ANTAUS Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 LINK-Edmunds.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calypsocoral Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 LINK-Edmunds.com Overall, a great review. Now, let's hope Ford doesn't dumb it down too badly when it gets to us... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 Fiesta 1.6 TDCI achieves similar fuel economy as the Prius but at a fraction of the price. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSFan00 Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 It's easy to beat the Prius with a small diesel; We drove the 2009 Ford Fiesta 1.6 TDCi, the flagship model, which features a 1.6-liter inline-4 turbocharged diesel that offers 89 horsepower and 150 pound-feet of torque. This familiar engine features a Bosch common-rail injection operating at 1,600 bar, and it's been refined for this new application in the Fiesta. It is impressively smooth and although the 0-60-mph sprint of 11.9 seconds is no better than adequate, the in-gear acceleration is impressive. Ford claims acceleration from 50 km/h to 100 km/h (31-62 mph) in 9.9 seconds, notably faster than the 10.8-second performance of the Fiesta's gasoline-fueled 1.6-liter inline-4. This turbodiesel engine's primary appeal lies in its economy. It manages 67.3 mpg as a European average, compared with 65.7 mpg for a Toyota Prius. Its carbon dioxide emissions are excellent, too (110 g/km versus 104 for the Toyota) and there's an Econetic version on its way that emits under 100 g/km. In Europe there is also a 67-hp 1.4-liter turbodiesel as well as a range of gasoline engines that includes a 59-hp 1.3-liter, an 80-hp 1.3-liter turbo and a 95-hp 1.4 liter. The premium gasoline engine is the all-new 118-hp 1.6 Ti-VCT that features variable valve timing for both the intake and exhaust cams. More powerful versions are likely to follow, although there hasn't been a high-performance Fiesta since the RS Turbo of 1992. The beginning of the dumbing-down for NA is that the heart of the car, the flagship engines, will not be coming here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P71_CrownVic Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 The beginning of the dumbing-down for NA is that the heart of the car, the flagship engines, will not be coming here. It's the way forward. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron W. Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 The beginning of the dumbing-down for NA is that the heart of the car, the flagship engines, will not be coming here. It's the way forward. Due to federal mandates. :reading: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harley Lover Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 The beginning of the dumbing-down for NA is that the heart of the car, the flagship engines, will not be coming here. In the U.K., our test car costs about $24,000 at today's exchange rates. Be fair, Ford can't bring in this engine with its associated costs, and sell this car at its expected price range. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSFan00 Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 Fair? What does a transit connect retail for in Britain vs. here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MERKURXR4Ti Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 Fair? What does a transit connect retail for in Britain vs. here? It's not for sale here. Have they even alluded to the price yet? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 Due to federal mandates. :reading: Exactly. Some here want to potray Ford as deciding "Nah, this engine is too good for America. Let's keep it in Europe only." :rolleyes: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 I love how they characterize the 11.9 sec. 0-60 time as 'barely adequate'. In fact, it's entirely unacceptable for this market------------ Unless you like getting into accidents on on-ramps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 I love how they characterize the 11.9 sec. 0-60 time as 'barely adequate'. In fact, it's entirely unacceptable for this market------------ Unless you like getting into accidents on on-ramps. 11.9 seconds was more than acceptable a few years ago, and is certainly acceptable compared to some of the things on the road in Europe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 Fair? What does a transit connect retail for in Britain vs. here? US emissions standards are significantly tougher than Euro standards. Therefore, this diesel engine would need significant additional emissions controls. By contrast, an ecoboost engine may be able to come within shooting distance of the diesel numbers, for significantly less coin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old_fairmont_wagon Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 (IMHO)Fact is, the car will likely feature the 1.6L I4 TiVCT delivering something between 110 and 115 hp. It fits better with the total lineup, its about where the competition is in the power to weight range, it will still deliver decent MPG (about where the Focus is in its respective class when compared to its rivals). All in all, it will be a competitive car when mechanicals and interior are considered. I just am curious as to what the " small changed to the front fascia" will really amount to. that design is riding the edge of looking good vs. looking bad already. If they have to extend a full bumper across it, or redo the grill in a major way, it could look ugly in a hurry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wescoent Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 11.9 seconds was more than acceptable a few years ago, and is certainly acceptable compared to some of the things on the road in Europe. Seriously. Am I the only one here who remembers driving cars built between 1978 and 1988? A 12-second 0-60 time was a dream come true for some of those heaps. Yet I don't recall ever having merging problems on highway ramps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 11.9 seconds was more than acceptable a few years ago, and is certainly acceptable compared to some of the things on the road in Europe. 1) 12 second 0-60 was barely acceptable a decade ago. Now it's downright dangerous. Unless you live in the land of half-mile long on-ramps and incredibly polite drivers. It's not so much a question of what was acceptable 10 years ago, as it is a question of what is acceptable in terms of today's fleet. 2) Edmunds wrote that with the US in view, not Europe. 12 seconds may be fine and dandy in Europe (I have my doubts), but it sure ain't here. I would consider 10 seconds to be 'barely acceptable' today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 Yet I don't recall ever having merging problems on highway ramps. Yeah. But how fast was everyone else going on the on-ramp? How fast was everyone on the freeway driving? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P71_CrownVic Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 Due to federal mandates. :reading: Other manufactures can do it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P71_CrownVic Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 Seriously. Am I the only one here who remembers driving cars built between 1978 and 1988? A 12-second 0-60 time was a dream come true for some of those heaps. Yet I don't recall ever having merging problems on highway ramps. Not to mention...how many people are actually doing 60 by the time they reach the end of the on-ramp? Not many...people would rather accelerate once they are on the actual highway. Personally, I move over and blow past them...it makes no difference to me how slow their car is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 Other manufactures can do it... start listing all the diesel sedans avail in the Sates P....keep the MSRP" similar to what we expect the Fiesta to come in at ( sub 18k )....PM Milm...he has info on the 65mpg VW..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Extreme4x4 Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 (edited) Ok, lets play the P game................. Name all of the diesel cars currently available in the US. Please list price and fuel economy. If you list one car that is "coming" then you are disqualified based on your own hypocrisy. LOL Dean................ we both posted at the same time. Edited August 25, 2008 by Extreme4x4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P71_CrownVic Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 start listing all the diesel sedans avail in the Sates P....keep the MSRP" similar to what we expect the Fiesta to come in at ( sub 18k )....PM Milm...he has info on the 65mpg VW..... That is not the point. The point is that others can make a diesel that conforms to US emission standards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Surgen Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 That is not the point. The point is that others can make a diesel that conforms to US emission standards. Can they? Please name 1 high volume 50-state diesel car. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atomaro Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 Seriously. Am I the only one here who remembers driving cars built between 1978 and 1988? A 12-second 0-60 time was a dream come true for some of those heaps. Yet I don't recall ever having merging problems on highway ramps. Thats because you didn't feel safe going much over 65 or 70 in those heaps...plus the speed limit was lower back then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Extreme4x4 Posted August 25, 2008 Share Posted August 25, 2008 Nice dodge there P. Talking out of our behind again.................. eh P??? Big surprise. :rolleyes: 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.