Jump to content

Ford to unveil radical new business plan to improve quality and profitability


Recommended Posts

15 hours ago, fuzzymoomoo said:


They’re not making any “new” ones. Everything from here on out is an evolution of existing engines. 

That's how I understood it.

I was referring to the rumored new inline-6 mentioned by silvrsvt. Wouldn't Ford just refine/update its 2.7 EB, 3.0 EB, 3.3 and 3.5 EB V6 engines instead of making a new inline-6?

Edited by AM222
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, CurtisH said:

That doesn’t sound right.  Do you have a list for each?  I’d really like to see the list. 

 

Toyota.

  1. 1.5L I3 M15A (2019)
  2. 1.6L I3 turbo G16E (2020)
  3. 1.2 I3 WA-VE (2021)
  4. 1.2L I4 turbo 8NR-FTS (2015)
  5. 1.3L/1.5L I4 4NR-FE & 5NR-FE (2013)
  6. 2.0L I4 6AR-FSE (2014)
  7. 2.0L I4 turbo 8AR-FTS (2015)
  8. 2.5L I4 A25A (2017)
  9. 2.0L I4 M20A (2018)
  10. 2.4L I4 turbo T24A (2021)
  11. 3.4L V6 turbo V35A (2017)
  12. 3.3L V6 turbodiesel F33A (2021)
  13. 2.4L/2.7L I4 turbodiesel 1GD-FTV & 2GD-FTV (2015)
  14. 1.6L/2.0L I4 turbodiesel 1WW & 2WW (2011)
  15. 4.8L V10 1LR-GUE (2011)

General Motors.

  1. 1.0L/1.1L I3 SGE (2014)
  2. 1.4L/1.5L I4 SGE (2013)
  3. 1.0L I3 E-Turbo (2018)
  4. 1.2L/1.3L I3 E-Turbo (2018)
  5. 1.5L I4 E-Turbo (2019)
  6. 2.0L I4 E-Turbo (2018)
  7. 2.7L I4 E-Turbo L3B (2018)
  8. 1.6L/1.8L I4 MGE (2012)
  9. 3.0L/3.6L V6 4th gen HFV6 (2016)
  10. 4.3L V6 Gen V block (2013)
  11. 5.3L/6.2L V8 Gen V block (2013)
  12. 4.2L V8 turbo Blackwing (2018)
  13. 5.5L V8 Gemini (2022)
  14. 3.0L I6 turbodiesel Duramax (2019)

Ford.

  1. 1.0L I3 turbo Fox (2012)
  2. 1.1L I3 Duratec (2017)
  3. 1.2L/1.5L I3 Dragon (2017)
  4. 1.5L I3 turbo Dragon Ecoboost (2017)
  5. 1.5L I4 turbo Sigma Ecoboost (2014)
  6. 2.0L I4 turbo twin-scroll Ecoboost (2015)
  7. 2.3L I4 turbo Ecoboost (2015)
  8. 2.7L/3.0L V6 turbo Ecoboost Nano (2015)
  9. 3.5L V6 turbo Ecoboost Gen 2 (2017)
  10. 5.0L V8 Coyote (2011)
  11. 5.2L V8 Voodoo/Predator (2016)
  12. 7.3L V8 Godzilla (2020)
  13. 1.5L/2.0L I4 turbodiesel EcoBlue (2016)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, AM222 said:

That's how I understood it.

I was referring to the rumored new inline-6 mentioned by silvrsvt. Wouldn't Ford just refine/update its 2.7 EB, 3.0 EB, 3.3 and 3.5 EB V6 engines instead of making a new inline-6?

I wonder if the Ironically-named Barra inline 6's tooling (formerly used used in Australian Falcon sedans and utes) was mothballed somewhere?

The last versions included a 436hp gasoline turbo and a 266hp LPG (Autogas) both displacing 3.9liters  and rather compact for an inline 6. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Chrisgb said:

I wonder if the Ironically-named Barra inline 6's tooling (formerly used used in Australian Falcon sedans and utes) was mothballed somewhere?

