Ford’s tiny but feisty 1.0-litre EcoBoost

[46Chief]

My 02 VW has a variable vane turbo nothing new...be interesting to see how long a boosted one liter engine spinning like crazy will last. I'll stick with German, cars and American pickups.

[Stefan]

Originally Posted by east tx skier

My VW 2.0T exceeds its on paper numbers, even at 70 mph.

YMMV, literally.

[/IMG]

Well then you might be one of the lucky few... my VW Golf R (also a 2.0TSI) well exceeds it's figures (and the figures of its 3.2V6 predecessor) in everyday driving, unless you don't use the power/torque, which is ridiculous, because if I wouldn't want to use the power I could have bought a smaller or a diesel engine. Exceeding meaning it consumes more because we calculate in Litres per Kilometer. Your consumption might also be okay because of your driving profile (rarely over 90mph).

[3event]

I am just turning in a 2010 company lease Merc Milan (aka a Merc badged Fusion) and I wouldn't recommend anything from that era for sure. Noisy and underpowered, with a lousy transmission that misses the shift 2-3 when cold (google Ford Fusion transmission problems). The mileage appears good until you realize the gauge is telling you a 10%+ fib. As far as rattles and squeaks - nothing noticeable. Fit and finish is good.

If the 2.4 engine and tranny are the same in the new fusion then do some research before you vote with your wallet.

Additionally , there is a recall on the Fusion/Escape ecoboost engine:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/...fires/1743203/

On the F150's , potential issues as well?
http://www.f150forum.com/f70/there-f...cooler-156900/

Ford has dropped to 2nd last in reliability on that big consumer magazine's list. I'm no fan now, and the local dealer didn't help any. I hope that the most recent significant and rapid changes to new technologies for fuel economy - such as wider use of turbos (yes I know VW-Audi-Porsche , but ... not all makers are so capable) , and CVT transmissions aren't "innovations" that become poor decisions in hindsight due to how they were designed in some of the mass market vehicles.

[FourFourty]

Originally Posted by 3event

Ford has dropped to 2nd last in reliability on that big consumer magazine's list.

That was Consumer Reports Magazine. Some of the reviews in CR are useful, but I find a lot of their reviews to be completely off base....I remember them recommending the GMC Sierra a few years ago. They gave it above average reliability, and it was a CR "top pick".

In the same issue, they gave the Chevy Silverado a very poor rating on several catagories, including reliability.

The Silverado badges and nameplates must have had serious issues that year, because, that is the only thing that seperates those trucks.

It should also be mentioned, that consumer reports clearly stated that, most of the reason for Fords drop on the list, was due to the "difficulty" to use MyFordTouch. I have that system in three of my fleet vehicles, and could see how it might be difficult for people that are not into todays gadgets...... That being said, what the heck does that have to do with reliability??

Ford has had some issues as of late...... You will have that, when you push the envelope of innovation. I applaud the effort. They are certainly kicking the tar out of GM and Chrysler.

[east tx skier]

Originally Posted by Stefan

Well then you might be one of the lucky few... my VW Golf R (also a 2.0TSI) well exceeds it's figures (and the figures of its 3.2V6 predecessor) in everyday driving, unless you don't use the power/torque, which is ridiculous, because if I wouldn't want to use the power I could have bought a smaller or a diesel engine. Exceeding meaning it consumes more because we calculate in Litres per Kilometer. Your consumption might also be okay because of your driving profile (rarely over 90mph).

Isn't the Golf R actually an FSI branded as TSI? I rarely get over 90 mph, but like to get on the throttle around town. My mileage improved slightly when I got it chipped. I'm at about 270 bhp and 300 ft/lbs of torque at the crank. Don't know the metric conversion to that off the top of my head.

[Stefan]

Originally Posted by east tx skier

Isn't the Golf R actually an FSI branded as TSI? I rarely get over 90 mph, but like to get on the throttle around town. My mileage improved slightly when I got it chipped. I'm at about 270 bhp and 300 ft/lbs of torque at the crank. Don't know the metric conversion to that off the top of my head.

Not sure how the brandings in the U.S. are now, but most of the current VW gas engines here are TSI's , usually single turbocharger with high pressure fuel injection. The R is a 2.0 TSI with 270hp (256hp in the U.S.), mine has around 310hp, which makes it a fast quirky car around town, but with a way to small gas tank out of town. But you are right, the one or two times I drove it somewhat slow on the Autobahn (well below 100mph) it had a reasonable gas consumption.
But what I'm saying is that it's riduculus to have a smaller engine which in case you use the power under real life circumstances, it consumes way more then a larger non turbocharged one.

