New Ecoboost 3.5L Twin Turbo Engines, Future of Falcon

XR6Naranja · 09-03-2012, 02:43 AM

So I've been saying to my mates for a while now, sucks that Ford wants to go to these 2.0L 4 cylinder turbo engines, but one of them said, it's all good they will be bringing out a new V6 twin turbo in place of the old inline 6 engines.

But all I can find is people rambling on about what parts are in it, but does anyone know how these perform, have they been put in a car and tested?

I'm interested to see these perform against the existing F6's.

|Nate · 09-03-2012, 03:33 AM

I think he might be referring to the Ecoboost V6 that's currently in Lincoln's and some other products. Link

268kw is not bad considering it uses around 9-11 L/100kms. It would be great to see it applied to the Australian automotive market.

chevypower · 09-03-2012, 03:45 AM

It does really well in the Taurus SHO and the Flex AWD, but these AWD setups tend to lose a lot of the performance, and the engine is not the TI-VCT version that is in the F-150, probably because they are predominantly FWD. Also we still haven't see the real potential of this engine with its current displacement.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wikipedia

In 2009 Ford modified an experimental 3.5 V6 EcoBoost engine with E85 direct injection and gasoline port fuel injection, which achieved a BMEP score of 305 psi (27 bar), which translates to approximately 553 pound-feet (750 N·m) of torque and 316 horsepower (236 kW)@3000 rpm (flat torque curve from 1500-3000 rpm)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_EcoBoost_engine

I don't really have a problem with the the current Ford AWD setups, they are fantastic. But my 2011 Polaris 850 Touring ATV proves that AWD can be set up on RWD very well. In 4x4 mode, my Polaris sends all the power and torque to the back wheels only, unless they begin to slip. When the back wheels slip 1/5th of a tyre rotation, the front wheels kick in. It completely imperceptible. I can't tell the difference between 4x2 and 4x4 mode on pavement, and I can completely floor it on snow and ice, and the front wheels seem like they respond instantly. Car manufacturers really need to use this technology.

Nic85 · 09-03-2012, 06:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chevypower

It does really well in the Taurus SHO and the Flex AWD, but these AWD setups tend to lose a lot of the performance, and the engine is not the TI-VCT version that is in the F-150, probably because they are predominantly FWD. Also we still haven't see the real potential of this engine with its current displacement.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_EcoBoost_engine

I don't really have a problem with the the current Ford AWD setups, they are fantastic. But my 2011 Polaris 850 Touring ATV proves that AWD can be set up on RWD very well. In 4x4 mode, my Polaris sends all the power and torque to the back wheels only, unless they begin to slip. When the back wheels slip 1/5th of a tyre rotation, the front wheels kick in. It completely imperceptible. I can't tell the difference between 4x2 and 4x4 mode on pavement, and I can completely floor it on snow and ice, and the front wheels seem like they respond instantly. Car manufacturers really need to use this technology.

They have been. Since the 80's. Nissan comes to mind straight away with the ATTESA AWD system. Manufacturers like Mitsubishi and Audi then made full time AWD systems with Mitsubishi later implementing an ACD for constant 50:50 torque distribution, and AYC to split torque left to right between the rear wheels.

OP: There's heaps of info on google about this engine. It's been around for quite a while and is currently being used in many cars. Outputs are slightly better than the F6's 310kW/565Nm in some applications.

jpd80 · 09-03-2012, 07:03 AM

Ecoboost V6 is not happening with E8 Falcon.

Ford is working on a next GEN V6 called "Nano" that will be around 2.7 litres, have DI and available in Ecoboost.
On today's power outputs, a 2.7 V6 EB would put out 250 Kw and 480 nm and would be available to a lot of
vehicles, effectively replacing the 3.7 naturally aspirated V6...

Interesting times ahead...

chevypower · 09-03-2012, 07:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpd80

Ecoboost V6 is not happening with E8 Falcon.

Ford is working on a next GEN V6 called "Nano" that will be around 2.7 litres, have DI and available in Ecoboost.
On today's power outputs, a 2.7 V6 EB would put out 250 Kw and 480 nm and would be available to a lot of
vehicles, effectively replacing the 3.7 naturally aspirated V6...

Interesting times ahead...

No doubt hooked to an 8-speed by then. Hopefully keeps offering the 3.5 as the high performance version in all models. I would really like the new Explorer with that engine. The 3.5 NA V6 is just too weak for that SUV.

