Ford investing $145M in 3.5L EcoBoost plant

[jpd80]

And possibly, the aftermarket bristles with power upgrades for the Ecoboost 3.5,

just as it does for Ford/GM and Chrysler V8.

 

Could it be that Ford recognized this years ago with offering performance in Mustangs to a certain level

but truthfully for the seriously hard core enthusiast, the aftermarket offers a veritable smorgasboard

of turbos, intercoolers and fuel system upgrades to keep the engines alive at wicked power levels.

Edited March 1, 2016 by jpd80

[Stray Kat]

I get it - it's the classic Ford vs Chevy battle. We just disagree on the business opportunity.

 

You sorta don't get it and I mean that with all due respect. I'm not suggesting Ford get in a pissing contest with Chevrolet. More precisely I'm saying Ford unique in the world right now with the combination of their size and network and the fact that they are mass producing small engines that are capable of producing copious amounts of power.

 

To say this would be a Ford vs. Chevy battle would be to diminish this and change it to a juvenile schoolyard type scuffle. Trust me I know every reason and more why GM and Chevrolet has found their way into virtually every application en masse.

[92merc]

If you can only see numbers and have no sense of destiny then the answer is no. If you had a vision for your company and cared about its heritage and displaying technical achievement in order to enhance the perception of what you can do, then the answer is yes, within reason.

 

Destiny and heritage are not quantifiable items. They don't pay the bills or keep the lights on. Keep needs to keep the Ford line up to date with their new engines and competitive. Adding crate engines adds very little value to the company. All it does is keeps certain engine lines from being underutilized.

[J-150]

 

Destiny and heritage are not quantifiable items. They don't pay the bills or keep the lights on. Keep needs to keep the Ford line up to date with their new engines and competitive. Adding crate engines adds very little value to the company. All it does is keeps certain engine lines from being underutilized.

Very true. Oldsmobile, Mercury, Plymouth et al had heritage.

[akirby]

You sorta don't get it and I mean that with all due respect. I'm not suggesting Ford get in a pissing contest with Chevrolet. More precisely I'm saying Ford unique in the world right now with the combination of their size and network and the fact that they are mass producing small engines that are capable of producing copious amounts of power.

 

To say this would be a Ford vs. Chevy battle would be to diminish this and change it to a juvenile schoolyard type scuffle. Trust me I know every reason and more why GM and Chevrolet has found their way into virtually every application en masse.

 

Fair enough.

[theoldwizard]

The 2 generation 3.5 l EcoBoost V6 will be a completly new engine. The only similarity will be the displacement 3,5. The new engine will have a dual injection system , port and direct and I have reason till belive that this is because it will have TWO fuels like the BobCat had in 2009.

Some speculation in those statements, but backed up by the "leaks" that Levine has let out !

 

I was absolutely SHOCKED when the 2.7L EcoBoost came out with a CGI block. CGI is not cheap to cast (like iron) and is very expensive to machine. The only reason for using CGI on the Gen 2 3.5L is extremely high combustion pressures. I would expect to see a different head bolt (stud ?) pattern to contain that pressure.

 

I also find it hard to believe that Ford will have a dual fuel engine. The cost will be quite high on top of the 2 turbos. If this happens, it would likely only be on a limited number of application (Raptor) aimed at people willing to go through the inconvenience of filling up twice.

 

Note in the research paper presented, only the E85 fuel is direct injected. The main purpose of doing that is to "cool" the combustion which allows for higher intake and combustion pressure without detonation. More E10 fuel upstream will help keep the intake valves clean.

Edited March 1, 2016 by theoldwizard

[Stray Kat]

Very true. Oldsmobile, Mercury, Plymouth et al had heritage.

 

I disagree with the notion that heritage and history have no play in the mind of new customers. One need only look at Harley Davidson (the other 100+ year old company still with some family influence) to see how to create "legendary" status. Polaris has spent plenty of time and resources to bring at least the name, spirit and heritage of Indian Motocycle Company back from the dead.

 

You guys sound like we're talking about refrigerators or washing machines here. We're talking about automotive stuff here fer gosh sakes. When did you guys get so old? I'm not talking about foolish endeavors, I'm talking about actually turning a profit making fun stuff.

