fuzzymoomoo Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 Ive said this before, but I own both a 2.0EB (Fusion) and a 3.7NA (MKX) and the 2.0EB feels way more powerful because the torque comes on much sooner. That said I think its a mistake to use the 2.0 and not the 2.3EB. Why not 2.0/2.7 for Edge and 2.3/3.0 for Nautilus? #reasons Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 The torque is almost the same (275 vs. 280) and the ecoboost torque peaks much sooner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brucelinc Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 Autoblog may be reporting it but has this been confirmed anywhere? Yes, on Lincoln's media site. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 Might be a CAFE issue? The 2.0L Ecoboost is 4 MPG improvement over the currrent 3.5 and 2.7L in AWD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brucelinc Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 While the torque is present and accounted for in the 2.0, it lacks the smoothness and refinement of the 2.7 or even the discontinued 3.7. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 Perhaps they’re only using the 2.0 in the base trim and the 2.7 will be standard on mid and reserve trim with the 3.0 available on Black Label? I don’t think we’ve seen all the drivetrain details yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcartwright99 Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 (edited) I’ve said this before, but I own both a 2.0EB (Fusion) and a 3.7NA (MKX) and the 2.0EB feels way more powerful because the torque comes on much sooner. That said I think it’s a mistake to use the 2.0 and not the 2.3EB. Why not 2.0/2.7 for Edge and 2.3/3.0 for Nautilus? That is an apple to oranges comparison due to weight. I have had an 2012 Edge 2.0 and currently own 2017 Fusion 2.0. I have also driven 3.7 MKZ and MKX. The 2.0 ecoboost is great off the line but after 4RPM that quick spinning turbo starts running out of steam fast. While you might not get the initial seat of the pants feel of the ecoboost the 3.7 really comes on mid-high rpms and generally has better performance 2.0 liter. The 2.0 is fine in the Fusion and MKZ because it doesn't weigh 4400 pounds. Fast enough and due to initial torque feels a bit faster than it is. In the Edge it's acceptable as a base engine but just don't see it for a luxury application. Your suggestion for 2.3/3.0 for Nauti makes most sense. On a side note, what does this mean for the 3.7? Mustang no longer uses it and the Nautilus won't use it. Does that leave only the Conti? We may have a dead engine walking. Edited December 1, 2017 by jcartwright99 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 I agree the ecoboost runs out of steam around 4K (as I’ve said before), but most drivers don’t exceed 4K rpm anyway. I still agree it seems like a mistake unless it’s only used on the base model. It does seem the 3.7 is dead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 (edited) As of mid 2015, Ford started selling the 3.7 Cyclone as an industrial engine. Just on the 2.0 EB vs 2.3 EB, I wonder if perhaps a PFDI version of the 2.0 EB would release more torque and HP, allowing the smaller EB to cover the pre PFDI 2.3 EBs power/torque... The MKC's power rating for 2.3 EB could almost be covered by an upgraded PFDI 2.0 EB if one actually exists... Edited December 1, 2017 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 I’ve said this before, but I own both a 2.0EB (Fusion) and a 3.7NA (MKX) and the 2.0EB feels way more powerful because the torque comes on much sooner. That said I think it’s a mistake to use the 2.0 and not the 2.3EB. Why not 2.0/2.7 for Edge and 2.3/3.0 for Nautilus? Like I speculated - maybe they just haven't paired the 8-speed with the 2.3/3.0 yet, so they want to keep the same engines/transmissions for part of a model year to keep costs down before it's ready to switch over? Perhaps they’re only using the 2.0 in the base trim and the 2.7 will be standard on mid and reserve trim with the 3.0 available on Black Label? I don’t think we’ve seen all the drivetrain details yet. They didn't specify that, but the 3.0 wasn't mentioned at all, so I can't imagine it'd be available on BL. I'd be ok with a base trim 2.3, 2.7 on mid/reserve, with 3.0 optional on reserve and standard on BL. That is an apple to oranges comparison due to weight. I have had an 2012 Edge 2.0 and currently own 2017 Fusion 2.0. I have also driven 3.7 MKZ and MKX. The 2.0 ecoboost is great off the line but after 4RPM that quick spinning turbo starts running out of steam fast. While you might not get the initial seat of the pants feel of the ecoboost the 3.7 really comes on mid-high rpms and generally has better performance 2.0 liter. The 2.0 is fine in the Fusion and MKZ because it doesn't weigh 4400 pounds. Fast enough and due to initial torque feels a bit faster than it is. In the Edge it's acceptable as a base engine but just don't see it for a luxury application. Your suggestion for 2.3/3.0 for Nauti makes most sense. On a side note, what does this mean for the 3.7? Mustang no longer uses it and the Nautilus won't use it. Does that leave only the Conti? We may have a dead engine walking. I wouldn't be surprised to see it phased out on the Conti for 2019 either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 (edited) It probably also has a lot to do with what's available with 6F and 8F supply during Ford's production changeover and probably a combination of everyone's thoughts - maybe Ford is simply going with what it can safely guarantee, leaving the 8F as a high series option in the first year like they did with the 10R... I wonder if the 8F is not all that different to GM's 9F version internally save for slight gear pack changes and one less version of clutch apply that simplifies shift flow and eliminates the hunting issue GM had in early series 9Fs...The Fords may prefer slightly altered gear stepping to improve shift quality. Edited December 1, 2017 by jpd80 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