EB# · 09-03-2012, 07:10 AM

The V6T Taurus makes the 0-100 in 6.7 seconds, according to this video...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zsWvK92HNpM

WILDB · 09-03-2012, 07:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EB92

The V6T Taurus makes the 0-100 in 6.7 seconds, according to this video...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zsWvK92HNpM

Everything I've read indicates 0-60 in approx 5.5 seconds for the 3.5 Ecoboost...?

jpd80 · 09-03-2012, 07:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chevypower

No doubt hooked to an 8-speed by then. Hopefully keeps offering the 3.5 as the high performance version in all models. I would really like the new Explorer with that engine. The 3.5 NA V6 is just too weak for that SUV.

I suspect it will make an appearance if Explorer sales stay up there,
and F150 has been sucking up more V6Eb sales than expected...

**Luke Plaizier** · 09-03-2012, 07:49 AM

Well, the 2.7 would go some way to filling the chasm between 2.0 and 3.5 Ecoboosts.

I still reckon the I6T is the father of the Ecoboost. It was the first turbocharged engine that I know of in the Ford World to be Ti-VCT at least, and all that's missing for Ecoboost is DI.

I wonder if the 3.5 Ecoboost would be a direct swap into the engine bay of a Duratec V6 Escape? That would be some AWD madness right there.....

Lukeyson

chevypower · 09-03-2012, 07:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luke Plaizier

I wonder if the 3.5 Ecoboost would be a direct swap into the engine bay of a Duratec V6 Escape? That would be some AWD madness right there.....

No harm in trying!
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Engine-Trans...ht_1236wt_1114

XR6Naranja · 09-03-2012, 10:42 AM

cheers for the info guys, I definitely don't like the future of Ford, but it looks promising to say the least in the 6 cylinders, I don't care what people say 4 men work harder then 6, but 6 get the job done, I don't want 4 cylinder engines that get quickly tired.

I do love that Ford has always fit so much power into much smaller engines then competitors.

And the I6, such a reliable engine.

The power it's pulling, I'm very interested, but in a different body then what that Taurus is holding, Australia loves a sleek sporty body, or a muscly grunty body, so definitely needs one of the two to suit me.

chevypower · 09-03-2012, 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheOrangeSpider

I don't want 4 cylinder engines that get quickly tired.

Engines don't have feelings, it's all about the air and fuel mix. As long as the metal is strong enough to push the drive train for hundreds of thousands of miles, that's all that matters really.

superfly · 09-03-2012, 03:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheOrangeSpider

cheers for the info guys, I definitely don't like the future of Ford, but it looks promising to say the least in the 6 cylinders, I don't care what people say 4 men work harder then 6, but 6 get the job done, I don't want 4 cylinder engines that get quickly tired.

2 of the men can be replaced by a turbo charger. Take a look at the WRX engine. 2L 4 cyl and lots of poke. Plus they go forever if treated well. Plenty of WRX's with over 200K on the clock still going strong.

TMC · 09-03-2012, 03:59 PM

The VCT 3.5L Ecoboost would be brilliant in the Falcon. 365HP around 5500rpm and 420lb/ft of torque from 2000-4500 rpm. Wouldn't that make the Falcon sing.

mickyyyy · 09-03-2012, 04:12 PM

Straight 6 all the way!!!

jpd80 · 09-03-2012, 04:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luke Plaizier

Well, the 2.7 would go some way to filling the chasm between 2.0 and 3.5 Ecoboosts.

I still reckon the I6T is the father of the Ecoboost. It was the first turbocharged engine that I know of in the Ford World to be Ti-VCT at least, and all that's missing for Ecoboost is DI.

The key ingredients to Ecoboost are DI, Turbo, TiVCT and the sophisticated program used
to manipulate values to allow 10:1 compression and 16 pis boost to operate on regular petrol,
not only survive on regular petrol but function impressively. It started out as a Bosch program for
early V6 Ecoboost and was subsequently advanced by Ford using its own programming.
The software and proptcols are protected by copywrite so Ford retains a big edge in stopping
other companies reverse engineering the program for themselves.

At the present power levels a 4.0 Ecoboost would produce at least 360 KW and 730 nm (on 95 ULP) and still run on 91 ULP.

Personally, I would love to see a next generation baby I-6, maybe 2.3 litres making 230 Kw and 420 nm and 8.4 l/100 km
A beautiful sweet six in a slightly smaller amd lighter RWD Falcon based on a Mix of Mustang front end and Fusion/Mondeo Bodies.

Falcman0o7 · 09-03-2012, 04:35 PM

One minute the falcons dead then it's getting new engines?
Is it dead or what...

jpd80 · 09-03-2012, 04:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Falcman0o7

One minute the falcons dead then it's getting new engines?
Is it dead or what...