The last versions included a 436hp gasoline turbo and a 266hp LPG (Autogas) both displacing 3.9liters  and rather compact for an inline 6. 

It'd be a good start. To be a fly on the wall at engine development...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's always great to hear about companies looking for ways to improve their quality and profitability. I'll definitely keep an eye out for the fireside chat with Rod Lache on February 15th. BTW, have you ever considered doing a hotel feasibility study for your business? It can be a great way to assess the viability of a potential hotel project and ensure its success. You might find this article on the subject from OGScapital to be helpful: https://www.ogscapital.com/article/hotel-feasibility-study/. Best of luck with your business plan!

Edited by AdamDosan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/13/2023 at 8:28 AM, Hugh said:

It'd be a good start. To be a fly on the wall at engine development...

 

An engine that traces its origins back to a 60 year old design a great start?  Personally I don't believe Ford is considering an in-line 6, but if they are basing it on an existing 4 cylinder would make the most sense.

 

I have heard much of Ford's ICE development group has been disbanded, and as others have stated anything 'new' from this point on will be based on existing designs.   

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 7Mary3 said:

 

An engine that traces its origins back to a 60 year old design a great start?  Personally I don't believe Ford is considering an in-line 6, but if they are basing it on an existing 4 cylinder would make the most sense.

 

I have heard much of Ford's ICE development group has been disbanded, and as others have stated anything 'new' from this point on will be based on existing designs.   

You have to start from somewhere, that's all I'm saying. Lessons learned from pervious development makes better in the future and recognizes constraints/restraints. Consider the overall idea of the "Modular" family still used today. It's not that much of a stretch. I'm just spit-balling here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cyclone and Nano V6 were designed when Ford was still using FWD transverse V6 architecture (D2 and CD4). Currently, once the Edge and Nautilus bites the dust, all the V6 applications are longitude (F-series/Expedition, T6, CD6, S650, Transit). If they are making that decision now, they probably would have gone with I6 that share the same 500 cc cylinder walls with I3 and I4 - i.e. the same strategy that BMW and Mercedes have chosen to produce all the engines in a shared facility:

1.5 I3 

2.0 I4

3.0 I6

 

Would they do that now? Seems unlikely... Nano already meet and will meet the next phase of emission targets so no reason to chuck it out just to be able to make them in the same factory as the I4. But Farley has killed many sacred cows so I wouldn't rule it out completely. Do we know if Cyclon and Nano production sites are used for something else?

 

 

 

 

Edited by bzcat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, bzcat said:

Cyclone and Nano V6 were designed when Ford was still using FWD transverse V6 architecture (D2 and CD4). Currently, once the Edge and Nautilus bites the dust, all the V6 applications are longitude (F-series/Expedition, T6, CD6, S650, Transit). If they are making that decision now, they probably would have gone with I6 that share the same 500 cc cylinder walls with I3 and I4 - i.e. the same strategy that BMW and Mercedes have chosen to produce all the engines in a shared facility:

1.5 I3 

2.0 I4

3.0 I6

In Ford's case, the 1.5 I3 is not related to the much older 2.0 I4 architecture.
1.5 I3 uses a timing belt and has an 84mm x 90mm bore & stroke.
2.0 I4 uses a timing chain and has an 87.5mm x 83.1mm bore & stroke.

PS: The V6 has its advantages on a RWD-based platform with a longitudinally mounted engine. Lower center of gravity and it's physically shorter. Inline-6 would require a longer engine bay and revised crash structure.

Edited by AM222
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, fuzzymoomoo said:


Pretty sure the 1.5 I3 is related to the old 1.5 I4

The 1.5 I4 was derived from the older 1.6 I4, both are "Sigma" engines. This engine architecture was developed in the 90s, it is not related to the more recent 1.5 Dragon engine.
Looking at the design of the engine block alone, they are obviously not related.

