UPDATE: Ford's new Bobcat, ethanol injected, turbocharged V8
Back in the 1970s, a Bobcat at Ford was a Mercury-badged version of the infamous Pinto. Hopefully, the new usage of the name at Ford will turn out with better results. So far, it's looking very promising. Our buddy Mike Levine has been doing some digging in the document treasure trove at the U.S. Department of Energy and uncovered some materials on Ford's new Bobcat. It turns out Bobcat is the code name for the new ethanol boosted engine being developed in Dearborn. Ford recently presented some data on Bobcat to the DOE that has fallen into Mike's hands.
The Bobcat engine is a new 5.0-liter V8 with gasoline port injection and turbocharging. A second set of direct injectors is used to feed a small amount of ethanol directly to the cylinders. The ethanol is used primarily for charge cooling allowing the engine to run at higher boost and compression levels. It also allows the engine to run much leaner. Normally, running lean causes higher combustion temperatures, increasing production of NOx. However, the ethanol helps to alleviate the NOx by reducing combustion temperatures. According to the data presented by Ford, they have been able to increase the brake mean effective pressure of a prototype E85 DI V6 engine from the standard 17 BAR to about 27 BAR.
BMEP is a measure of specific output of an engine that is independent of displacement. That BMEP of 27 BAR in a 3.5-liter V6 translates to a torque output of 553 lb-ft. Compare this to 350 lb-ft from a standard 3.5-liter Ecoboost. The 5.0-liter Bobcat can produce over 500 hp and 750 lb-ft of torque. That's the kind of torque number typically associated with big diesel engines and handily beats the 650 lb-ft of the 6.4-liter diesel currently offered in the Super Duty pickups.
The beauty of ethanol boosting in this way is that it can potentially offer better-than-diesel performance and efficiency without the expensive particulate filter and urea injection after treatment systems. If the concept can be scaled down effectively to smaller displacement engines, it could be the next step beyond the Ecoboost engines that are coming over the next couple of years.
[Source: PickupTrucks.com]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Wibbler 12:17PM (6/08/2009)
But wouldn't you have to refill your ethanol every time you filled up your gas tank. I don't see how that is more cost efficient. Maybe I'm wrong.
Reply
Sam Abuelsamid 9:57PM (6/08/2009)
The amount of ethanol used is so small that the tank would only need to be filled about every 20,000 miles.
Jim 9:01AM (6/09/2009)
"The amount of ethanol used is so small that the tank would only need to be filled about every 20,000 miles. "
I hope the tank for the E85 is well sealed.
Isellbeachhomes 12:45PM (6/08/2009)
They do this with methanol injection in turbo cars all the time. It is VERY cheap and allows you to run the same boost as if you were running race gas (116 octane). So it isn't anything new...just adding E85.
Reply
Jim 11:04PM (6/09/2009)
"They do this with methanol injection in turbo cars all the time"
Who is this "they?" Have "they" certified their setups for a minimum of 150,000 mile lifetime? Or, (more likely) "they" threw something together and it didn't blow up on the dragstrip. Takes more than backyard "engineering" to make a salable product. If only more posters on AutoblogGreen would realize this.
Knuckles 1:38PM (6/08/2009)
About 40+ years ago Oldsmobile released the F-85 Jetfire, a small turbocharged V-8. Although it was a nicer performer, it was handicapped by the same issue that will haunt the Bobcat...dual fuel. As Wibbler noted, both fuels need to be attended to. The Jetfire used a water-alcohol mix to prevent detonation when under boost. Unfortunately, the owner who put gas in it and turned the key to go would fail to refill the small water-alcohol container. When the engine fails we end up with a warrantee problem.
Surely today's electronics wizards will protect the engine but the consumer will complain when performance sags due to his failure to refill the fuel container. Remember, we are dealing with people that need a light on the dash to tell them to check their tires and change the oil.
