Ford unveils smallest EcoBoost engine yet at 1.6 liters

Even I want an engine swap :lol:
The 1.6 will be a lot lighter and even more powerful than my N/A 2.5 i5...
 
How long before MkI through MkIII Focus owners do engine swaps? :D EcoBoost is genius plain and simple. HOWEVER... I do not want the V8 do completely disappear. That would be baaaad. <_<
 
NecroJoe said:
Technically, isn't yours a 3.9? :p
Click to expand...

Note sure what you mean? 2 rotors, 650 cc each IIRC.

I apologize if this was a joke that went straight over my head.

EDIT:

JCE said:
How long before MkI through MkIII Focus owners do engine swaps? :D EcoBoost is genius plain and simple. HOWEVER... I do not want the V8 do completely disappear. That would be baaaad. <_<
Click to expand...

If an EcoBoost V6 gets V8 power.... then I can imagine an Ecoboost V8 being quite formidable.
 
Last edited:
thevictor390 said:
Note sure what you mean? 2 rotors, 650 cc each IIRC.

I apologize if this was a joke that went straight over my head.
Click to expand...

So I was off on the final result being 3.9, but it's not really 1.3 either...necessarily...

In a rotary engine, displacement is a bit trickier. Each rotor has three faces, or working chambers, and there are two rotors in a 13B engine. All six chambers have a displacement of 0.654 liters, but it takes three revolutions of the output shaft to bring all those chambers through a full cycle. Were it to be rated by the same method as a piston engine (chamber displacement times number of chambers), it would be called a 3.9 liter, which is hardly logical. The accepted approach is to treat each rotor housing as a cylinder and measure the displacement of one chamber per rotation. Interestingly, this happens to be precisely equal to capacity. In other words, on every revolution of the output shaft, the rotary engine moves a volume equal to its rated total displacement.

For the purpose of displacement equivalency, either the rotary engine total displacement needs to be doubled or the piston engine total displacement needs to be halved. The latter approach is more correct (equates with capacity) but the former is simply more politically correct, as this is a piston engine world and those exaggerated ratings are just too familiar to our culture. So, rather than say that a 2.6-liter piston engine has 1.3 liters of capacity (true), we say that a 1.3 liter rotary has equivalent displacement of 2.6 liters (also true, but back-assward).
Click to expand...
http://www.drivingsports.com/site/2008/12/rotary-vs-piston-engine-equivalency/
 
Yeah, depends if we are talking displacement or capacity, I guess. Interesting read.

Anyway, EcoBoost! Back on topic!
 
thevictor390 said:
f an EcoBoost V6 gets V8 power.... then I can imagine an Ecoboost V8 being quite formidable.
Click to expand...

Defeats the purpose of EcoBoost. The point of EcoBoost is to replace the larger engine choice with a smaller one that produces the same or similar power. The V6TT replaces the V8 in terms of power and better fuel economy. I just do not want V8's and larger engines to go away.
 
Ford's purpose is not my purpose. Besides, they could put an EcoBoost V8 in the GT and get a good laugh.
 
Ecoboost V8 replaces the V10. Simple as that, and nothing's to stop them hot-rodding cars with them.
 
well 13 years ago they were serving up 145hp 3.8 T birds and now this.

I'm not sure If I want an engine swap though. unless its the TT3.5 :mrgreen:
 
I respect their work and success with it, but I don't know that I'd take a smaller engine with a ton of extra stuff that could potentially go wrong versus a larger and simpler engine.
 
It seems like Ford is the only one of the big three that has their shit together.. fuck yeah "eco" turbo engines and 400 horsepower mustangs!
 
isn't the plan for WRC to switch to 1.6L Turbo power in 2011.. pretty sure thats what my latest issue of Racecar Engineering says anyway... also pretty sure Ford is planning on using the Fiesta as their new WRC chassis so it is entirely possible we will see this in a road going fiesta... i am not really up to date on my homologation rules i think currently the constructor only needs to homologate the block and not the whole turbo system but still i suppose it is a possibility
 
Oh Ford, you're just gunning to sell me my next car, aren't you?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top