EcoBoost - formerly Twin Force

GoatMonkey

Golden Member
Feb 25, 2005
1,253
0
0
The greenies seem to have a pretty good, but somewhat biased, article about Ford's "EcoBoost" technology. It's pretty much direct injection with turbos and a higher than normal compression ratio due to the last second direct injection of fuel.

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2...direct-injection-engi/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgwvQtU4MW4

Now that all the major automakers have acknowledged the reality of both climate change and the need for increased fuel efficiency, they are all looking for ways to address the problems. Speaking at a preview prior to the 2008 Detroit Auto Show Ford Global Product Development VP Derrick Kuzak made it clear that in order to have any real impact, improvements need to start happening quickly and on a large scale. With a U.S. vehicle fleet approaching 200 million vehicles and only about 16 million new vehicles on the road each year, it takes 15-20 years to turn over the fleet to cleaner, more efficient vehicles.

In order to meet the total fleet CO2 reductions that will be needed over the next several decades, millions of vehicles per year need to cleaned up - a few hundred to a few thousand vehicles won't have an impact. To achieve that, economically efficient solutions will be required so that car buyers can afford to buy. The first steps toward that for Ford will be weight reduction and gasoline-turbocharged-direct-injection (GTDI) engines. GTDI? Yes. Read on past the jump to learn more.

Gallery: Detroit 2008: Ford EcoBoost GDTI engines

Gallery: Detroit 2008: Ford Explorer America concept Gallery

[Source: Ford]


Over the next five years Ford plans to have at least 500,000 cars a year powered by GTDI engines. Many of new models coming in that time frame will be using GTDI power-plants in place of larger, normally-aspirated engines. First up will be the Lincoln MKS, which in 2009 will get a 3.5L GTDI V-6 as the optional engine. When the original MKS concept appeared at the 2006 Detroit show it used the Volvo-Yamaha 4.4L V-8 from the XC90.

At the 2007 Detroit Auto Show, Ford showed the Lincoln MKR concept using this new configuration. The Twin-Force name used for the concept has now been replaced by EcoBoost to play up the fuel economy aspect of the technology. The second application for the GDTI V-6 will be the new Ford Flex CUV followed by the next-generation Explorer which is being previewed with this year's Explorer America Concept. The V-6 in the SUV will improve mileage by more than 2mpg compared to the current 4.6L V-8 while providing more power and torque and it will save 150-200lbs. The base engine in the Explorer is expected to be a 2.0L four cylinder EcoBoost model.



When discussing GTDI technology, Kuzak gave a run-down on the payback times based on fuel savings for various technologies. Disregarding any tax credits which are becoming unavailable on some vehicles as sales increase, a four cylinder hybrid drive-train has a pay-back time of about 11.5 years. A comparable four cylinder diesel has a 7.5 year payback. A four cylinder GTDI will save enough fuel to recover the extra cost in 2.5 years. Those figures are based on gasoline at $2.87/gallon, diesel at $2.90/gallon and 15,000 miles per year of driving.

The V-6 will be just the first of many GTDI engines from Ford. The 2.0L four cylinder GTDI will likely supplant the current 3.0L V-6 in the next few years offering a 5mpg improvement over the larger engine with less weight. A smaller 1.4L GTDI will also replace larger, normally-aspirated fours much as Volkswagen has done with their TFSI engines in their European lineup.

In all cases the use of direct injection will offer multiple advantages. Engines will be able to run at higher compression ratios with less risk of engine damaging knock because the fuel is injected just before ignition. Because the fuel is not included in the intake charge, the timing of the valve opening and closing can be optimized to allow for extra exhaust scavenging. This results in lower intake air temperatures in the cylinder and reduced risk of pre-ignition. The combination of the higher compression ratios and turbocharging results in much improved torque at all engine speeds giving better low speed drivability of the smaller engines. The effect is a feeling more like a diesel engine. The low inertia turbochargers and direct injection also contribute to eliminating that bugaboo of old-time turbo engines, the lag between pressing the accelerator and getting actual forward motion.



All of Ford's GTDI engines will eventually be flex-fuel, although the first 3.5L won't be at launch. The variable boost control and variable valve timing will allow for greater control flexibility and allow the engines to get closer to parity on mileage and have improved performance when running on ethanol as well.

