Ford says EcoBoost could save you "hundreds" of dollars a year
Sometimes, it's the modest claims that sound the most honest. Sure, we'd love to have amazing electric cars that can go 250 miles between charges, last for 15 years and cost just $20,000, but that's not going to happen any time soon. Ford's recent announcement that its upcoming EcoBoost fuel-saving system will be able to save a driver hundreds of dollars in fuel costs a year strikes me as something that is not only realistic but also worth getting excited about if you're a Ford fan.
Ford says that the systems potential is to reduce fuel use by 20 percent. Apply that to an annual driving range of 15,000 miles and gas at $3.25 and you'll spend $340 less on gas each year. If that sounds good to you - and you're keen on the Lincoln MKS (pictured) where EcoBoost will debut in 2009 - then start thinking about how to spend your extra $340. Of course, in 2009, we just might need to recalculate that price. $3.25? Not at the rate things are going.
[Source: Ford]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
MikeW 1:53PM (4/04/2008)
Wow.
Good job Ford. You save 20% against a hypothetical V8.
Reply
Dan 2:48PM (4/04/2008)
Exactly. They are getting these numbers from imaginary "thirstier" counterparts... or perhaps, lackluster powertrains already found in Ford vehicles. Besides. This won't exactly save me hundreds a year if I am switching from a Honda Civic to whatever ugly beast into which Ford drops this "ecoboost" nonsense.
Ford needs to wake up and smell the pile they've been sitting in for the last 100 years. They need to stop hedging bets and start breaking the curve. Bite the bullet and let loose some good design and drop the gasoline inhaling engines. "Ecoboost" that only represents a 20% improvement over... what?... a SuperDuty? a GT40? a V8? How about an "ecoboost" that represents a 20% improvement over a Nissan Altima, Honda Accord, Toyota Camry, etc.
Color me unimpressed.
Reply
short sighted 7:01PM (4/07/2008)
You'll save 80 percent on fuel costs with electrics so get some EVs on the dealers ford. please.
Reply
Byron Thomas 3:14PM (4/04/2008)
If my 07 Focus had a 1.6l Ecoboost engine with an 11.5to1 compression ratio, running on E20 (91 octane), it could get 45 mpg on the freeway. Heck I get 37 to 38 mpg with the Duratec. I think Ecoboost is a good alternative to expensive hitech diesels.
Reply
Dan 3:17PM (4/04/2008)
This would be interesting if it's true. The MKZ is a mid-size sedan, a platform twin of the Ford Fusion and Mazda6. It comes with a 3.5L V6 which gets slightly better highway mileage than the 3.0L V6 in the Fusion or Mazda6: MKZ 28 MPG, Fusion 26 MPG, Mazda6 25 MPG. They all get 18 MPG city.
If an Ecoboost turbo 4 gets 20% better mileage in the MKZ, that would push mileage from 22 MPG combined to 26 MPG combined, better than even the Mazda6 or Fusion with the 2.3L 4-cylinder. I'll believe it when I see it.
Reply
DT 3:56PM (4/04/2008)
Let's see....
Develop incremental mileage improvements that is relatively low cost for a cash-strapped manufacturer to develop and affordable to the consumer that can be put to market sooner with greater market penetration, or....
Get rid of all those gas guzzlers that generate the bulk of your marginal profits and bet the future of the company trying to make a quantum leap in efficiency.
Everybody want big gains in fuel efficiency, but you have to be realistic kids.
Even almighty Toyota is coming out with just as many big gas guzzlers as hybrids. Profits off 200,000 Tundra's pays for a lot of development on those hybrids.
By the way, the original press info on the Ecoboost said that the 20% gains were relative to engine that would be replaced.
Reply
Kevin Nugent 6:45PM (4/04/2008)
I don't see these so called "fuel savings " unless you are comparing it to a gas guzzling v8
Reply
diesel 5:45AM (4/05/2008)
crazy a 2.ol ecoboost is were they should have started, it would give over 200bhp, how much power do yeah need in the usa.In fact a 1.6 twin turbo would not be far of 200 hp vw make a 1.4 that makes 170hp that would be an economical engine for a car of that size and would still be loads of power.
Reply
Chris 7:34AM (4/05/2008)
Another innovation for rich people.
Reply
John Andrzejewski 8:32PM (6/25/2008)
I would prefer the smaller Landrover diesel engine in the upcoming F-150 considering the price of diesel fuel.
Why does Ford persist on building Cuimings diesel wanabees?
It is time for Ford to wake up and stop compeeting with Chrysler huge truck designs and build a light, aerodynamic F-150 pickup with real improved milege.
That is the only way Ford will retain the number one lead in truck sales.
Until then, I will refrain from buying a Ford F-150.
Reply
John In Dallas 2:41AM (12/20/2008)
Cummings??????????OH...you mean "Cummins" what an idiot.
Sam 5:40PM (5/26/2009)
I love how they think its innovation. VW has been putting 4cyl turbos in their cars for years. Im glad ford is making the switch now though.
Reply