Unlike BMW's modular Inline engines with different cylinder counts, Ford's current engine lineup is made up of different generation architectures. The 1.0 Fox I3 or 1.5 Dragon I3 for example were not paired with I4 engines when they were developed. The 1.0 Fox I3 was sold alongside the 1.5/1.6 Sigma I4 engines. The 1.5 Dragon i3 (NA & EB) engines replaced the Sigma I4 (NA & EB) engines. 

The Fox I3 had an NA-only 1.1 version, while the Dragon I3 had an NA-only 1.2 version, these took the place of the 1.25L Sigma I4 engines offered in some markets. The larger displacement Duratec-Mazda MZR derived engines (like today's 2.0 and 2.3 EcoBoost) just continued to evolve and were never replaced like the smaller Sigma engines. 

PS: By the way, even the 1.0 Fox I3 engine is different from the 1.5 Dragon I3.
 

Edited by AM222
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unlike car bodies where age is plainly visible, engines are buried away and only us gearhead geeks keep track of 'em. Thus automakers make a basic engine design last for decades and even a half century at times, even before electric cars competed for development dollars. So it's pretty unlikely we'll see a whole new engine this late in the IC engine age, though we'll see some updates passed off by PR as"new" engines.

 

Then again, didn't Ford just blow millions on a new 1950s design V8?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/16/2023 at 5:19 AM, 7Mary3 said:

 

An engine that traces its origins back to a 60 year old design a great start?  Personally I don't believe Ford is considering an in-line 6, but if they are basing it on an existing 4 cylinder would make the most sense.

That's like saying you're still using grandpa's old axe, when the handle has been replaced 5 times and the blade replaced 3. It's not grandpa's old axe any more. 

 

The 4l Barra was, and remains, an awesome engine. Ppl are getting 1000+ HP from them. In terms of straight 6s, they're absolutely up there with the RB26T and the BMW straight 6 of the time. Considering FoA had pennies to develop it, it's an amazing engine. 

 

Ford would have done well to utilise it across the pond. Would have made a great Jag engine. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, AM222 said:

In Ford's case, the 1.5 I3 is not related to the much older 2.0 I4 architecture.
1.5 I3 uses a timing belt and has an 84mm x 90mm bore & stroke.
2.0 I4 uses a timing chain and has an 87.5mm x 83.1mm bore & stroke.

PS: The V6 has its advantages on a RWD-based platform with a longitudinally mounted engine. Lower center of gravity and it's physically shorter. Inline-6 would require a longer engine bay and revised crash structure.

So is the new 2.3L EB related to the dragon I3?  I thought I read the bore was 84mm.  The motor trend article I read about it said the architecture would be shared with an I3.  Otherwise, it sounds like the dragon I3 isn’t long for this world if it will be part of a modular architecture with the 2.3L.  I’d assume there will also be a 2.0l I4 also.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, slemke said:

So is the new 2.3L EB related to the dragon I3?  I thought I read the bore was 84mm.  The motor trend article I read about it said the architecture would be shared with an I3.  Otherwise, it sounds like the dragon I3 isn’t long for this world if it will be part of a modular architecture with the 2.3L.  I’d assume there will also be a 2.0l I4 also.

The 2.3 EB is related to the 2.0 EB, that means it's derived from the older Duratec-MZR I4 architecture which first came out in the early 2000s.

The Dragon-family of engines is fairly new, it was first introduced in 2017. 

Edited by AM222
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, AM222 said:

The 2.3 EB is related to the 2.0 EB, that means it's derived from the older Duratec-MZR I4 architecture which first came out in the early 2000s.

The Dragon-family of engines is fairly new, it was first introduced in 2017. 

Wrong version of the 2.3. You’re referring to the current one.  I’m asking about the new modular performance architecture one being introduced in the 2024 Mustang.  It has a smaller bore and longer stroke than the duratec/Mazda one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, rperez817 said:

J.D. Power's 2023 Vehicle Dependability Survey was publicized recently. To no one's surprise, Ford and Lincoln are 2 of the most problematic brands. 

