Its official: the 2015 Focus is getting the Ecoboost 1.0

[papilgee4evaeva]

 

I think it would be stupid NOT to think that this move is highly influenced by CAFE in every vehicle.

 

Ford has several years of experience pricing and marketing the EB engines, so it's not like this is uncharted territory.

 

And as I already pointed out, they may be TRYING to limit sales volume of the new engine due to supply constraints or other issues.

 

Either way, I presume they know what they're doing and if it doesn't work out the way they planned then it's easy enough to change.

 

You presume, and for Ford's sake I hope.

[Hugh]

 

And in the Focus here, what is the engine replacing? There's no engine below the 2.0 in the Focus, so it's not a straight-across comparison.

There has only been the D20 in NA while ROW had access to Diesel and EB10, 16 and IIRC D16. Perhaps Focus not having a smaller then D20 was an issue. I would have loved to have a Focus Titanium with the EB16 but since EB15 is out, that works too.

[jpd80]

 

Ford's had some recent fails where they thought they had business cases before. It is very possible that this is another, which is why we'll wait and see.

 

And in the Focus here, what is the engine replacing? There's no engine below the 2.0 in the Focus, so it's not a straight-across comparison.

 

OR -- and I just thought of this -- what if the engine is a CAFE grab?

I'm not suggesting that this is a slam dunk winner , just that it stands a better chance of success than a diesel competitor that costs $5,000 more.

 

Ask anyone five years ago whether they would ever consider an engine like this in a compact and I guarantee the response would be a flat "NO"

but maybe that stance has softened with other Ecoboost engines paving the way, the truth is like diesel, three's no gauge as to market penetration.

 

While you can't force people to like a car, maybe the market is more open to a 1.0 EB Focus than some perceive, we just don't know but Ford wants to try.

Edited February 26, 2014 by jpd80

[J-150]

 

Ding ding ding!!

 

The upcharge for a diesel is usually an order of magnitude more than for an EB. You know, like 3-5k vs 1k.

 

When you pay extra for fuel economy with an EB, you don't have the 20-30% premium you have to pay for the fuel like you do with a diesel.

 

 

Diesel is not at a 20% premium in all areas.

 

This still becomes about paying an upcharge for a more fuel efficient engine.

 

So, as with the arguments against diesels, lets make the same argument for the 1.0.

 

How many miles do you have to drive to justify the $995 upcharge?

[jpd80]

So, as with the arguments against diesels, lets make the same argument for the 1.0.

 

How many miles do you have to drive to justify the $995 upcharge?

A lot less than a diesel that costs $5,000 more

[akirby]

With diesel you almost always get a big bump in torque, so it's not just the fuel economy.

[chevys]

I maintain that this about about advertising "best in class" with the wonderful "ecoboost technology" and little to do about the take rate or real world results. I can just see the average guy showing up at the dealership saying how many cylinders did you say it had again? It might be a great thing across the pond but it wont fly here in the US. Ford already had the engine so why not toss it in there for publicity benifits. This so reminds me of the SFE pickups a few years back. A total waste but it made for good adds. I cant wait to see the upcharge and what the benifits are and do the math on the payback.

[akirby]

I can just see the average guy showing up at the dealership saying how many cylinders did you say it had again?

 

Ha ha ha ha ha.......... Do you honestly think a small car buyer cares about number of cylinders? They care mostly about the EPA fuel economy on the window sticker and a test drive will confirm whether it has adequate power.

 

I still think this is purposely limited due to engine supply. The automatics tend to get better mileage than the manual so doing it for advertising reasons doesn't make sense.

[silvrsvt]

Its not like getting back $1000 or so bucks back is going to be hard to with fuel savings with these types of engines. They probably pay for themselves in year or two, even with average driving

[jpvbs]

My feeling is that the average small car buyers cares more about what color the car is, or that the cool touch screen works with their phone, or that it "looks right" than they do about peak engine hp. The 1.0EB supposedly has good low end throttle response so it doesn't feel doggy and that is the one thing the typical buyer notices most. The additional mpg is certainly a selling point but if a dealer has a number of cars on the lot to choose from, there is probably a lot of other considerations more important for a lot of buyers when either engine is acceptable for their needs. The EB price differential will get lost in the myriad of different option packages that cost more. This is assuming they offer it at some point with an automatic. A CVT with the 1.0 would be interesting as other manufacturers seem to be putting up good MPG numbers using them.