Of course it's dead, why else would we keep discussing it......

Falcon is like the Phoenix that is killed off every seven years, only to rise from the ashes..

TMC · 09-03-2012, 05:01 PM

What's wrong with a 4.0 inline Ecoboost that makes 360kW and 730Nm of torque?????????? Imagine that in an AWD Territory. Woohooo!!!!!!!!

Would make all the 6.2L V8 Holdens look like wimpy little pieces of farm machinery.

I wish the Ford guys would just listen to their hearts a bit and be like Nike and "Just Do It".

mik · 09-03-2012, 05:11 PM

does`nt the inline 6 already make 700 nm on over boost?

4.0i OHC · 09-03-2012, 05:12 PM

I know that I'd much rather have a 4 cylinder Falcon than have any sort of V6 ruin the car.

Buntz · 09-03-2012, 06:46 PM

Indications of the venerable I6's demise is evident. So more than likely, 3.5 V6 EB will become our entry level performance engine. They will have to however tune it for more torque than it's currently producing... so that then next 6T variants aren't putting out less torque than they were. 560+nm would be sufficient.

However motoring enthusiastically speaking. Inline engines are just far sweeter . And it will take some of the cult following, and uniqueness Falcon has that makes it an enthusiasts vehicle

XR6Naranja · 09-03-2012, 07:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chevypower

Engines don't have feelings, it's all about the air and fuel mix. As long as the metal is strong enough to push the drive train for hundreds of thousands of miles, that's all that matters really.

I dunno I'm just a bit skeptical about it that's all.

Quote:

Originally Posted by superfly

2 of the men can be replaced by a turbo charger. Take a look at the WRX engine. 2L 4 cyl and lots of poke. Plus they go forever if treated well. Plenty of WRX's with over 200K on the clock still going strong.

Fair enough, but 200k in a BA/BF terms isn't much, taxi's go strong at 1m+

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpd80

The key ingredients to Ecoboost are DI, Turbo, TiVCT and the sophisticated program used
to manipulate values to allow 10:1 compression and 16 pis boost to operate on regular petrol,
not only survive on regular petrol but function impressively. It started out as a Bosch program for
early V6 Ecoboost and was subsequently advanced by Ford using its own programming.
The software and proptcols are protected by copywrite so Ford retains a big edge in stopping
other companies reverse engineering the program for themselves.

At the present power levels a 4.0 Ecoboost would produce at least 360 KW and 730 nm (on 95 ULP) and still run on 91 ULP.

Personally, I would love to see a next generation baby I-6, maybe 2.3 litres making 230 Kw and 420 nm and 8.4 l/100 km
A beautiful sweet six in a slightly smaller amd lighter RWD Falcon based on a Mix of Mustang front end and Fusion/Mondeo Bodies.

The stats do sound promising to say the least.

Crazy Dazz · 09-03-2012, 11:49 PM

Yes and no.
Ford won’t kill off the I6 in the current Falcon.
Unless for marketing reasons they wanted to do a staged transition, but the development and Euro5 compliances costs make that unlikely.
If we end up getting the AWD Faurus then yes, your XR6 Turbo will come with some version of the EB. Possibly then FPV could continue to market the F6 with a tweaked version.

I would like to know if there is any truth to the rumours of a V8 variant for the D4?

Bossxr8 · 10-03-2012, 08:28 PM

There will be no V8 version of a FWD/AWD platform as the Coyote is not designed for transverse applications, unlike the old Modular 4.6.

jpd80 · 10-03-2012, 08:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

There will be no V8 version of a FWD/AWD platform as the Coyote is not designed for transverse applications, unlike the old Modular 4.6.

Ecoboost V6 has plenty of thump with the right transmission...

Bossxr8 · 10-03-2012, 10:02 PM

But its not the same is it.

au11futura · 10-03-2012, 10:56 PM

i can see were these engines would be great and a fresh idea for the aussie application. but on the other hand im still an old school way of thinking guy and still prefer the inline six, i know cannot think too far out of the box.

Crazy Dazz · 10-03-2012, 11:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

There will be no V8 version of a FWD/AWD platform as the Coyote is not designed for transverse applications, unlike the old Modular 4.6.

How can an engine be “not designed for transverse applications”? Are you telling me that If I want to drive a GT from Perth to Sydney, I’ll have to drift it sideways because the engine will only run in the North-South orientation?
The Coyote is practically the same exterior dimensions as it’s predecessor, and surely size and weight are the limiting factors?