ToBeHuman Posted October 5, 2009 Share Posted October 5, 2009 (edited) One challenge that Ford still faces is managing emissions during cold start. Current cold start technologies from Ford tend to significantly reduce nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions. In order to meet U.S. emissions guidelines, Ford may be forced not to deploy its 1.6 L and 2.0 L EcoBoost engines domestically. The resulting engine can be tuned to be very powerful -- when pushed, the 3.5 L V6 EcoBoost engine can put out up to 500 hp for a "couple hours" if smog emissions are thrown out the window. Article Edited October 5, 2009 by ToBeHuman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AM2 Posted October 6, 2009 Share Posted October 6, 2009 (edited) One challenge that Ford still faces is managing emissions during cold start. Current cold start technologies from Ford tend to significantly reduce nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions. In order to meet U.S. emissions guidelines, Ford may be forced not to deploy its 1.6 L and 2.0 L EcoBoost engines domestically. Thats odd, didn't Ford just confirm the 2.0 liter EcoBoost for the North American market last July? Barb Samardzich, VP of global powertrain development announced the next stage of the company's EcoBoost strategy for North America. The new 2.0-liter EcoBoost four cylinder will debut in 2010. This will be the first four-cylinder EcoBoost for North America. http://green.autoblog.com/2009/07/21/ford-...inpage_autoblog Edited October 6, 2009 by AM2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 (edited) Thats odd, didn't Ford just confirm the 2.0 liter EcoBoost for the North American market last July? http://green.autoblog.com/2009/07/21/ford-...inpage_autoblog its a green light from EVERYTHING I have heard and read....which it will show up in first i have no idea...HOPEFULLY it finds its way into the Fiesta/ Focus as a performance model... Edited October 12, 2009 by Deanh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2b2 Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 imho the next EB intro needs to play up the ECO part of the equation so guess it'd better be the Explorer even tho I really*REALLY* want to see the 2.0EB in the Focus/Mercuocus & Fusion/Milan** think the 2.0EB would be too hot of an engine for ECO for them and the Taurus has had enough EB-Love imho - for now ** otoh, a 2.0EB COULD be Very Interesting in a greenER MKZ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DUCKRACER Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 Article I have not seen an EB Taurus or Flex in person. Do they have intercoolers? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kris Kolman Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 A turbocharger needs intercoolers... Else the air going into the engine is too hot. Remember that unlike a supercharger, which is a mechanical pump, a turbocharger is powered by hot exhaust gases and the heat pickup is too much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
battyr Posted October 18, 2009 Share Posted October 18, 2009 Compressing the intake air, whether from the turbo or a supercharger, caused the air to heat up. Using an intercooler, you can make the air more dense and it flows into the cylinder easier. Also the power of the engine comes from the expansion of the combustion gases. The more dense the air before combustion, the more it can expand. Other benefits of an intercooler is reduce knock and greater allowed boost. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DUCKRACER Posted October 19, 2009 Share Posted October 19, 2009 I have not seen an EB Taurus or Flex in person. Do they have intercoolers? So, can I assume that Ford intercooled all EB motors? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kris Kolman Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 Wow really... Didn't know that. You forgot to mention that hot, less dense gas also has less oxygen per unit volume to burn (just like at altitude). What I ment is that the diffence between a turbocharger and a supercharger is that the part pumping up the air is actually hotter. As such the air comming out of a turbocharger is hotter than the air comming out of an equivelently sized supercharger. As such I've seen plenty of superchargers without intercoolers, but no turbochargers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpvbs Posted October 20, 2009 Share Posted October 20, 2009 Non-intercooled turbos are not unheard of, but they really don't allow the true potential of the turbos show. Chysler had (still has?) a non-intercooled turbo PT Cruiser, the 2.2 Dodge turbos from the 80s were not intercooled, turbo Buicks didn't have intercoolers until 1986, the very first Dodge Cummins were non-intercooled. Also, the 2.3 turbo Fords from the 80s were not all intercooled either (some were). The general theme though, is these are relatively low output engines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordtion Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 I've never seen any Ford 2.3L engines that did not have a intercooler.Just what model and year did Ford make one without a intercooler??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpvbs Posted October 21, 2009 Share Posted October 21, 2009 (edited) I've never seen any Ford 2.3L engines that did not have a intercooler.Just what model and year did Ford make one without a intercooler??? from wikipedia The turbocharged and intercooled 2.3 was also used in the 1984-86 Mustang SVO, while the 1983-1984 Mustang TurboGT, 1985-89 Merkur XR4Ti, 1983-1986 Thunderbird Turbo Coupe and 1984-1986 Mercury Cougar XR7 all skipped the intercooler on their turbo versions, which dropped output to 180 hp (130 kW) and 205 ft·lbf (278 N·m) of torque. The SVO Mustang's output increased in 1985 1/2 to 205 HP. Edited October 21, 2009 by jpvbs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tboneguy Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 My 79 Capri/Mustang had the NON-intercooled 2.3 turbo. I believe it was rated at a whomping 132 HP, which was a big jump from the non-turbo 2.3's 88 HP. Certainly not a rocket, but for it's day it was a fun drive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ford Jellymoulds Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Autocar mentioned this month that the next generation Focus will be powered by small 3 cylinder 1.2 & 1.4 Ecoboost engines to meet strict future EU regulations on CO2, if this is going to be a global Focus then maybe you will be getting these small engines Stateside as well. A Ford spokesman did mention to Autocar that the next US Focus will be built Stateside. Big gas guzzling 4 cylinder cars are soooooooooooh yesterday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MERKURXR4Ti Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Just means you need to buy an aftermarket intercooler.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AM2 Posted January 9, 2010 Share Posted January 9, 2010 (edited) Update: Toward the end of the year, a new 2.0-liter Ti-VCT four-cylinder for the next-generation Focus will mark the first introduction of a normally aspirated direct injection engine to the powertrain lineup. The all new engine will launch on the 2012 Focus in North America. - http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/fo...0-80997137.html In the article they listed down the 2.0 EB, but no 1.6 EB, instead there will be a new NA direct injection Ti-VCT 2.0. If I recall the 1.6 EB was supposed to replace the NA 2.0 liter Ford engines. I wonder what the next generation Asia-Pacific Focus will use... the 2.0 NA engine or the 1.6 EB like the one in the upcoming C-Max/ Grand C-Max? Edited January 9, 2010 by AM2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MY93SHO Posted January 9, 2010 Share Posted January 9, 2010 Here's a pic of the 1.6 display at Detroit. http://jalopnik.com/5443818/2010-detroit-a...eview/gallery/9 Don't know why they would have a display if it's not going to be offered here. 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.