[Donaldo]

A CVT with the 1.0 would be interesting as other manufacturers seem to be putting up good MPG numbers using them.

 

Yes, these days a manual transmission cannot compete with a good e-CVT. Could Ford be concerned that a CVT equipped Fusion with 1.0EB would have MPG approaching the Fusion hybrid at a lower cost?

[papilgee4evaeva]

I'm not suggesting that this is a slam dunk winner , just that it stands a better chance of success than a diesel competitor that costs $5,000 more.

 

Ask anyone five years ago whether they would ever consider an engine like this in a compact and I guarantee the response would be a flat "NO"

but maybe that stance has softened with other Ecoboost engines paving the way, the truth is like diesel, three's no gauge as to market penetration.

 

While you can't force people to like a car, maybe the market is more open to a 1.0 EB Focus than some perceive, we just don't know but Ford wants to try.

 

Interestingly enough, VW still offers the 2.slow in the Jetta, and it's even less powerful than the 1.0EB. They don't move much (literally and figuratively).

 

I'm ok with the idea that "Ford wants to try," even if I'm not fully on board with the attempt. The pricing will always be a sticking point with me, though.

 

With diesel you almost always get a big bump in torque, so it's not just the fuel economy.

 

Referencing again the Jetta line, for about $2910 you can go from a Jetta SE with Connectivity to an equally-equipped TDI, gain 50 ft-lbs of torque, and +4/+6 MPG (manuals). Seems pretty good if the price differential between regular and diesel isn't too steep.

[papilgee4evaeva]

Yes, these days a manual transmission cannot compete with a good e-CVT. Could Ford be concerned that a CVT equipped Fusion with 1.0EB would have MPG approaching the Fusion hybrid at a lower cost?

 

Couple of things...

 

1) Ford's eCVT is hybrid-only. Wouldn't work with a strictly gas engine. And I don't know if they're going to try a conventional CVT again since the first ones they made were failures.

2) Returns on fuel economy would likely be greatly diminished if you put that engine in a 3400-lb car.

[jpd80]

I'm ok with the idea that "Ford wants to try," even if I'm not fully on board with the attempt. The pricing will always be a sticking point with me, though.

We haven't heard Ford's pricing yet, I'm just assuming there's an up charge like Fiesta but that may be completely wrong and coloring people's judgement.

 

 

 

 

 

Couple of things...

 

1) Ford's eCVT is hybrid-only. Wouldn't work with a strictly gas engine. And I don't know if they're going to try a conventional CVT again since the first ones they made were failures.

2) Returns on fuel economy would likely be greatly diminished if you put that engine in a 3400-lb car.

Ford has the 1.0 Ecoboost in the European C-Max and it will also be going into the new version of European Mondeo later this year.

 

Market perception and buyer expectation are different in Europe, those two vehicles and Focus currently have/had the 1.6 TiVCT as an option, so moving to

the EB 1.0 is an improvement in performance and fuel economy. In North America, there's an expectation that vehicles will be capable performers, even if that

comes at the cost of some fuel economy. So charging more for an engine with less performance is always a hard sell - maybe the charge in Fiesta is justified

but but not in Focus while a 1.0 EB Fusion in North America has no business case due to market expectations.

 

The key here is to grow sales not simply to convert existing 2.0 DI Focus buyers to 1.0 EB, these would be mostly conquest buyers attracted

to Ford because its offering something different, maybe ex-prius buyers...

Edited February 27, 2014 by jpd80

[MKII]

From a Driveline News report dated January 2013.