One of the other major advantages of EcoBoost is that it provides efficiency benefits at under all driving conditions, not just urban stop and go or just highway. The GTDI V-6 in the MKS will be rated at approximately 340hp and 340lb-ft of torque when it's introduced, which puts it well past either the Volvo 4.4L V-8 or Ford's own 4.6L. In the transverse engine configuration of the MKS, the transmission and the rest of the drivetrain are actually the limiting factor in performance. When the GTDI V-6 goes into longitudinal configurations like the Explorer, it will be able to have an even higher output.
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,393
8,552
126
so somehow they're trying to tell us that a twin turbo 400+ hp 3.5L V6 is enviro friendly?
 

PricklyPete

Lifer
Sep 17, 2002
14,582
162
106
I think the Eco-tilt is marketing ridiculousness...but I'm loving the thought of more engines like this. I want GM to put more of those 260HP 2.0Liter engines that they have the the Pointiac Solstice GXP into other cars like the Pontiac G6 replacement or even the Chevy Malibu. That engine attached to a good 6spd would make the car a lot of fun and still decent on the gas mileage. Right now I have to go with something German/Japanesse to even get close to it (Unless I want the HHR SS...which no one does)...but looks like that will change soon.

 

GoatMonkey

Golden Member
Feb 25, 2005
1,253
0
0
Originally posted by: ElFenix
so somehow they're trying to tell us that a twin turbo 400+ hp 3.5L V6 is enviro friendly?

They're saying that it's *more* friendly than a 400 hp V8, by getting about 2 MPG better not counting any gains they might get if it comes out weighing less.

Also, there is a 2.0L variation that they are saying will replace then 3.0 V6 that Ford uses in various cars.

There is no reason that they couldn't combine this technology with hybrid features to get an even better improvement.

 

dandragonrage

Senior member
Jun 6, 2004
385
0
0
Originally posted by: ElFenix
so somehow they're trying to tell us that a twin turbo 400+ hp 3.5L V6 is enviro friendly?

Doesn't matter to me as long as it's reliable. I'm for it! GM is supposed to be doing direct injection stuff soon too I read.
 

Ktulu

Diamond Member
Dec 16, 2000
4,354
0
0
Originally posted by: dandragonrage
Originally posted by: ElFenix
so somehow they're trying to tell us that a twin turbo 400+ hp 3.5L V6 is enviro friendly?

Doesn't matter to me as long as it's reliable. I'm for it! GM is supposed to be doing direct injection stuff soon too I read.

They've been implementing DI for a couple years now. No twin turbos yet though.
 

GoatMonkey

Golden Member
Feb 25, 2005
1,253
0
0
Originally posted by: Ktulu
Originally posted by: dandragonrage
Originally posted by: ElFenix
so somehow they're trying to tell us that a twin turbo 400+ hp 3.5L V6 is enviro friendly?

Doesn't matter to me as long as it's reliable. I'm for it! GM is supposed to be doing direct injection stuff soon too I read.

They've been implementing DI for a couple years now. No twin turbos yet though.

Yes, the Cadillac CTS definitely has direct injection already. There may be some others that I don't know about.
 

Ktulu

Diamond Member
Dec 16, 2000
4,354
0
0
Originally posted by: GoatMonkey
Originally posted by: Ktulu
Originally posted by: dandragonrage
Originally posted by: ElFenix
so somehow they're trying to tell us that a twin turbo 400+ hp 3.5L V6 is enviro friendly?

Doesn't matter to me as long as it's reliable. I'm for it! GM is supposed to be doing direct injection stuff soon too I read.

They've been implementing DI for a couple years now. No twin turbos yet though.

Yes, the Cadillac CTS definitely has direct injection already. There may be some others that I don't know about.

The HHR SS, Cobalt SS and Kappa Twins all have turbocharged DI engines.
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,393
8,552
126
Originally posted by: GoatMonkey
Originally posted by: ElFenix
so somehow they're trying to tell us that a twin turbo 400+ hp 3.5L V6 is enviro friendly?

They're saying that it's *more* friendly than a 400 hp V8, by getting about 2 MPG better not counting any gains they might get if it comes out weighing less.

oh i'm not sure it said that second part.



now if only they could make a similar engine with pushrods and get rid of the massive heads and valvetrain.
 

GoatMonkey

Golden Member
Feb 25, 2005
1,253
0
0
Originally posted by: ElFenix
Originally posted by: GoatMonkey
Originally posted by: ElFenix
so somehow they're trying to tell us that a twin turbo 400+ hp 3.5L V6 is enviro friendly?

