Perceptions Die... OK Say Again Y Foreign is Better

[Camaro509]

I'm curious to know how some of you know what Mr. Ford was thinking back a while, and how you know 'why' he did or didn't do what he did or didn't do?

Seems to me the further we all get in this thread the more desperate the 'facts' become and rely more and more on "I know for a fact Mr. so-and-so at Ford (or GM) was thinking _________________ about GM/Ford, and THAT is why *my facts or more factual than yours*". My friends cousin, who knows this hairdresser in Flint, MI heard that....

Too much like Monday morning quarterbacking.

In my opinion, none of the big three made good or sound business decisions
this past decade or so, even without regard to the economy/housing market/stock exchange etc.

[All-Or-Nothing]

Originally Posted by Camaro509

In my opinion, none of the big three made good or sound business decisions
this past decade or so, even without regard to the economy/housing market/stock exchange etc.

I don't think anyone is disputing that fact.

[MCPOAJ]

Originally Posted by All-Or-Nothing

What was the purpose of the Mitsubishi Link. It only ran a 13.5 so did you just want to show us a slower car.

Secondly the ecoboost is much more involved than the Mazda motor. Yes it's turbocharged, yes it's direct injection. No it's not the same. There is more to the ecoboost than the things you keep talking about. Read up on it and you will know for yourself.

umm... that is a car from 1995 with just and intake vs a 2010 car with a tune (boost turned up) and sure it's e.t. was only 13.5 but it trapped 105 which is only 3mph away

and please link me to where all this information is so i can read up about what this motor has that no other motor has

[All-Or-Nothing]

Originally Posted by MCPOAJ

umm... that is a car from 1995 with just and intake vs a 2010 car with a tune (boost turned up) and sure it's e.t. was only 13.5 but it trapped 105 which is only 3mph away

and please link me to where all this information is so i can read up about what this motor has that no other motor has

The Mitsu is only 3700lbs and the Taurus is 4400lbs.


Ain't this way off topic.

[MCPOAJ]

Originally Posted by All-Or-Nothing

The Mitsu is only 3700lbs and the Taurus is 4400lbs.


Ain't this way off topic.

god damn it my friend lied to me then lol he actually has a VR4 and said it weighed out on 1/4 tank with him at 4400 and i was just askin for a link cause i googled it and read the wikipedia and couldn't really find anything

[Cmicasa the Great XvX]

Originally Posted by All-Or-Nothing

Go ahead and read up on the Ecoboost engine and you will see that Fords application is far superior.

Tell me how... Because just using the GM 2.0L vs Ford 2.0L would lend loads of credibility to my argument... as the GM version pulls in 260HP/260lbs and the Ford version supposedly yields 230hp/240lbs. I strongly believe that their fuel efficiency will be either similar or more in favor of GM.

[a_Username]

Originally Posted by All-Or-Nothing

Go ahead and read up on the Ecoboost engine and you will see that Fords application is far superior.

It may be, but the point that Cmicasa is getting at is that the "Ecoboost" isn't a new idea.

[comiskeybum]

Originally Posted by a_Username

It may be, but the point that Cmicasa is getting at is that the "Ecoboost" isn't a new idea.

who cares. its helping to launch Ford into a new era and it will sell very well for them.

who cares if its new or not.........its a damn good engine

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by comiskeybum

who cares. its helping to launch Ford into a new era and it will sell very well for them.

Yeesss, and that's fantastic...but it matters, and we care...because DI + Turbocharging is not new. Even though many fanatics believe that Ford is pioneering this idea. It's just an observation, that's all.

Still good, still powerful, and still very promising. Just not new.

[comiskeybum]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

Yeesss, and that's fantastic...but it matters, and we care...because DI + Turbocharging is not new. Even though many fanatics believe that Ford is pioneering this idea. It's just an observation, that's all.

Still good, still powerful, and still very promising. Just not new.

i just hear that Chrysler invented a new engine..........the Rotary engine........its gonna be sweet!!!

[All-Or-Nothing]

Originally Posted by a_Username

It may be, but the point that Cmicasa is getting at is that the "Ecoboost" isn't a new idea.

