1967 Ford Mustang on 2040-cars

Auto blog

A cool boost to turbocharger performance

Since the advent of the forced-induction engine, we have been looking for ways to get every drop of performance we can. There are many approaches to getting additional power using better intercooling, water injection, or even adding nitrous oxide. One take on a short instant burst of power is being researched by Mahle and involves providing supercooled air to an engine, which allows it to burn a leaner fuel mixture and produce more power. The supercooling idea is not new and was examined by Ford in 1993 on the Mustang Mach III concept car, then brought up again in 2003 with the SVT F-150 Lightning concept. Ford called its system the SuperCooler; it was designed to work with any turbocharged or supercharged engine equipped with a water-to-air intercooler. The system on the Lightning concept used a small tank of antifreeze that was hooked up to the truck air conditioning compressor. The air conditioning compressor cooled the antifreeze down to about 30 degrees. The other side of the tank was hooked up to the air-to-water intercooler, which usually had a temperature over 100 degrees. Once the antifreeze was circulated from the tank into the intercooler, it would lower the intercooler temperature and provide for a cooler, denser air charge into the engine; the result was around 50 extra horsepower for a burst of about 30 seconds to a minute, depending on the size of the tank. The system for the Lightning was to be offered as a $750 option and would have been targeted towards drag racers and the like, as it could be used for a run down the drag strip and then re-cooled by the time the truck was back in line. The system was fairly non-intrusive – it only weighed about 25 pounds and did not require a new compressor or intercooler. But as with many concepts, it was ultimately scrapped. The technology was always stuck in the back of my mind, but with larger and more powerful engines being produced it could not find its place. With the advent of new fuel economy standards, we have seen small-displacement turbocharged engines pop up and they seem like the perfect candidate for this type of technology. Ford's EcoBoost 1.0-liter three-cylinder turbocharged engine, as used in the Fiesta and Focus, is one such candidate for this technology. It would add a negligent amount of weight but could provide a boost of 10 to 20 horsepower when needed, like merging onto the highway or catching up to traffic.

Weekly Recap: Ferrari, Ford and Porsche power up for Geneva

Monday was Groundhog Day. Tuesday, apparently, was Sports Car Day. The Ferrari 488 GTB, the Ford Focus RS and the Porsche Cayman GT4 all debuted within hours of each other ahead of their rollouts at the Geneva Motor Show. Three sporty machines, three vastly different approaches – and a lot of implications for enthusiasts. That's a day worth repeating. It also illustrates the opportunities automakers see in the performance market, which is expected to grow in the coming years. Ford estimates the segment has expanded 14 percent in Europe and surged 70 percent in North America since 2009. The Detroit Auto Show was evidence of this, and performance cars of every stripe debuted, including the Acura NSX, Ford GT, Alfa Romeo 4C Spider and several others. This isn't a fad. Performance cars aren't going away. The question is why? Stricter CAFE standards are looming in the United States, as are tighter emissions regulations in Europe. And no one expects gas prices to remain low in America. None of this matters for sports cars, and automakers are increasingly using them to elevate their images. That's why Dodge rolled out two 707-horsepower Hellcats last year. It's why Ford has decided to resurrect the GT for road and track. It's why in the depths of bankruptcy, General Motors continued work on the Chevrolet Corvette Stingray, not to mention the Z06. "Great brands are made one car at a time," Ford of Europe president Jim Farley said at the reveal of the Focus RS. Still, companies make those cars for different reasons. View 5 Photos Mainstream brands like Ford and Dodge want to build cars that get people talking, excite their bases and drive more potential customers into the showroom. They probably don't buy a Focus RS or a Hellcat, but suddenly the regular Focus hatch looks a bit hotter, and that V6 Charger seems to be just a touch more muscular. The halo of performance is alive and well in the eyes of automakers and their customers. "It's one of the most effective catalysts for ingenuity and innovation," said Joe Bakaj, vice president of product development for Ford of Europe. That also leads to a trickle-down effect. Some of the technologies inevitably make their way to other products. It's hard to think the new all-wheel-drive system in the Focus RS that distributes torque front to rear and side to side won't be used in other vehicles. It's different for Ferrari and Porsche.

Ford made three big mistakes in calculating MPG for 2013 C-Max Hybrid

It's been a rough time for the official fuel economy figures for the Ford C-Max Hybrid. When the car was released in 2012, Ford made a huge deal about how it would beat the Toyota Prius V, which was rated at 42 combined miles per gallon, 44 city and 40 highway. The Ford? 47 mpg across the board. How did Ford come to this place, where its Prius-beater turned into an also-ran? Well, after hearing customer complaints and issuing a software update in mid-2013, then discovering a real problem with the numbers last fall and then making a big announcement last week that the fuel economy ratings of six different 2013 and 2014 model year vehicles would need to be lowered, the C-Max Hybrid has ended up at 40 combined, 42 city and 37 highway. In other words, the Prius trumps it, as daily drivers of those two vehicles have known for a long time. The changes will not only affect the window sticker, but also the effect that the C-Max Hybrid (and the five other Ford vehicles that had their fuel economy figures lowered last week) have on Ford's compliance with greenhouse gas and CAFE rules for model year 2013 and 2014. How did Ford come to this place, where its Prius-beater turned into an also-ran? There are two technical answers to that question, which we've got below, as well as some context for how Ford's mistakes will play out in the bigger world of green vehicles. Let's start with Ford's second error, which is easy to do since we documented it in detail last year (the first, needing to do a software update, was also covered). The basic gist is that Ford used the general label rule (completely legally) to test the Fusion Hybrid and use those numbers to figure out how efficient the C-Max Hybrid is. That turned out to be a mistake, since the two vehicles are different enough that their numbers were not comparable, despite having the same engine, transmission and test weight, as the rules require. You can read more details here. Ford's Said Deep admitted that the TRLHP issue is completely separate from the general label error from last year. Now let's move on to last week's announcement. What's interesting is that the new recalculation of the MPG numbers – downward, of course – was caused by a completely separate issue, something called the Total Road Load Horsepower (TRLHP). Ford's Said Deep admitted to AutoblogGreen that the TRLHP issue had nothing to do with the general label error from last year.