 

2023011a.JPG?itok=aRgdtMpA

 Such a dramatic change from even one year ago, when both Lincoln and Ford rated above the industry average. Let's hope FMC can turn things around in a positive sense as quickly as they did toward the negative. 2022 U.S. Vehicle Dependability Study

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, slemke said:

Wrong version of the 2.3. You’re referring to the current one.  I’m asking about the new modular performance architecture one being introduced in the 2024 Mustang.  It has a smaller bore and longer stroke than the duratec/Mazda one.

Interesting, same stroke as the 2.5 Duratec.

 

Are there clear shots of the new engine and did Ford call it an all-new engine/architecture? 

Edited by AM222
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, AM222 said:

Interesting, same stroke as the 2.5 Duratec.

 

Are there clear shots of the new engine and did Ford call it an all-new engine/architecture? 

From motor trend:

https://www.motortrend.com/news/2024-ford-mustang-engine-ecoboost-v-8-deep-dive?galleryimageid=fe5df94f-0132-423c-887d-a0db1ae1d513

MPC 2.3-Liter EcoBoost I-4”,


image.thumb.jpeg.14810596caf6104cbfc53b355efd2442.jpegIt may be tough to tell by studying the Mustang's spec sheet, but this 2.3-liter EcoBoost I-4 engine is entirely new, save for a few fasteners. One of its big emissions enablers is fitment of both port- and direct-injection, with the latter's pressure bumped to 5,000 psi. Another is internally plumbed exhaust-gas recirculation, which can be managed far more precisely than metering exhaust gasses back in through external lines. One interesting feature on this longitudinal application of the engine is an integrated airbox, which ships from the engine factory attached in front of the front-end accessory drive unit. Mounting it so close to the intake manifold minimizes losses.

 
SEE ALL 71 PHOTOS

At the 2024 Mustang's launch, Ed Krenz, chief functional engineer, Ford Performance, assured us there will be no backsliding on performance or fuel consumption and that the team prioritized drivability and fun performance over advertisable peak numbers (which today are 310-330 hp, 350 lb-ft, and 22-25 EPA combined mpg—the new figures are forthcoming). Oh, and that MPC stands for Modular Power Cylinder, which refers to the combustion chamber shape, valve and injector orientation, piston dome, etc., all of which get engineered and optimized once and applied to a family of engines (in this case, inline three- and four-cylinders). Well, guess what? Ed was right. Official power figures were released just ahead of the 2022 holiday season, and the new 2.3-liter I-4 EcoBoost makes 315 hp and 350 lb-ft, meaning it gets the old model's maximum torque output standard and generates an extra 5 hp.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given that Ford has informed us that IC engines of less than Super Duty scale have maybe a decade left to live, a totally new 3/4 cylinder is a pretty unlikely bad investment. That looks a lot like the 2 liter Mazda based 4 in my Transit Connect, but for the turbo and longitude mounts. More like a PR flacks overly generous description of the usual mid life updates, sort of like how VW Group has "completely redesigned" the 1.5 to 2 liter  4 that dates back to the "B1" Audi 80 of a half century ago but it still has the same bore center spacing...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ford's Entrenched Problems Complicate Move to Electric....Big front page banner in yesterdays WSJ but released Thursday on line.  Surprised the stock hasn't reacted more to this.  Notable comments.."Ford's factories too often churn out vehicles of subpar quality and supply chain management lags behind competitors, executives said."  And "Ford-which invented the moving assembly line......is being tripped up by some basic nuts and bolts of the car business".

 

Concluding paragraph....."The company has started to see improvement after hiring a new executive director of quality..."

 

Hmnn  In this age of flat org charts, too bad that quality wasn't included/demanded of those already on the payroll.  When  Mulally landed Farley as he was considered the ultimate marketing guy I think, perhaps that "marketing strength" was valued more by Bill Ford more so than say someone who knew what it took to build a good product.  You Ford insiders have any idea who that may have been?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...