theoldwizard Posted July 10, 2009 Author Share Posted July 10, 2009 I'm guessing that he's angry at Ford for laying off their own workers and contracting out lots of advanced developments like this. If that's the case, I don't blame him, We have a winner ! (BTW, it was made clear to all white collar workers that were terminated that these were "not layoffs" and they should have no expectation of obtaining employment with Ford ever again.) ...but I wish he'd stop trying to piss in our Wheaties. Noted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted July 10, 2009 Author Share Posted July 10, 2009 OldWizard, I have a question: If your financial is so dire as you seem to want us to think, isn't THAT what knocks a $38,000 car off the list??? You're saying you have a very tough situation, but if the SHO didn't have "premium recommended", you'd be happy to buy a $38,000 car?? Am I the only one or does something seem whacked here? Point well made. If the EcoBoost "system" runs best on premium fuel, I wonder how well it will sell as a "standard" engine in a small, "affordable" car ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrewfanGRB Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 Point well made. If the EcoBoost "system" runs best on premium fuel, I wonder how well it will sell as a "standard" engine in a small, "affordable" car ? How do you know this would apply to small, "affordable" cars, since none of them with Ecoboost are yet in production? Logic tells me that proportionally, that IF premium fuel maximizes performance in ALL Ecoboost engines, the greatest increase in performance would be found on the largest and most powerful version. Regardless, it's premature, IMO, to assume that a smaller version of an Ecoboost would also run best on premium fuel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hydro Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 (edited) Point well made. If the EcoBoost "system" runs best on premium fuel, I wonder how well it will sell as a "standard" engine in a small, "affordable" car ? A small car would have an even smaller fuel tank. So, $0.20 more per gallon on a 12 gallon tank is $2.40. Hardly a deal breaker, even if it was...... just run REGULAR in it. With a small car, peak power isn't your main concern anyway. Edited July 10, 2009 by Hydro Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 Point well made. If the EcoBoost "system" runs best on premium fuel, I wonder how well it will sell as a "standard" engine in a small, "affordable" car ? As much as Ford denies it, I think Ecoboost will always be a premium engine and those wishing to have fuel efficiency and power will always pay extra. The litmus test will be EB I-4 in Fusion and possibly Taurus, will both be dearer than V6 counterparts? I think so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted July 10, 2009 Author Share Posted July 10, 2009 As much as Ford denies it, I think Ecoboost will always be a premium engineand those wishing to have fuel efficiency and power will always pay extra. I concure. The litmus test will be EB I-4 in Fusion and possibly Taurus, will both be dearer than V6 counterparts?I think so. You may never see an I4 EcoBoost Taurus. Just my gut feel. Fusion looks to continue it sales leadership position. With the new 2.5L I4/6 speed automatic providing very reasonable performance, it will be interesting to see if a smaller I4 with EcoBoost can take over for the 3.0L. It looks like it could easily move into the "S" model and displace the 3.5L and still command the higher price. Has anyone heard of a "end date" for the 3.0L ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harley Lover Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 Isn't is possible that the V6 EB, being marketed as a 'premium performance' engine, might be engineered for the option of premium fuel, whereas the I4 EB, given its mission in lower price cars, might be engineered for regular fuel only? I don't see a disconnect in that premise, because I 'think' Ford is marketing the V6 EB differently than it plans to market the I4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 You may never see an I4 EcoBoost Taurus. Just my gut feel. You might be right, but why offer it in an even heavier vehicle like the upcoming Explorer Unibody? Going back to the V6 Ecoboost, when it was under development, they where going to call it Twinforce then that got canned when price of gas got stupid. Yes it is a premium engine since that what it started off as, but I think its more marketing now to make it sound more green then it really is. It is a kick ass engine, but trying to dress it up as a fuel sipper is sort of a dissevice to it. Guess we can blame the ones marketing it for that! :P The true test is how the I4 Ecoboost is going to work. If they can get 30 MPG out of the unibody Explorer, I think it will be very succesful, but if someone is looking to tow with it, they'll be better served by the 3.5L or a Ecoboost 3.5L. The price of the Ecoboost might be sentitive when it starts getting into the Fusion and Focus...but we'll have to see how that plays out...its only supposed to be $700 extra, but thats a decent amount of coin for a car that is less then 25K Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
napoleon Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 I remember my 87 Turbo Coupe had a switch on the dash for either regular or premium. Biggest change between the two was the boost level (10 psi vs 15 psi). I believe the svo had the same switch. It pulled boost and timing. The '87 coupe only had 15psi in 1st and maybe 2nd gear everything after that was 10psi. '88 was 15psi in premium mode all the way through the gears. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one2gamble Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 I believe the svo had the same switch. It pulled boost and timing. The '87 coupe only had 15psi in 1st and maybe 2nd gear everything after that was 10psi. '88 was 15psi in premium mode all the way through the gears. what happened if you forget to flip the switch down? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevenCaylor Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 I believe the svo had the same switch. It pulled boost and timing. The '87 coupe only had 15psi in 1st and maybe 2nd gear everything after that was 10psi. '88 was 15psi in premium mode all the way through the gears. It was the other way around. In first and second up to 4500 rpms, you were limited to 10 psi. After 4500 rpms in 1st and 2nd and in 3rd, 4th and 5th, you got the full 15 psi. They changed that in the 88 and, IIRC, added syncromesh to reverse on the manuals trans. As to running 87 when the switch was set for 91, I don't know. I (wisely) never tried it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralph Greene Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 It's been pointed out that an engine with direct injection can run about 1 point higher compression ratio than a similar engine with port injection. Since the EB engine is announced as having a 10-1 compression ratio, I imagine that would take a tune similar to how you would tune a port injected car with 9-1 compression. But it's max HP rating is with premium, so that has to be stated....as pointed out by others. So my point is....with direct injection....if you were really building a max HP engine for premium fuel, it would have higher than a 10-1 compression. I believe this engine wasn designed to run on both 87 and premium. With modern computer controls, and intelligent combustion technology sensing, it's no big deal to have it switch back and forth between a 87 tune and a premium tune. So I imagine the EB engine is tuned with a little more timing when run with premium, but as announced it gives up very little when run on 87. And 87 has some advantages over premiun fuel in BTU content (maybe not measurable outside a lab though). BTW....info about how old SHO's (or any other old car really) run with this and that fuel is not relavent to any discussion about the new model. Forget what you think you know about older systems that pull timing (to run on 87) based on feed back from knock sensors. The new combustion sensing technology goes way beyound that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted July 10, 2009 Author Share Posted July 10, 2009 ... The new combustion sensing technology goes way beyound that. Could you enlighten us on this "new technology" ? The only new combustion sensing "technology" I am aware of is ion probes, which has never mad it out of the research lab environment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralph Greene Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 (edited) Could you enlighten us on this "new technology" ? The only new combustion sensing "technology" I am aware of is ion probes, which has never mad it out of the research lab environment. You may have a better handle on what you call it....but I'm talking about the combustion sensing technology in the recent Bullitt, the MKS, the 2010 Mustang GT, and the EB 3.5. These cars have dual tunes....sorta. This is different than just pulling timing, and thus adjusting tune, based on feed back from knock sensors. One of my tuning friends (soft ware engineer) explained the difference to me, but much is new to me. Hope you get your SHO. I'm waiting to see what changes come about in the 2nd or 3rd year of production, and to make sure I can order one X plan with some rebates....after the initial excitement dies down. By that time the aftermarket will be offering a lot of stuff for this car. Edited July 10, 2009 by Ralph Greene Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.