2008 Blue King Ranch 6.4l V8 4x4 Heated Seats Leather 6 Disc Keyless Cruise on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2014 Ford Fiesta 1.0L EcoBoost

I'll be honest; when Ford first unveiled its 3.5-liter EcoBoost V6, I was skeptical. Past attempts at building turbocharged American cars were almost universally awful, I reasoned, so why would Ford's latest effort be any different? This may seem foolish today, considering the success that the growing EcoBoost range has achieved - particularly the 2.0-liter and 1.6-liter mills. Yet I once again found myself questioning Ford.
It's the makeup of the 1.0-liter, turbocharged three-cylinder slotted into the compact engine bay of this Fiesta that has a way of breeding doubt. Three-cylinder engines remain an extreme rarity in the US. What's more, they earned a less-than-desirable reputation for applications in the 1980s and 1990s, and my trepidation about this latest three-pot as a result.
As I found out, though, history is a poor informant of modern technology. The thrust available in other cars with the EcoBoost badge on the back has not gone missing here; something the International Engine of the Year committee has lauded. That august body named the 1.0-liter Ecoboost the best engine of 2012 and 2013. After a week of driving, it didn't take long for my fear of threes to get turned into something like that line of thinking.

Ford investing $500M in engine plant for 2.7L EcoBoost production

Ohio is a hot area for Ford at the moment with the announcement just a few weeks ago that production of the next-generation F-650/F-750 medium-duty trucks would move from Mexico to the Ohio Assembly Plant in Avon Lake, Ohio. Now, Ford is investing $500 million to hire 300 workers at its Lima Engine Plant in Lima, Ohio, to add production of the twin-turbo 2.7-liter EcoBoost V6 for the 2015 F-150.
The latest investment will be used to add a new flexible engine assembly system and renovate 700,000 square feet of the plant for machining and assembly areas. The Lima factory already builds Ford's 3.5-liter and 3.7-liter Duratec V6 engines. The plant opened in 1957, and it's on track to build its 40 millionth engine later this year.
Ford claims that the 2.7-liter EcoBoost will offer V8 performance with better efficiency in the F-150. It comes standard with intelligent stop/start that doesn't activate when the truck is towing or in four-wheel drive, and it's made from a combination of compacted graphite iron and aluminum for low weight and high strength. The company says that V6 engines have already proven popular in the F-150 with 57 percent of trucks in 2014 being equipped with either the naturally aspirated 3.7-liter or turbocharged 3.5-liter EcoBoost engines.

EPA says fuel economy test for hybrids is accurate

The EPA says it stands behind its fuel economy test for hybrid vehicles following controversy about the testing process after Ford C-Max Hybrid customers and automotive journalists alike struggled to achieve 47 miles per gallon, the advertised mpg number, Automotive News reports. Ford responded to the issue almost two weeks ago by claiming that a 1970s-era EPA general label rule was responsible for the inaccurate mileage numbers, rerating the C-Max Hybrid's mpg numbers and offering customers rebates. Ford later said it didn't overstate the C-Max Hybrid's fuel economy and that it was surprised by the low numbers.
Ford technically didn't do anything wrong because it was following the general label rule, but agency regulator Christopher Grundler says the automaker was exploiting a loophole when it came up with the hybrid C-Max numbers, and that the testing process remains accurate. The general label rule allows vehicles that use the same engine and transmission and are in the same weight class to share fuel economy numbers, but it doesn't take into account other factors such as aerodynamic efficiency, which affects hybrids more drastically than non-hybrid vehicles. Ford originally used the Fusion Hybrid economy figures for the C-Max Hybrid and claimed the engineers didn't realize that its aerodynamic efficiency would affect fuel economy as much as it did.