 

FORD FIESTA TO USE DRY DCT, WHILE FOCUS WILL HAVE PLANETARY AUTO

 

"Ford has gained near-universal plaudits for the performance, economy and refinement of its extremely downsized Fox three-cylinder gasoline engine in the medium-sized European Focus. But the Company faces something of a dilemma in deciding on a suitable automatic transmission to make the innovative one-liter engine an attractive proposition for customers who prefer not to shift their own gears.

 

The situation is further complicated by the fact that the Fox engine is deliberately designed to be applied to almost the entire line-up of Ford vehicles. These range from the compact Fiesta hatchback to the much-more-substantial Focus portfolio, as well as the near-premium, next-generation Mondeo sedan and station wagon and the B-Max, C-Max, S-Max and Galaxy range of minivans. The span of vehicle curb weights is wide, stretching from barely 1,000 kg to almost 1,700 kg. A range of automatic transmissions is at the disposal of Ford engineers. These include the dry clutch Getrag-Ford DCT used on US-market Fiestas and Focuses, and the European Powershift wet clutch DCT designed for high-torque diesels, available on most current Ford models but very much a first-generation unit in terms of architecture and efficiency.

 

While the Fiesta paired happily with the six-speed dry DCT from the US, said Ernie DeVincent, vice president of product development at Getrag, the weightier Focus posed more of a challenge. With the larger platform there is too much inertia and you cant get the acceleration thats needed, he told DrivelineNEWS.com at a recent industry conference in Berlin. Thats why Ford has decided to go for the US six-speed planetary automatic.

 

This unit is a joint development between Ford and GM, and was launched in 2006. Ford codes the unit, which is built in large volumes in the US, the 6F. GM versions are labeled Hydramatic 6T-70 and 6T-75.

 

DeVincent, who was an engineer at Ford until he joined Getrag in 2006, did not give a launch date for the new engine/automatic pairings, nor state which transmissions would be used on other larger European Ford models. However, he did reveal that the Asian market would be the main target for Getrags new wet clutch 6DCT150, the six-speed, lower-torque derivative of the new-generation 7DCT300 seven-speed core model.

Edited February 27, 2014 by MKII

[fordmantpw]

A lot less than a diesel that costs $5,000 more

 

Darnit jpd, I was away from my PC today and you beat me to it...that's exactly what I was going to say!

 

With diesel you almost always get a big bump in torque, so it's not just the fuel economy.

 

Yep, and that torque is great for towing trailers in trucks, but for passenger cars, the EB has plenty of torque, and the extra torque of the diesel wouldn't be noticed outside of stoplight racing.

[papilgee4evaeva]

Yep, and that torque is great for towing trailers in trucks, but for passenger cars, the EB has plenty of torque, and the extra torque of the diesel wouldn't be noticed outside of stoplight racing.

 

RE: the matter at hand - 123 ft-lbs isn't "plenty." It could be "adequate" depending on your driving habits, but that's about it.

[fordmantpw]

 

RE: the matter at hand - 123 ft-lbs isn't "plenty." It could be "adequate" depending on your driving habits, but that's about it.

 

 

It's not just about the numbers, but the area under the curve too (granted, the diesel will be just as good). How much more would a diesel have and would it be noticeable? Keep in mind, this is an economy car and not a sports car. Sure, that extra torque is nice, but if you are buying an economy car, is it worth the extra $$$?

[papilgee4evaeva]

It's not just about the numbers, but the area under the curve too (granted, the diesel will be just as good). How much more would a diesel have and would it be noticeable? Keep in mind, this is an economy car and not a sports car. Sure, that extra torque is nice, but if you are buying an economy car, is it worth the extra $$$?

 

Not quite my words on this one. Even the European mags ding it for its ability to climb hills and warn that you may need "a judicious gap for overtaking." (CAR supplied that quote)

 

Since you ask, though, even the smallest diesel in Europe produces 170 ft-lbs of torque (source: Wikipedia).

