Recaro option from '79-'82 is probably still the best factory Mustang seat).

                              And an SVT Focus driven as intended will put you on a first name basis with your local tire dealer.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X