transitman Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 (edited) I'm still undecided whether I want an SEL, 1.6L, 173 HP for better fuel economy, or sacrifice mpg's and get a Titanium with 64 more HP and probably at least 3 to 5 fewer mpg's. I base that guess on Ford's claim that the 1.6 will see better numbers than the current Escape Hybrid. I would option out the SEL to the Titanium level, minus the HID's. I'm looking for some opinions whether folks feel if the 1.6L will be powerful enough to move 3515 pounds around effectively. My 2012 Focus which weighs 2948 and with 160 HP has plenty of pep and passing power. Edited February 22, 2012 by transitman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted February 22, 2012 Share Posted February 22, 2012 I'm still undecided whether I want an SEL, 1.6L, 173 HP for better fuel economy, or sacrifice mpg's and get a Titanium with 64 more HP and probably at least 3 to 5 fewer mpg's. I base that guess on Ford's claim that the 1.6 will see better numbers than the current Escape Hybrid. I would option out the SEL to the Titanium level, minus the HID's. I'm looking for some opinions whether folks feel if the 1.6L will be powerful enough to move 3515 pounds around effectively. My 2012 Focus which weighs 2948 and with 160 HP has plenty of pep and passing power. Depends on your definition of "effectively". It will be slower than your Focus but should still be perfectly acceptable. I think my 93 Explorer only had 175 hp or so and it was fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transitman Posted February 22, 2012 Author Share Posted February 22, 2012 (edited) Depends on your definition of "effectively". It will be slower than your Focus but should still be perfectly acceptable. I think my 93 Explorer only had 175 hp or so and it was fine. I guess by "effectively" I mean will it labor from a stop, have good passing power and have enough power to carry me and cargo through the mountains in Arizona, all of this with good accelerator response and without bogging down and affecting fuel economy too much. Maybe it's not a question that can be answered at this time. The 93 Explorer was a pretty heavy vehicle and if 175 HP was fine, well... I'll have to do some research to compare a 20 year old 175 HP engine versus a modern 173 HP engine. I did some quick checking and 93 Explorer 3679 lbs., 160 HP and 220 ft # of torque 2013 Escape 3515 lbs., 173 HP and 177 ft # of torque On paper it seems the Escape should have plenty of power. I've made up my mind to get the 2.0L Titanium. For 2 or 3 mpg, it's not worth having a lack of power when needed. I make an annual trip to AZ and with the 2.0L there's no need to worry about over revving at 75 to 80 mph and power on the mountain climbs. There, done and done. Edited February 23, 2012 by transitman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 I guess by "effectively" I mean will it labor from a stop, have good passing power and have enough power to carry me and cargo through the mountains in Arizona, all of this with good accelerator response and without bogging down and affecting fuel economy too much. Maybe it's not a question that can be answered at this time. The 93 Explorer was a pretty heavy vehicle and if 175 HP was fine, well... I'll have to do some research to compare a 20 year old 175 HP engine versus a modern 173 HP engine. I did some quick checking and 93 Explorer 3679 lbs., 160 HP and 220 ft # of torque 2013 Escape 3515 lbs., 173 HP and 177 ft # of torque On paper it seems the Escape should have plenty of power. I've made up my mind to get the 2.0L Titanium. For 2 or 3 mpg, it's not worth having a lack of power when needed. I make an annual trip to AZ and with the 2.0L there's no need to worry about over revving at 75 to 80 mph and power on the mountain climbs. There, done and done. If you're that worried about it then yes - get the 2.0L. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rscalzo Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 If you're that worried about it then yes - get the 2.0L. 20% less torque is what I'd be worried about. when does the torque come in? On the older 4.0, I'd say at a lower RPM. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlucarelli Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Don't buy either. Faith in Ford Motor Company on a new model with no history? Personally, I would not purchase any vehicle with less than a 100,000 mile power train warranty. Too much risk ( and cost), if, say, a Duratech engine spins a main bearing at 65,000 miles and requires a $7,000 engine replacement. Ironically, Ford DOES warrant engines for 100,000 miles - but only the remanufactured ones. Don't forget that Ford's "EcoBoost" marketing term is really a small engine with stressful turbocharging bolted on. Ford only has one or two years' experience with this - not enough data for folks like Consumer Repors to compile accurate reliability data. My "simple" Duratech engine was $7,000. Imagine how expensive a sophisticated EcoBoost engine costs to replace. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transitman Posted February 23, 2012 Author Share Posted February 23, 2012 Don't buy either. Faith in Ford Motor Company on a new model with no history?... This the same thing they said when Ford replaced the straight 6. