[1931Chevy]

Price tag for Ford EcoBoost: $700
Amy Wilson
Automotive News
August 18, 2008 - 12:01 am ET


DETROIT -- Ford Motor Co. will charge a premium of around $700 for its much-touted EcoBoost engine system when it goes on sale in 2009.

A 3.5-liter V-6 with EcoBoost will arrive next year on the Lincoln MKS sedan and Ford Flex crossover.

The V-6 with EcoBoost is slated for the Ford F-150 in 2010, and the pickup application will produce "significantly more" than 340 hp and 340 pounds-feet of torque, said Brett Hinds, Ford's advanced engine design manager. That tops the 300-hp rating of the largest engine -- a 5.4- liter V-8 -- in the current F-150.

EcoBoost technology combines turbocharging and gasoline direct injection. A V-6 with EcoBoost gets as much as 20 percent better fuel economy than a conventional V-8, Ford says. It also improves performance and will enable the company to replace V-8s with V-6s and V-6s with four-cylinder engines.

The fuel savings will enable buyers to recoup the premium paid for EcoBoost technology within two years, Hinds said. When going from a V-8 to a V-6 with EcoBoost, Ford estimates annual savings at $339 when driving 15,000 miles per year with gasoline costing $3.25 a gallon.

continue at the link

 

[460ford]

Wow I was expecting it to cost a lot more than that, Really nice to see the F-150 getting it for 2010. Ecoboost should make a really good marketing point for Ford and attract some people into the showroom.

 

[Xenon]

Wow I was expecting it to cost a lot more than that, Really nice to see the F-150 getting it for 2010. Ecoboost should make a really good marketing point for Ford and attract some people into the showroom.

Its because one set of engines is going into so many cars. Its almost the same strategy that VW does with the 2.0T. But the bigger question is what is the $700 pricetag for...the F-150? I don't think they wold make it so cheap for the MKS, Fusion, or Taurus.

 

[eurohazard]

I wonder when (at what RPM) the torque comes on and peaks. Sure it makes 40 more hp, but it makes less torque than the V8.

 

[gregorypeter]

I wonder when (at what RPM) the torque comes on and peaks. Sure it makes 40 more hp, but it makes less torque than the V8.

I'm not sure if that would necessarily be true. When they debuted the Twinforce in the MKR it was making something like 415/400 or something like that. I'm sure they can tweak the ECU for a truck application.

 

[davidlane]

I wonder when (at what RPM) the torque comes on and peaks. Sure it makes 40 more hp, but it makes less torque than the V8.

If you'll look at HP/torque graphs for GM's 2.0l LNF you'll find the torque peaks at low RPMs and stays flat to about 5000 RPMs, if I recall correctly. Saab engines aer similar. With direct injection, computer control and current turbocharger designs these are nothing like the early generation turbos. In the example mentioned by Ford that's 40 more horses and 25 fewer lbs ft.

 

[JT87]

Mighty impressive package!
Adding two water-cooled Honeywell turbochargers, as well as the necessary higher pressure fuel system is very impressive for only $700 (even if the package stays under $1000, still quite good). I looked over some articles in some industry magazines, and it sounds like the real deal. Kudos to Ford.

(P.S., Still waiting for a DI turbo 6, GM!)

 

[chevydlrmn]

The ridgeline get 15/20 mpg's with the 3.5 V6. Silverado gets better mileage. I am not sure that this will save as much gas as anticipated.

 

[big swede]

Turbo's produce excellent torque. The turbo is what has given the diesel engine the reputation for being a torque monster even though the diesel configuration is given the most credit.

 

[Quickening]

And the question that no company (GM or Ford) when talking about upcoming Turbo engines or packages, will they require premium.

The ridgeline get 15/20 mpg's with the 3.5 V6. Silverado gets better mileage. I am not sure that this will save as much gas as anticipated.

And people will have to learn how to drive with a Turbo, if you want to get the good mileage, you can't use the turbo every time you leave a stoplight or stop sign or your gas mileage will plummet.

 

[nsap]

I'm a little apprehensive toward saying the "ECOBoost" will be the gas saver Ford is touting it to be, but I hope I'm incorrect. Nonetheless, $700 is a good premium for the engine. If it does have better gas mileage figures...you'd be a fool not to get the engine.

 

[wescoent]

I'm a little apprehensive toward saying the "ECOBoost" will be the gas saver Ford is touting it to be, but I hope I'm incorrect. Nonetheless, $700 is a good premium for the engine. If it does have better gas mileage figures...you'd be a fool not to get the engine.

The idea is, V6 economy with V8 power, and I4 economy with V6 power. That's it, and I don't see why that's unreasonable.

 

[megeebee]

If this works in real-world practice as Ford claims, I say Kudos! A $700.00 premium is not a high price to pay for this. Even if it takes 3 years to recoup, it's still a fairly inexpensive way of saving fuel and thereby reducing carbon emission. It's a very good start and, again if it pans-out as Ford says, it will send the worlds automakers scrambling to emulate it.

I understand GM has cancelled (as much as anything is actually cancelled in the auto business) it's own program.

 

[big swede]

And people will have to learn how to drive with a Turbo, if you want to get the good mileage, you can't use the turbo every time you leave a stoplight or stop sign or your gas mileage will plummet.

That's exactly how they are tested with the EPA to get the mileage figures for the window sticker which plays right into EcoBoosts hands. These "test numbers" will definitely make the EPA numbers look good and it will go a long way towards CAFE requirements. What we get in real world driving is of no concern to Ford, or any other manufacturer for that matter.

 

[61BelAir]

$700 is a bargain. Combine more power and torque with up to 20% better mileage and thats a winner!

 

[eurohazard]

$700 is a bargain. Combine more power and torque with up to 20% better mileage and thats a winner!

lol, why are some saying ecoboost makes more torque? The 5.4 V8 makes more torque (365 vs. 340). Can't wait for more specs.

 

[mooseman]

lol, why are some saying ecoboost makes more torque? The 5.4 V8 makes more torque (365 vs. 340). Can't wait for more specs.

Thats strictly for the transverse rating. Longitudinally it makes around 400/400.

 

[JT87]

lol, why are some saying ecoboost makes more torque? The 5.4 V8 makes more torque (365 vs. 340). Can't wait for more specs.

The first versions (presumably for transverse applications), will have ~340 lbs ft. The truck/RWD versions are to have about 385lbs ft and above, and more of a torque 'plateau' than a curve.

 

[ChevroletRevived]

$700 is impressive and definitely worth it! Basically it improves power out of an engine, enabling a 4-cylinder to be used instead of a 6, for instance. It looks to be a promising thing for Ford if they can deliver on it .

 

[61BelAir]

lol, why are some saying ecoboost makes more torque? The 5.4 V8 makes more torque (365 vs. 340). Can't wait for more specs.

Maybe some people are reading the text that says in the F150 it will have significantly more than 340HP/340Torque.