Reply
augustus 5:10PM (6/08/2009)
It really depends on how often the second fuel needs to be replenished. If it is once every 3k miles that isn't that bad. Ideally the car would give ample warning that you are low on ethanol.
Jim 11:06PM (6/09/2009)
"Although it was a nicer performer, it was handicapped by the same issue that will haunt the Bobcat...dual fuel. "
yeah, that's great and all, but the "Bobcat" is *not* handicapped by something the jetfire was- a fucking carburetor.
gorr 1:35PM (6/08/2009)
Remember the name, ford, this compagny is now working for goverment related regulations to keep polution as high as possible and fuel as costly as possible, that's how they make money. They invent a desease, then they sell the solution. In this case food-fuel... They will fight anything that is good and natural for natural flesh corpse, that's why chevron is studying genetic modifications with green algae fuel and foods and have put regulations to transform foods into fuel while keeping natural gas out of sight of the market. They are deeply depressed folks not feeling welcomed and accepted in a human flesh corpse and they now sell this depression worldwide in all kind of manners like they did in sept 2001 with their terrorist attack because they tought slayer rock band will heal the deep depression of the general citizens in the street.
Remember the names of the players that switched their faith from normal paying consumers to taxmoney and regulations terrorist group. Ford, gm, toyota, mercedes, volks, chrysler, nissan. All theses folks now work with taxmoney income to kill the planet and foods and humans and economy.
Reply
Owain Ozymandias Buck 1:39PM (6/08/2009)
Gorr's here? No one said ANYTHING about hydrogen.
guyledouche 1:52PM (6/08/2009)
Gorr, can you please stop licking your walls and start speaking english. I am surprised you even understand your own posts.
Also if you need help with spelling, try the Rosetta Stone. It should do wonders for you.
stevezilla 2:11PM (6/08/2009)
Gorr, don't make me come down there....
I run my car on distilled corpses and Slayer's 97-octane "Reign In Blood"
The earth has never been happier.
Brian 2:01PM (6/09/2009)
Your on CRACK... A Hippy like you should not even allow yourself to own a CPU, just think about how many units of CO2 were used to make your CPU. Go hug a tree!!!
Nick 2:00PM (6/08/2009)
Only small amounts of ethanol are needed--the alcohol tank would only need to be refilled during scheduled maintenance.
Reply
augustus 5:08PM (6/08/2009)
Sooo better than V8 diesel torque in a gas V6. Very good for heavy trucks. Yes the future still needs heavy trucks. Hopefully the added complexity does not result in diminished reliability.
Reply
henreh 7:20AM (6/09/2009)
I don't think dual fuel will be that much of a problem for a heavy duty truck where the user is usually has a higher tech level than the average consumer.
And if you have the secondary fuel run out in your dual fuel ecoboost four pot, you'll definitely notice when it switches to the regular gasoline map and you loose 50% of your torque.
Reply
Rob 11:24AM (6/09/2009)
I'm pretty sure you mean PSI instead of BAR. 17 BAR would be enormous.
Reply
ian 2:06PM (6/09/2009)
no, they mean BAR. pressures in a normal engine reach very high levels. 10:1 compression is about 25 BAR at top dead center in a gas engine.
RJ 2:14PM (6/09/2009)
RE: Rob,
It's BAR. This is not referring to the turbo boost, but, if I understand correctly, the pressure before combustion. Which is a factor of boost, compression ratio, and perhaps volumetric efficiency.
nw2571 6:18AM (6/13/2009)
They're talking BMEP not actual cylinder pressure. Peak cylinder pressure will be much higher. For those engineers, BMEP is the "area under the curve" of the P-v diagram.
If you don't understand that, Indicated MEP is the average (hence the word mean) pressure that when multiplied by the swept volume gives the same energy output as the engine. Pumping MEP is the same concept applied to the pumping work. Frictional MEP takes into account mechanical losses in the engine. BMEP = IMEP + FMEP + PMEP where FMEP and PMEP are always negative.