They're saying that it's *more* friendly than a 400 hp V8, by getting about 2 MPG better not counting any gains they might get if it comes out weighing less.

oh i'm not sure it said that second part.



now if only they could make a similar engine with pushrods and get rid of the massive heads and valvetrain.


Here's what I was referring to...

The 2.0L four cylinder GTDI will likely supplant the current 3.0L V-6 in the next few years offering a 5mpg improvement over the larger engine with less weight.

However, I honestly don't believe that the weight reduction will be that much when you add in the weight of the turbo system and any extra required plumbing. It should be less, but not by a huge amount.
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,393
8,552
126

ok now i think you've lost me, or i've lost you.

what i think is that the 2 mpg for the 400 hp twin turbo V6 over the 320 hp 4.6 V8 difference does include the weight reduction.
 

PricklyPete

Lifer
Sep 17, 2002
14,582
162
106
Originally posted by: ElFenix
Originally posted by: GoatMonkey
ok now i think you've lost me, or i've lost you.

what i think is that the 2 mpg for the 400 hp twin turbo V6 over the 320 hp 4.6 V8 difference does include the weight reduction.

that is the way I read it as well. Not as impressive as I'd like to see. Of course with many V8 engines getting in the 16-18 MPG city range...2 extra MPG represents a 10+% improvement in gas savings which can be substantial in the course of a year.
 

TheSlamma

Diamond Member
Sep 6, 2005
7,625
5
81
Not that new, GM has done this for awhile.

I still don't understand Hybrid SUV's and DI V-8's for better economy.

Wow 10% more fuel efficient above nothing is still nothing.
 

GoatMonkey

Golden Member
Feb 25, 2005
1,253
0
0
Originally posted by: ElFenix
Originally posted by: GoatMonkey
ok now i think you've lost me, or i've lost you.

what i think is that the 2 mpg for the 400 hp twin turbo V6 over the 320 hp 4.6 V8 difference does include the weight reduction.

Maybe I've assumed too much. When I read this article it seemed to me like they were doing the testing in a lab type environment instead of an actual car. Like running it on an engine dyno to simulate load. You're right, that quote I put up there is talking about an actual car.

They do talk about weight a bit in another section of that article also, and it's in relation to an actual vehicle.

The V-6 in the SUV will improve mileage by more than 2mpg compared to the current 4.6L V-8 while providing more power and torque and it will save 150-200lbs. The base engine in the Explorer is expected to be a 2.0L four cylinder EcoBoost model.


 

PricklyPete

Lifer
Sep 17, 2002
14,582
162
106
Well this article from InsideLine states a 20-30% increase which would certainly seem beneficial. It also states the 2.0 liter 4 banger putting out 275 HP...so that would be quite impressive to do that and give such good gas mileage.

InsideLine
 

Ktulu

Diamond Member
Dec 16, 2000
4,354
0
0
Originally posted by: TheSlamma
Not that new, GM has done this for awhile.

I still don't understand Hybrid SUV's and DI V-8's for better economy.

Wow 10% more fuel efficient above nothing is still nothing.

Um...GM's 2-mode hybrid SUV's and trucks get up to 50% increased mileage.
 

PricklyPete

Lifer
Sep 17, 2002
14,582
162
106
Originally posted by: TheSlamma
Not that new, GM has done this for awhile.

I still don't understand Hybrid SUV's and DI V-8's for better economy.

Wow 10% more fuel efficient above nothing is still nothing.

10% affects your wallet in the same way no matter how many miles per gallon my car drinks. Actually the actual amount of savings is potentially greater for a gas guzzler as that 10% amounts to more money.

For instance if consumer A with a thrifty econo car usually spends $1200 a year in gas, then a 10% savings nets him $120 unspent each year. The same goes for the actual amount of gas used.

If consumer B has a gas guzzling SUV and usually spends $2600 a year, then a 10% savings nets him $260 unspent each year. The same goes for the actual amount of gas used.

So focusing on gas guzzling vehicles is not actually that bad of an idea.
 

RU482

Lifer
Apr 9, 2000
12,689
3
81
All of Ford's GTDI engines will eventually be flex-fuel, although the first 3.5L won't be at launch. The variable boost control and variable valve timing will allow for greater control flexibility and allow the engines to get closer to parity on mileage and have improved performance when running on ethanol as well.

Interesting for us folks from the Midwest, where E10 is all but mandatory and E85 is somewhat available.