[east tx skier]

Originally Posted by Stefan

Not sure how the brandings in the U.S. are now, but most of the current VW gas engines here are TSI's , usually single turbocharger with high pressure fuel injection. The R is a 2.0 TSI with 270hp (256hp in the U.S.), mine has around 310hp, which makes it a fast quirky car around town, but with a way to small gas tank out of town. But you are right, the one or two times I drove it somewhat slow on the Autobahn (well below 100mph) it had a reasonable gas consumption.
But what I'm saying is that it's riduculus to have a smaller engine which in case you use the power under real life circumstances, it consumes way more then a larger non turbocharged one.

Your point is well taken. One reason I am driving a VW now as a long time Honda owner is that the latest generation Accord was a total pig compared to previous generations, which were more "peppy." With the turbo on a smaller 4 cyl engine, it's nice to have the power when you need it or want it, but be able to settle into some reasonable fuel economy when you are cruising. In the US, we don't have the luxury of the German autobahn. So, for the most part, 70--80 mph is where I topping out. Still, it's nice to have a car that can do what I want when the mood or need strikes me, but can still settle in and sip the petrol gently when I have the cruise control set and the kids are asleep in the back seat.

As far as the engines go, for ease of reference, this is the TSI in my CC (200 hp stock; 270 hp tuned; picture before new intake installed).



And this is the "TSI" branded engine in the current US spec Golf R, which is actually a tuned up FSI (256 hp as you said).



This is the FSI used in the US Spec 2.0T VWs until 2008.5.



What have you done to your Golf R to get 310 hp. Is that stage 1 and an intake or did you go for a K04 or larger turbo?

[Stefan]

Just a Stage1, Stage 2 exaust was to loud for my taste and everyday use, also did a DSG optimization, shorter shift times, and redline lifted to 7000RPM, sadly though, there is not much improvement below 4000RPM, If you floor it it goes pretty well though... I just love it torquier at low RPM, twin turbo would be a solution, or the 5cyl engine from the Audi RS3/TTRS, but as of now nothing of that will happen in the next generation.

Mine looks just like your second picture, I also think that the Golf R in Europe and North America are just slightly different due to emissions standards, I personally think it's a worong decision not to sell the DSG in North America...

[east tx skier]

Okay. Technically, you have what we have branded the "FSI." Still a 2.0T, but belt driven with a different intake path and different PCV system assuming Europe and the US have basically the same setup, if only differently tuned.

We do have the DSG as an option in the US from 2010 on (at least in the CC and GTI). Mine is a 6 spd manual, however. Just my preference. I don't notice an absence of torque or any issues with shifting as a result. The TSI 2.0T loves 4k--5k rpm. But, frankly, I think mine goes like crazy from 2K--5K. At about 6K, I think the K03 turbo has had enough. I have a modshack intake that helps quite a bit with the throttle response. I previously had an APR intake, but sold it because I think it causes a bit of hesitation for some reason.

There was a VW update for the DSG in around August 2012 that people over here were really happy about. I'm not sure if it is an improvement over a Tuner's DSG update though. I have a Unitronic Stage 1+ on my engine and am perfectly happy. If I really get on it, I can keep the tires turning loose through 3rd gear.

I need better tires.

[Stefan]

Originally Posted by east tx skier

Okay. Technically, you have what we have branded the "FSI." Still a 2.0T, but belt driven with a different intake path and different PCV system assuming Europe and the US have basically the same setup, if only differently tuned.

I think we don't have the FSI branding anymore since there were some uncharged "real" FSI in the beginning.

Originally Posted by east tx skier

We do have the DSG as an option in the US from 2010 on (at least in the CC and GTI). Mine is a 6 spd manual, however. Just my preference. I don't notice an absence of torque or any issues with shifting as a result. The TSI 2.0T loves 4k--5k rpm. But, frankly, I think mine goes like crazy from 2K--5K. At about 6K, I think the K03 turbo has had enough. I have a modshack intake that helps quite a bit with the throttle response. I previously had an APR intake, but sold it because I think it causes a bit of hesitation for some reason.

Yeah I meant DSG in the R, to be honest there is no real 'absence' of torque, but I'm just spoiled from the low end torque in my SL55 which I don't get to drive to much anymore since I own a Mastercraft But for changing mechanical parts on the engine, we need to get the car checked and reapproved in that case, that was to much of a hassle for me, also modifing more than a stage1 always comes with a louder exaust, which is no option for my everyday use.

Originally Posted by east tx skier

There was a VW update for the DSG in around August 2012 that people over here were really happy about. I'm not sure if it is an improvement over a Tuner's DSG update though. I have a Unitronic Stage 1+ on my engine and am perfectly happy. If I really get on it, I can keep the tires turning loose through 3rd gear.

I need better tires.

or 4 wheel drive

this is what I'd love to own, but then again, you could get a much cooler car than a Golf for over a 100k Euro http://www.hgp-turbo.de/golf-vi-sonderumbau.html sorry its german