630land Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 Sea creature,? Oh big deal. Good name I say. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jqa1824 Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 The 3.7 is used as the base V6 in the Transit. Itd be interesting to see the take-rate on the Trandit between the 3.7, 3.5EB and the Diesel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted December 1, 2017 Share Posted December 1, 2017 It probably also has a lot to do with what's available with 6F and 8F supply during Ford's production changeover and probably a combination of everyone's thoughts - maybe Ford is simply going with what it can safely guarantee, leaving the 8F as a high series option in the first year like they did with the 10R... I wonder if the 8F is not all that different to GM's 9F version internally save for slight gear pack changes and one less version of clutch apply that simplifies shift flow and eliminates the hunting issue GM had in early series 9Fs...The Fords may prefer slightly altered gear stepping to improve shift quality. Ford engineers didn't see much difference in efficiency in a 9 speed vs an 8 speed so for the sake of manufacturing cost and simplicity they changed it to an 8 speed. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzcat Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 The 3.7 is used as the base V6 in the Transit. Itd be interesting to see the take-rate on the Trandit between the 3.7, 3.5EB and the Diesel. For the time being... I think it will be replaced by the 3.3 V6 from F-150 when Ford gets around to update the Transit. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 For the time being... I think it will be replaced by the 3.3 V6 from F-150 when Ford gets around to update the Transit. should be MY2019 for a refresh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sullynd Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 For the time being... I think it will be replaced by the 3.3 V6 from F-150 when Ford gets around to update the Transit. The 3.7 is also in the PI/U Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzcat Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 The 3.7 is also in the PI/U Also for the time being... PI is giving way to Fusion hybrid PI. And PIU may or may not outlive the arrival of CD6 Explorer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2b2 Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 It probably also has a lot to do with what's available with 6F and 8F supply during Ford's production changeover and probably a combination of everyone's thoughts - maybe Ford is simply going with what it can safely guarantee, leaving the 8F as a high series option in the first year like they did with the 10R... I wonder if the 8F is not all that different to GM's 9F version internally save for slight gear pack changes and one less version of clutch apply that simplifies shift flow and eliminates the hunting issue GM had in early series 9Fs...The Fords may prefer slightly altered gear stepping to improve shift quality. Ford engineers didn't see much difference in efficiency in a 9 speed vs an 8 speed so for the sake of manufacturing cost and simplicity they changed it to an 8 speed. s so can it be said if there will ever be a Fomoco 9-speed version? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 (edited) The 3.7 is used as the base V6 in the Transit. Itd be interesting to see the take-rate on the Trandit between the 3.7, 3.5EB and the Diesel. IMO, the 3.7 would be the lion's share of vans with the diesel and EB V6 being small quantities (ie around 10% each?) Edited December 2, 2017 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 s so can it be said if there will ever be a Fomoco 9-speed version? Makes me wish that Ford just did a transverse version of its on design 10R and left the GM 9AT well alone... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 s so can it be said if there will ever be a Fomoco 9-speed version? to my knowledge, no there won't be. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brucelinc Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 I would love to know how much torque Ford rates the 8 speed able to handle and what the exact ratios are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albertabound Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 I ordered a 2015 MKC in the spring of 2014 after my MKX was written off when I was rear ended on I-15 going through Las Vegas. I have been pleased with the vehicle particularly the 2.3 Echoboost but the rear seat leg room leaves a lot to be desired. I had decided to buy a 2018 MIX until I saw the specs with no change from 2017. Have recently had 2 test rides in a Volvo SUV and was close to purchasing when info arrived on the 2019 Nautilus. I have seen a number of the features listed but nothing about Heads up Display. I was really taken with this feature on the Volvo and would think with the price being asked for the top of the line Lincoln SUV this would be available Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MY93SHO Posted December 2, 2017 Share Posted December 2, 2017 Ford engineers didn't see much difference in efficiency in a 9 speed vs an 8 speed so for the sake of manufacturing cost and simplicity they changed it to an 8 speed. Read a couple stories that the Cherokee with the 9 speed rarely is ever in 9th gear. Even with the V6 it rarely uses it, even 8th wasn't always used.. They may have fixed that with software but I never understood having gears that aren't being utilized. 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.