 

It's great the Raptor 6.2 has been marinized. Apparently that has been a worthwhile venture so far. If what I'm talking about is crap why would Ford bother making extra engines for boats. Does that sell you on a new Ford? Well yes in fact it just may. If your weekend on the lake was a hoot and the entertainment was powered by Ford it might cause you to become a little more enthusiastic about other Ford products. Yes it's a way to reach more customers, just like professional auto racing is.

 

The key thing is, is if your weekend toys are connected to Ford progress and technology you might be even more inclined to lean towards a new Ford than you maybe would just watching a spec car with a Ford sticker on it go round and round on the weekends.

 

Believe me when you roll the power on in your kit car, boat, hot rod or truck you know damn well who's responsible for all that velvety goodness.

[silvrsvt]

I disagree with the notion that heritage and history have no play in the mind of new customers. One need only look at Harley Davidson (the other 100+ year old company still with some family influence) to see how to create "legendary" status. Polaris has spent plenty of time and resources to bring at least the name, spirit and heritage of Indian Motocycle Company back from the dead.

 

You guys sound like we're talking about refrigerators or washing machines here. We're talking about automotive stuff here fer gosh sakes. When did you guys get so old? I'm not talking about foolish endeavors, I'm talking about actually turning a profit making fun stuff.

 

The problem is that motorcycles for the most part are luxury purchases due to their limited usefulness. A car has pretty much evolved into a stove for alot of people who are buying them. The enthusiast market for cars isn't as deep as you make it out to be. If that was the case, car makers would be making alot more cars with manuals in them instead of Manuals having 5-10% of the total automotive market.

 

HD had some pretty shitty products 30-40 years ago with lots of changes in ownership.

[Stray Kat]

The problem is that motorcycles for the most part are luxury purchases due to their limited usefulness. A car has pretty much evolved into a stove for alot of people who are buying them. The enthusiast market for cars isn't as deep as you make it out to be. If that was the case, car makers would be making alot more cars with manuals in them instead of Manuals having 5-10% of the total automotive market.

 

HD had some pretty shitty products 30-40 years ago with lots of changes in ownership.

 

Well I think we're getting all mixed up here. I thought there was going to be a huge push for the performance market via the regrounping of everything under the "Ford Performance" banner? I thought 12 new performance cars were being brought out in the next few years?

 

What is all this about? You guys realize that Ford need only focus a little more attention on coupling their fine power products with some specific high value targets. The beauty of these new Ecoboost engines is they don't need a lot of extras to be great performers. For example the high performance sand car and/or rock crawling craze is nearly the exclusive domain of GM. So what's wrong with that you may think? I guess nothing really, but wouldn't it be nice for thousands of young enthusiasts to be routinely impressed by the capability and potential of Ford's leading engine brand? Should they just be bombarded by GM performance on the weekends?

 

Yes some of these points are "intangibles", but again it takes work to build an image.

[akirby]

For example the high performance sand car and/or rock crawling craze is nearly the exclusive domain of GM. So what's wrong with that you may think? I guess nothing really, but wouldn't it be nice for thousands of young enthusiasts to be routinely impressed by the capability and potential of Ford's leading engine brand? Should they just be bombarded by GM performance on the weekends

I thought you said it wasn't about Ford vs Chevy?

[Stray Kat]

I have shared this before but I feel like the message is important. This is a letter that Zora Arkus Duntov wrote to GM management in 1953 about capturing the "youth market". Maybe this will click and enlighten us with some historical perspective. You see Ford used to own the youth market. The Flathead V8 era is what spawned the aftermarket performance industry as we know it today. Then very quickly Ford lost the lead and it was because of more than anything else, ENGINES. You'll notice that Duntov talks a lot about engines.

 

Ford's V8's have always been quite good but also have always seemed to be overshadowed by the others. That is unacceptable at this point and especially with the fine Ecoboost engine line.

 

So without further adu I give you the words of Duntov himself calling on GM management to overtake Ford's then unique and exclusive domain.

