Author Topic: FORD rolling the dice on Direct Injection Gas over Diesel in North America  (Read 3084 times)

Offline ArticSteve

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 27856
  • Carma: +310/-6813
    • View Profile
  • Cars: Hobby Car: 15 Mustang Vert, V6, manual, 3.55 lsd; 2024 MDX Aspec; 2022 F150 TREMOR lifted
Not all customers want compacts, despite the rapid growth of the segment, but most want better fuel efficiency. And even if they don’t, car makers are compelled by the new government Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards to deliver it.

To boost the efficiency of its products, Ford is betting on its new advanced engines that it brands “EcoBoost.” They are smaller than today’s comparably powerful engines, but use 20 percent less fuel.

Like diesel engines, these engines use direct injection — that means the fuel sprays straight into the combustion chamber instead of into the intake port — and turbocharging. Unlike diesels, however, the engines will burn conventional gasoline, so consumers need not change their fueling habits, and unlike diesels these gas engines are quite affordable.

Diesel engines tend to be expensive both because of their sturdy design to withstand their powerful combustion and also because of the high cost of the pollution control systems they require.

“Compared with the current cost of diesel and hybrid technologies, customers in North America can expect to recoup their initial investment in a four-cylinder EcoBoost engine through fuel savings in approximately 30 months,” promised Derrick Kuzak, Ford’s group vice president of  global product development.

To recoup the additional cost of investing in a diesel engine in North America will take an average of 7 1/2f years, Kuzak added, while the investment in a hybrid will take nearly 12 years to recoup, given equivalent miles driven per year and fuel costs, he said.

Ford’s Mazda subsidiary already sells direct-injected turbocharged gasoline engines in its Mazdaspeed3, Mazdaspeed6 and CX-7 crossover SUV, but EcoBoost advances that technology and optimizes it for efficiency rather than power, according to Kuzak.

Ford will launch EcoBoost in 2009 and the company says it will sell half a million vehicles equipped with the technology in the next five years. The technology debuts as a 340-horsepower 3.5-liter V-6 in the Lincoln MKS luxury sedan in 2009, but will also include four-cylinder engines.

One application of the four-cylinder could be in the next-generation Ford Explorer. The potential for that vehicle is shown in the Explorer American concept car, on show in Detroit, which could use a 275-horsepower 2.0-liter four-cylinder engine along with a six-speed automatic transmission and reduced weight (through the use of lighter materials) to deliver a 30 percent fuel saving compared to today’s V-6 Explorer. Obviously, fuel savings compared to today’s eight-cylinder Explorer would be even greater.

Offline Snowman

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 38392
  • Carma: +702/-1347
  • Gender: Male
  • “It’s never crowded along the extra mile.”
    • View Profile
  • Cars: Cars: 2012 Audi TT-RS. 2011 Toyota Venza AWD.2004 Honda S2000 Bikes: Giant Defy Avdvanced 0. Giant Talon 29 "hardtail"
 :thumbup: :thumbup:  Good news, anything but stinky diesels.

Offline Guy

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 7866
  • Carma: +481/-1215
  • Gender: Male
  • member
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2021 Mustang Mach-E Premium, 2019 Volvo XC40 Momentum
The new diesels do not stink. Have you been to Europe lately?

Offline Ex-airbalancer

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 40151
  • Carma: +729/-1584
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2011 Silverado 1500 LTZ ext ended cab , 2013 Lexus RX-350 F Sport
The new diesels do not stink. Have you been to Europe lately?
Diesel still does stink, but not out the exhaust of a 2006 TDI

Offline Guy

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 7866
  • Carma: +481/-1215
  • Gender: Male
  • member
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2021 Mustang Mach-E Premium, 2019 Volvo XC40 Momentum
Agree!  :D

Offline ArticSteve

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 27856
  • Carma: +310/-6813
    • View Profile
  • Cars: Hobby Car: 15 Mustang Vert, V6, manual, 3.55 lsd; 2024 MDX Aspec; 2022 F150 TREMOR lifted
Ya gotta keep a pair of dedicated gloves in a zip lock bag just for re-filling.  :rofl:

Frankly I have no idea where the market/engine technology is going and which will prevail.  I posted this because I found it interesting that Ford is signaling that they are not going diesel on their everyday ppl movers.

Offline Guy

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 7866
  • Carma: +481/-1215
  • Gender: Male
  • member
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2021 Mustang Mach-E Premium, 2019 Volvo XC40 Momentum
The CX-7 is not a good example for this technology. I understand this things run at the rate of 13-14 L/100 km.