The turbo and DI isn't new technolgy. Yes you are right, but that isn't why Ford is recieving so much praise.

The hardware obviously isn't new however the approach is. The Ford control system is what garnered most of the new patents.

• the powertrain management strategy uses 10,066 adjustable parameters
• at idle, each injector releases 10.4 milligrams of fuel per injection; put in household terms, meaning 1/25,000 the volume of a can of soda, or 0.2 drops of fuel
• fuel injection pressure is continuously controlled to between 220 psi and 2150 psi
• injection timing is adjusted up to 300 times a second

Just a small sample but just saying "Hey we got a DI turbo engine first" totally misses the whole point of this new technology

[syr74]

Originally Posted by Cmicasa the Great XvX

Tell me how... Because just using the GM 2.0L vs Ford 2.0L would lend loads of credibility to my argument... as the GM version pulls in 260HP/260lbs and the Ford version supposedly yields 230hp/240lbs.

Ecoboost isn't intended for drag racing, and do recall that 230hp/240lb-ft of torque is a minimum estimate. Every new Ford engine has exceeded pre production estimates handily over the course of the last five years including the 3.5L Cyclone, 3.7L Cyclone, 3.5L Ecoboost.

Originally Posted by Cmicasa the Great XvX

I strongly believe that their fuel efficiency will be either similar or more in favor of GM.

This is where what we have from Ford thus far makes the difference in terms of Ecotec and Ecoboost and differs from your argument and many others here. With Ecoboost Ford has stated time and time again that the focus is on efficiency and not simple power, so the balance of those two is what they are looking for.

Ford has claimed time and time again that fuel efficiency on this engine will be the standout feature, and the news we hear mutered from insiders and from within Ford...if somewhat quietly...is that fuel economy here will seriously best anything Ecotec has ever mustered.

Whether or not you believe Ford in this matter is your prerogative, but the buzz circulating is that the four cylinder Ecoboost used in the Explorer, which will almost certainly be the 2.0L at least initially, will net 30mpg even in that application.

Those leaks fall directly inline with the improvements claims Ford has tossed about, so effectively Ford is claiming that a full size, Ecoboost powered, unibody suv is going to knock down roughly the same fuel economy Ecotec managed in a Cobalt.

As I said, whether or not you or I believe Ford can manage the same is up to us to decide, but Ford is absolutely claiming that the EcoBoost four is on another level altogether compared to the Ecotec GM currently uses and they are claiming that based upon fuel economy.

[All-Or-Nothing]

Originally Posted by syr74

Ford has claimed time and time again that fuel efficiency on this engine will be the standout feature, and the news we hear mutered from insiders and from within Ford...if somewhat quietly...is that fuel economy here will seriously best anything Ecotec has ever mustered.

Exactly. The Ecoboost gains up to 20% better fuel efficiency, with lower emissions, and more performance. Ford didn't design them to be race engines. They provide power of larger displacement engines while giving the efficiency of much smaller applications. 20% is a big jump.


Wonder what the Ecotec did................here you go


According to Ecotec's Chief Engineer Dean Guard, "Direct injection [Spark Ignited Direct Injection--SIDI as GM calls it] is one of those rare technologies where we get two synergistic benefits from a single technology. Direct injection offers the opportunity to increase the compression ratio due to the charge-cooling effects of in-cylinder fuel vaporization, and therefore helps both improve fuel economy, around 2 percent, and performance with roughly a 5 percent power increase." The way that direct injection precisely delivers the fuel enables a more complete combustion, particularly on cold starts when emissions are higher. Better combustion means fewer emissions and a greater fuel economy benefit from the higher compression. It's a win-win in an industry constantly trying to meet tougher government standards.


So let's see...the Ecoboost gets 18% better fuel economy than the Ecotec. I guess Ford got this one right after all.

[Captain Awesome]

Originally Posted by comiskeybum

i just hear that Chrysler invented a new engine..........the Rotary engine........its gonna be sweet!!!

Aren't they putting it into the newly invented "small-van" that uses "cab-rearward design" and "Quad-wheel-propulsion"?