 

 

To: Mr. Maurice Olley

From: Mr. Z. Arkus-Duntov

Subject: Thoughts Pertaining to Youth, Hot Rodders, and Chevrolet



Date: December 16, 1953

The hot rod movement and interest in things connected with hop-up and speed is still growing. As an indication: the publications devoted to hot rodding and hop-upping, of which some half-dozen have a very large circulation and are distributed nationally, did not exist some 6 years ago. From cover to cover, they are full of Fords. This is not surprising then that the majority of hot-rodders are eating, sleeping, and dreaming modified Fords. They know Ford parts from stem to stern better than the Ford people themselves.



 

A young man buying a magazine for the first time immediately becomes introduced to Ford. It is reasonable to assume that when hot-rodders or hot-rod influenced persons buy transportation, they buy Fords. As they progress in age and income, they graduate from jalopies to second hand Fords, then to new Fords.



 

Consider The Jaguar F-TYPE®

 

Powerful, Agile & Distinctive.

Find a Local Jaguar Retailer.

ads by Swoop

Should we consider that it would be desirable to make these youths Chevrolet-minded? I think that we are in a position to carry out a successful attempt. However, there are many factors against us:



 

1. Loyalty and experience with Ford.


 

2. Hop-up industry is geared to Ford.

 

3. Law of numbers thousands are and will be working on Fords for active competition.

 

4. Appearance of Ford’s overhead V-8, now one year ahead of us.



 

When a superior line of G.M. V-8s appeared, there where remarkably few attempts to develop these and none too successful. Also, the appearance of the V-8 Chrysler was met with reluctance even though the success of Ardun-Fords conditioned them to the acceptance of Firepower. 



 

This year is the first one in which isolated Chrysler developments met with success. The Bonneville records are divided between Ardun-Fords and Chryslers.

 

In the non acceptance of G.M. V-8’s and very slow beginning of Chrysler, cost must have played a part.

 

Like all people, hot-rodders are attracted by novelty. However, bitter experience taught them that new development is costly and long and therefore are extremely conservative. From my observation, it takes an advanced hot-rodder some three years to stumble toward the successful development of a new design. Overhead Fords will be in this state in 1956-1957.



 

The slide rule potential of our RPO V-8 engine is extremely high but to let things run their natural course will put us one year behind and then not too many will pick Chevrolet for development.

 

It seems that unless by some action the odds and the time factor are not overcome, Ford will continue to dominate the thinking of this group. One factor which can largely overcome this handicap would be the availability of ready engineered parts for higher output.

 

If the use of the Chevrolet engine would be made easy and the very first attempts would be crowned with success, the appeal of the new will take hold and not have the stigma of expensiveness like the Cadillac or Chrysler, a swing to Chevrolet may be anticipated. This means the development of a range of special parts – camshafts, valves, springs, manifolds, pistons and such which will be made available to the public.

 

The association of Chevrolet with hot rods, speeds and such is probably inadmissible. But possibly the existence of the Corvette provides the loop hole. If the special parts are carried as RPO items for the Corvette, they undoubtedly will be recognized by the hot rodders as the very parts they were looking for to hop up the Chevy.

 

If it is desirable or not to associate the Corvette with the speed, I am not qualified to say, but I do know that the in 1954, sports car enthusiasts will get hold of Corvettes and whether we like it or not, will race it. Most frequent statement from this group is "we will put a Cadillac in it". They are going to, and I think this is not good! Most likely they will meet with Allard trouble that is breaking sooner or later, mostly sooner, everything between the flywheel and road wheels.

 

In 1955, with V-8 engine, if I needed to they will be still outclassed. The market-wise negligible number of cars purchased for competition attracts public attention and publicity out of proportion to their number. Since we cannot prevent the people from racing Corvettes maybe it is better to help them to do a good job at it.

 

To make good in this field, the RPO parts must pertain not only to the engine but to the chassis components as well. Engineering-wise, Development of these RPO items, as far as the chassis concerned, does not fall out of line with some of the planned activity of our group. Use of light alloys, and brake development composite drums, disc and such are already on the agenda of the Research and Development group already.

 

As I stated above, V-8 RPO engine has a high power potential it is hard to beat inches, but having only 80% of cubic inches it has 96% of square inches of Pittston area of the Cadillac. In my estimation, the power output comparable to the Cadillac can be obtained not exceeding 270 ft.lb. of torque at any point. (323 ft.lb. of Cadillac)*. The task of making powertrain reliable is therefore easier. 