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gator06 Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Don't buy either. Faith in Ford Motor Company on a new model with no history? Personally, I would not purchase any vehicle with less than a 100,000 mile power train warranty. Too much risk ( and cost), if, say, a Duratech engine spins a main bearing at 65,000 miles and requires a $7,000 engine replacement. Ironically, Ford DOES warrant engines for 100,000 miles - but only the remanufactured ones. Don't forget that Ford's "EcoBoost" marketing term is really a small engine with stressful turbocharging bolted on. Ford only has one or two years' experience with this - not enough data for folks like Consumer Repors to compile accurate reliability data. My "simple" Duratech engine was $7,000. Imagine how expensive a sophisticated EcoBoost engine costs to replace. I bought a 2006 Fusion new and I will admit I was slightly uneasy about a first model year build. Thats why I decided to get the extended warranty as it was good piece of mind. I can happily report I'm still driving that car today after 85k miles and the only out of the ordinary work I've had to do was replace an A/C compressor that is likely a common part across multiple vehicles and thus has nothing to do with it being a first year car. I know people are naturally hesitant to be one of the first buyers of something new for fear of experiencing teething pains, but I think things are better now than they used to be in that regard. All auto manufacturers, and especially Ford, have placed a large emphasis on quality in the past 5 years. I have no doubt they designed and tested these engines thoroughly. Turbocharging is only stressful if the components of the engine aren't designed with forced induction in mind (like someone bolting a turbo onto a stock naturally aspirated engine.) These engines were designed from the ground up for this application so I don't see it being any different than the 3.0 V6 in regards of durability. It sucks you lost an engine, but the Duratec is an older design so I'm not quite sure I follow your logic of avoiding new models. Are you suggesting someone go for something older even though that was what you had an issue with? The best resource for any consumer is the internet and message boards such as these. Common problems on any product will become well known quickly (and hopefully solutions as well!) Nothing is more reliable then hearing from the consumer themselves. Until we start hearing of issues with these new Ecoboost engines, I don't think its fair to use a blanket statement telling people to avoid them. I prefer the innocent until proven guilty theory. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
92merc Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 Don't buy either. Faith in Ford Motor Company on a new model with no history? Personally, I would not purchase any vehicle with less than a 100,000 mile power train warranty. Too much risk ( and cost), if, say, a Duratech engine spins a main bearing at 65,000 miles and requires a $7,000 engine replacement. Ironically, Ford DOES warrant engines for 100,000 miles - but only the remanufactured ones. Don't forget that Ford's "EcoBoost" marketing term is really a small engine with stressful turbocharging bolted on. Ford only has one or two years' experience with this - not enough data for folks like Consumer Repors to compile accurate reliability data. My "simple" Duratech engine was $7,000. Imagine how expensive a sophisticated EcoBoost engine costs to replace. Taurus SHO was debuted in August of 2009 with the 3.5EB. So it's been more than "one or two" years. No recalls have happened on that release of the EB. And now the F150 has had a EB for over a year now with no recalls related to turbo charging. Ford has tested the crap out of it. It works. I guess if you want the 100k mile warranty, go get a Dodge/Chryco product. Just remember to look at the recent JDP results. Keep scrolling down until you get to the bottom of the list. That should give an idea of why they have to put such long warranties behind them... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted February 23, 2012 Share Posted February 23, 2012 I guess if you want the 100k mile warranty, go get a Dodge/Chryco product. Just remember to look at the recent JDP results. Keep scrolling down until you get to the bottom of the list. That should give an idea of why they have to put such long warranties behind them... "If you want me to take a crap in a box and put a guarantee on it I will. I've got the time." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transitman Posted February 28, 2012 Author Share Posted February 28, 2012 Reading the source book, I noticed this foot note regarding the 1.6L and 2.0L EcoBoost HP and torque estimates. (1) Horsepower and torque values using premium fuel. Using a lower octane may reduce performance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeeman84 Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 Just put in an order for the SEL with 1.6 EcoBoost. Traded in the Escape Hybrid with about the same horsepower. Hoping for the same power. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transitman Posted February 29, 2012 Author Share Posted February 29, 2012 Just put in an order for the SEL with 1.6 EcoBoost. Traded in the Escape Hybrid with about the same horsepower. Hoping for the same power. Congrats, and thanks for your service. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2005Explorer Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 I think it all comes down to whether you want 4WD or not. I think the 1.6 or 2.0 would be fine with FWD. When you start to look at the added weight and drag of 4WD I think you would definitely want the 2.0L. It's similar to the current situation where the V6 is a lot better with 4WD then the standard I4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rscalzo Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 I think it all comes down to whether you want 4WD or not. I think the 1.6 or 2.0 would be fine with FWD. When you start to look at the added weight and drag of 4WD I think you would definitely want the 2.0L. It's similar to the current situation where the V6 is a lot better with 4WD then the standard I4. I have both. The difference is not that great. 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.