Offline The Mighty Duck

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 7861
  • Carma: +34/-44
  • Gender: Male
  • f*** that duck
    • View Profile
  • Cars: 2010 MINI Cooper S | Past: 1999 Honda Civic, 2009 Honda Fit
The CX-7 is not a good example for this technology. I understand this things run at the rate of 13-14 L/100 km.

That's why they said "but EcoBoost advances that technology [direct-injection] and optimizes it for efficiency rather than power..."

I like the idea - I'm not convinced the insane torque of a diesel would be a suitable replacement for the high-RPM rush of a gasoline engine coming out of a corner...  though I'm more than happy to be proven wrong.  :D

Offline huota

  • Drunk on Fuel
  • ****
  • Posts: 2009
  • Carma: +49/-60
    • View Profile
To boost the efficiency of its products, Ford is betting on its new advanced engines that it brands “EcoBoost.” They are smaller than today’s comparably powerful engines, but use 20 percent less fuel.

Audi A4 1.8 TFSI, 160hp, 6-speed, combined city/highway 7.1 l/100km
Audi A4 2.0 TDI, 143hp, 6-speed, combined city/highway 5.5 l/100km

That is about 22% less for the diesel. I guess something similar would be too much to ask from Ford.

Edit: Q7 3.6 FSI 280hp, tiptronic 12.7 l/100km vs 3.0 TDI 240hp, tiptronic 9.8 l/100km, or about 23% less for the diesel.
« Last Edit: January 14, 2008, 05:01:05 pm by huota »
Fiction is the lie through which we tell the truth

Offline PJungnitsch

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 12943
  • Carma: +170/-337
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
    • Travel in Africa
  • Cars: Subaru Crosstrek, Lexus RX350, Evolve Carbon, Biktrix Juggernaut, Yamaha TW200
Diesels do have a lot of issues, especially in our climate. Harder starting, lack of heat (heated seats are a must!), expensive to buy. And when they go wrong they are very expensive.

The new 'burner-type' exhausts are not helping. Apparently they go through a lot of fuel in the process and will melt pavement if the vehicle is sitting still. My brother just finished a job with Shell and he was saying the new Ford diesel pickups are banned from well sites.

That said, we'll see how the new generation of small pickup diesels turn out, maybe they'll have a better pollution control method by then.

Offline gotak

  • Auto Obsessed
  • ***
  • Posts: 663
  • Carma: +3/-2
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: FORD rolling the dice on Direct Injection Gas over Diesel in North America
« Reply #10 on: January 14, 2008, 05:25:29 pm »
275 hp 2.0 liter 4 banger? That sounds like premium fuel level of performance. Does the savings accounts for that? Although I do like the idea of premium becoming more regular and so cheaper then the rip off prices they charge right now.

Offline huota

  • Drunk on Fuel
  • ****
  • Posts: 2009
  • Carma: +49/-60
    • View Profile
Re: FORD rolling the dice on Direct Injection Gas over Diesel in North America
« Reply #11 on: January 14, 2008, 05:26:23 pm »

The new 'burner-type' exhausts are not helping. Apparently they go through a lot of fuel in the process and will melt pavement if the vehicle is sitting still.

I am not sure what kind of a system you're referring to, but some of the preheating systems use a quarter of a litre of fuel per hour of heating. Some of that is immediately recovered by the lower fuel consumption of a properly warmed up engine. It also solves the problem of lack of heat in the cabin.

Offline PJungnitsch

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 12943
  • Carma: +170/-337
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
    • Travel in Africa
  • Cars: Subaru Crosstrek, Lexus RX350, Evolve Carbon, Biktrix Juggernaut, Yamaha TW200
Re: FORD rolling the dice on Direct Injection Gas over Diesel in North America
« Reply #12 on: January 14, 2008, 05:43:06 pm »
I am not sure what kind of a system you're referring to, but some of the preheating systems use a quarter of a litre of fuel per hour of heating. Some of that is immediately recovered by the lower fuel consumption of a properly warmed up engine. It also solves the problem of lack of heat in the cabin.

No, it's the regeneration systems on the new 3/4 ton trucks that pumps diesel fuel into the exhaust to burn up soot.

Offline Cord

  • Car Crazy
  • *****
  • Posts: 5095
  • Carma: +104/-115
    • View Profile
Re: FORD rolling the dice on Direct Injection Gas over Diesel in North America
« Reply #13 on: January 14, 2008, 07:13:14 pm »
275 hp 2.0 liter 4 banger? That sounds like premium fuel level of performance. Does the savings accounts for that? Although I do like the idea of premium becoming more regular and so cheaper then the rip off prices they charge right now.

Very unlikely that Ford would ever come out with a mainstream engine that requires premium.
"If we can just believe something then we don't have to really think for ourselves, do we?" Paul Haggis