 These thoughts are offered for what they are worth: one man’s thinking aloud on the subject. 



 

Z. Arkus-Duntov

December 16, 1953

 

* The comparison pertains to a special type of Cadillac

 

You can download a copy of the Duntov Letter HERE

[theoldwizard]

 

Destiny and heritage are not quantifiable items. They don't pay the bills or keep the lights on.

Maybe they do !

 

It was no accident and took some work for the Coyote to come out as a 5.0L V8 (and maintain the same bore spacing as the modular).

 

Why did Ford make a 2.3L EcoBoost, Just for the Mustang ?

[akirby]

Why did Ford make a 2.3L EcoBoost, Just for the Mustang ?

 

You mean the one you can also get in a MKC, Explorer and Focus RS?

[silvrsvt]

 

You mean the one you can also get in a MKC, Explorer and Focus RS?

 

Doesn't the Edge have it also? Or is that just the 2.0L?

[jpvbs]

I'm curious to see if Ford positions the improved 3.5EB differently in the lineup than it is currently. I believe currently the 5.0 is a more expensive option than the 3.5EB. The 5.0 is rated for more peak HP than the 3.5eb, so I suppose that can be a selling point to charge more for it (even if it doesn't actually perform better). I assume the new 3.5eb will have some HP increase over the current one. What kind of numbers are we guessing (400hp/450lb/ft)? Does the 5.0 get a HP increase as well to keep the order?

[jasonj80]

 

Doesn't the Edge have it also? Or is that just the 2.0L?

 

Just 2.0L, it was planned for the MKX but there isn't enough capacity at this time.

 

Also the work to change over Woodhaven Stamping is starting in the next few weeks as well.

[akirby]

Just 2.0L, it was planned for the MKX but there isn't enough capacity at this time.

 

Also the work to change over Woodhaven Stamping is starting in the next few weeks as well.

 

I was wondering why we didn't see it in the MKX and MKZ already.

[fordmantpw]

I'm curious to see if Ford positions the improved 3.5EB differently in the lineup than it is currently. I believe currently the 5.0 is a more expensive option than the 3.5EB. The 5.0 is rated for more peak HP than the 3.5eb, so I suppose that can be a selling point to charge more for it (even if it doesn't actually perform better). I assume the new 3.5eb will have some HP increase over the current one. What kind of numbers are we guessing (400hp/450lb/ft)? Does the 5.0 get a HP increase as well to keep the order?

 

The 3.5EB is a $600 option over the 5.0 in the F150 (at least on the model I configured recently).

 

I think we will see numbers just above the 420/460 from the 6.2L GMs. If so, this should be a real screamer of a truck because the current 3.5L EB nearly keeps up with the hefty 6.2L GM. (http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2016/01/texas-truck-showdown-2016-acceleration.html)

[jpd80]

 

The 3.5EB is a $600 option over the 5.0 in the F150 (at least on the model I configured recently).

 

I think we will see numbers just above the 420/460 from the 6.2L GMs. If so, this should be a real screamer of a truck because the current 3.5L EB nearly keeps up with the hefty 6.2L GM. (http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2016/01/texas-truck-showdown-2016-acceleration.html)

Yes the truck version of the LT is as you say 420 hp & 460 lb ft.

but even with the 8AT, the 6.2 Silverado is anchored at 21 mpg sticker.

 

 

Depending on load rating the 3.5 EB F150 with 6AT is anywhere between 21 mpg and 23 mpg

so yeah, once the next gen 3.5 EB is mated to a 10AT, that economy should be at least 23 mpg

gapping the 6.2 Silverado nicely...

 

I can see Ford milking this for all its worth, it will own Chevy's Silverado 1500

Edited March 4, 2016 by jpd80

[mnm]

 

 

Just 2.0L, it was planned for the MKX but there isn't enough capacity at this time.

 

/quote] Cleveland Engine Plant is only running 2 shifts currently on the I-4 ecoboost line. The capacity is there if management decided. It's not an equipment issue.