Edited February 28, 2014 by papilgee4evaeva

[fordmantpw]

 

Not quite my words on this one. Even the European mags ding it for its ability to climb hills and warn that you may need "a judicious gap for overtaking." (CAR supplied that quote)

 

Since you ask, though, even the smallest diesel in Europe produces 170 ft-lbs of torque (source: Wikipedia).

 

170 ft-lbs and what, 90 HP? I'm sure you'd need "a judicious gap for overtaking" with that too.

 

Point is, though, most of the folks buying these cars aren't too worried about overtaking or maintaining speed climbing hills.

[2b2]

I could easily be ALL wrong

but

...While the Fiesta paired happily with the six-speed dry DCT from the US, said Ernie DeVincent, vice president of product development at Getrag, the weightier Focus posed more of a challenge. With the larger platform there is too much inertia and you cant get the acceleration thats needed, he told DrivelineNEWS.com at a recent industry conference in Berlin. Thats why Ford has decided to go for the US six-speed planetary automatic...

shouldn't a direct-coupling transmission like (my understanding of) a DCT lose less force than a full-automatic?

or is this that mysterious (to me) torque-multiplication at work??

[papilgee4evaeva]

 

170 ft-lbs and what, 90 HP? I'm sure you'd need "a judicious gap for overtaking" with that too.

 

Point is, though, most of the folks buying these cars aren't too worried about overtaking or maintaining speed climbing hills.

 

94 HP. :-P I mean, Europe is pretty used to comparatively tiny engines over there. If THEIR reviewers are saying that the car is slow, then, well.... :shrug:

[fordmantpw]

 

94 HP. :-P I mean, Europe is pretty used to comparatively tiny engines over there. If THEIR reviewers are saying that the car is slow, then, well.... :shrug:

 

I'm not saying it's not slow, just that the diesel wouldn't be that much faster for the price.

 

But yes, it's a decision each person would have to make. Is it worth the extra $$ for the oomph of the diesel? Is it worth the extra $$ for the extra fuel economy? From a purely financial standpoint, it would be hard to justify the diesel.

[MKII]

I could easily be ALL wrong

but

shouldn't a direct-coupling transmission like (my understanding of) a DCT lose less force than a full-automatic?

or is this that mysterious (to me) torque-multiplication at work??

I take what Ernie said was a diplomatic way of saying that the Fiesta is stuck with the dry clutch Powershift, but Ford has

decided not to use it in the Focus 1.0 EB 125hp.

 

BTW, the dry clutch Powershift in the Fiesta 1.0 EB is paired with the lower hp 100hp only, not the 125hp output EB.

 

What was discussed by Getrag at this past Frankfurt Auto Show, gives me the impression that they will be dropping their dry clutch DCT.

Excerpt from this article http://drivelinenews.com/news/wet-dct-set-to-displace-dry-in-expanding-market/

"Getrag supplies its dry clutch 6DCT250 to both Renault and Ford, and Volvo also employs it on the V30 and some of its current mid-sized models. It is expected that Getrag will replace this unit with a wet clutch version offering greater torque capacity and, possibly, seven rather than six speeds. This will complete Getrag’s move away from dry clutch DCTs, leaving only Fiat, with its high-torque D635, and Volkswagen, with its seven-speed DQ200, as providers of dry clutch transmissions.

 

And most recently in a Wardsauto article quotes Ford's Raj Nair, group vice president-global product development, says although the 1.0L is paired with Ford’s PowerShift dual-clutch automatic transmission in other parts of the world, it didn’t make sense for American customers.

“We’re finding that different markets react differently to different types of automatics, so a dual-clutch automatic transmission is not what North American customers are used to,” he says.

http://wardsauto.com/north-america/ford-focus-gets-facelift-new-engine

Edited February 28, 2014 by MKII

[jpd80]

 

RE: the matter at hand - 123 ft-lbs isn't "plenty." It could be "adequate" depending on your driving habits, but that's about it.

In overboost (30 seconds), that goes up to 148 lb ft...so the equation is a little better.

 

Markets with 1.6 Focus will see the i.0 EB as an improvement but the Nth American 2.0 DI only Focus market not so much