California Air Resources Board kicks off new round of clean vehicle rebates with $15M
Smith Electric Vehicles expands US manufacturing with facility in South Bronx; New York state incentive program for commercial fleet EVs

New Ford Escape to offer two EcoBoost engines: 1.6L and 2.0L

1_02
The 1.6 liter four-cylinder EcoBoost engine. Click to enlarge.

The new Ford Escape will offer two different EcoBoost engines: a 2.0-liter four-cylinder and, for the first time in the US, a 1.6-liter four-cylinder.

Each new engine uses the core EcoBoost technologies of direct fuel injection and turbocharging and adds twin independent variable camshaft timing (Ti-VCT) (earlier post). With these technologies, the 2.0-liter EcoBoost is projected to produce more torque than the larger V6 engine in Toyota’s RAV4, and the 1.6-liter is projected to produce segment-leading fuel economy among compact SUVs and up to 5 mpg better than the outgoing Escape.

The 2.0-liter EcoBoost four-cylinder is projected to deliver 250 lb-ft (339 N·m) of torque and 237 hp (177 kW). The 1.6-liter EcoBoost four-cylinder is projected to deliver 177 lb-ft (240 N·m) of torque and 173 hp (129 kW).

Each new EcoBoost engine is mated to a specially calibrated six-speed SelectShift Automatic transmission, which is standard and allows drivers to manually control gear selection from a switch on the left-hand side of the shifter.

The gearbox features a new torque converter for improved driving feel, smooth shifts and improved fuel economy. Engineers also installed revised gear ratios for a balanced driving feel in all situations. The new ratios complement the revised torque converter.

Efforts to improve unwanted noise on the 2.0-liter EcoBoost were carried over to the 1.6-liter EcoBoost, which adds an electronically controlled bypass valve. This valve helps mitigate turbocharger tip-in and tip-out noises, resulting in a smoother sound out of the engine when the customer tips off the throttle. The valve smoothes out the sound by balancing the air pressure in the intake.

EcoBoost has become a popular choice among customers since the EcoBoost V6 was introduced in 2009 in the Ford Taurus SHO and Lincoln MKS. By 2013, more than 90% of Ford’s North American lineup will be available with EcoBoost technology. Ford holds more than 125 patents on its EcoBoost engine technology.

Lighter, more efficient 2.5-liter. The base engine for the all-new Ford Escape is an updated version of the 2.5-liter four-cylinder, which shares many components with the 2.0-liter EcoBoost engine to save weight, improve quality and increase fuel economy.

Highlighting the improvements is the new lower-tension global front-end accessory drive belt. With the belt at a lower tension, friction in the entire system is reduced. Less friction reduces fuel consumption.

That improvement, combined with engine control changes and other advancements, contributes up to a 2 mpg improvement in fuel economy as well as better low-end torque for enhanced performance feel.

Also improving fuel economy is the Active Grille Shutter System, which helps reduce air resistance and is on all models with the 1.6-liter EcoBoost engine and the 2.5-liter four-cylinder.

The Active Grille Shutter System will open grille slats when extra engine cooling air is required, such as low-speed stop-and-go driving. When cruising on the highway at steady speeds, the grille slats automatically close to improve aerodynamics and fuel efficiency.

Active Grille Shutters already are used on the Ford Focus, Ford Taurus and Ford Edge in North America and will be added progressively to more vehicles.

Global powertrains. In markets outside of North America, where the new SUV will wear a Kuga badge, a number of additional powertrains, including a new diesel engine, will be offered. More details will be provided when the new Kuga launches at the Geneva Motor Show in March 2012.

Recycled materials. The new Ford Escape contains more sustainable materials than its predecessor. Materials that are recycled, renewable and reduce impact on the environment include:

  • Carpeting made from either post-consumer or post-industrial materials. An example of a post-consumer material is plastic that’s been recycled, like from beverage bottles. The source for polyester carpeting is about one-third post-consumer and two-thirds post-industrial.

  • About 25 20-ounce plastic bottles total are in the carpeting.

  • Soy foam in the seats and head restraints. In addition to bio-foam content in the seat cushions and backs, new for Escape is head restraint foam that is 5% soy-based.

  • Powertrain undershields made from 100% recycled plastics.

  • More than 10 pounds of scrap cotton recycled from jeans, sweaters, T-shirts and other items otherwise sent to a landfill is used in sound-absorption material.

  • Climate control gaskets made from recycled tires.

  • Industry-first use of microcellular (MuCell) technology in the injection molding process of the instrument panel, reducing weight by 1 pound and contributing to improved fuel economy. This technology injects microscopic cells to reduce weight without sacrificing dimensional integrity.

  • Tailpipe trims are made from polished stainless steel instead of more common and less environmentally friendly chromium-plated trims.

The all-new Ford Escape meets the USCAR Vehicle Recycling Partnership goal that 85% of the vehicle is recyclable.

Comments

kelly

Great efforts.

HarveyD

Another good move by Ford.

3PeaceSweet

If you know a car is only going to use 4 cylinders you can make the front of the car suited to it.

Should it be possible to use valve control to enable the engine to run atkinson cycle at cruise. You would have less energy going the turbo, but valve timing could switch to otto when power was required

Peter_XX

@3PeaceSweet
Yes, but you need a more advanced variable valve timing that what they have at the moment. Another practical problem is that the (geometrical) compression ratio must be increased. This would reduce power and torque unless this could be compensated by higher boost pressure. For the moment, turbocharging is a limitation here, unless you want to add also a mechanical supercharger. However, I have noted an increased interest for bi-turbo systems for gasoline engines, so I think it is just a matter of time before we will see an engine that has this and – to some extent – also Atkinson cycle, or Miller system as we prefer to call it when the Atkinson cycle is combined with high level of supercharging.

joe.vanni

@Peter XX
The motor you say does already exists and has advanced variable valve timing coupled with turbocharging.

http://www.ukipme.com/engineoftheyear/winners_10/bestnew.html (2010 engine of the year)

“MultiAir employs an electrohydraulic system to independently control each cylinder’s inlet air charge. Depending on the driving situation, there are five main modes of inlet valve timing and lift, but in principle MultiAir enables infinitely variable control of the inlet valves”

It means is available the Miller cycle (which is better than Atkinson cycle).

They don’t say that (that’s marketing), but the engine's electronic control unit uses the Miller cycle in some driving conditions.
At this time the most powerful version is the 4 cylinder, 170 Hp and claims 47 mpg.

The the smallest version is 0,9 L, 2 cylinder, 85 HP, 70 mpg (Fiat 500), (2011 Engine of the year)

http://www.green.autoblog.com/2011/05/27/fiat-875-cc-twinair-named-international-engine-of-the-year/

Soon will come out stronger versions of this engine.

Peter_XX

@joe
I am familiar with the Fiat engine. However, one has to recognize the basic features of the Miller system. In this case, it means that you also must have a high (geometric) compression ratio. The Fiat engine does not. I do not care very much about what car manufacturers say in their marketing, I only look at facts. Maybe you could say that this engine has a certain percentage of Atkinson cycle at some load and speed points but I would not consider it as an engine that utilize the Miller system. It does not have the features I referred to and I am still waiting for this engine.

Reel$$

Dunno. With all the excitement in the alternative energy field, any kind of ICE looks clunky and boring.

joe.vanni

@ Peter XX

Excuse me, why you also must have a high (geometric) compression ratio?

Definition of Miller cycle:
http://www.howstuffworks.com/question132.htm

“A Miller-cycle engine is very similar to an Otto-cycle engine. The Miller-cycle uses pistons, valves, a spark plug, etc., just like an Otto-cycle engine does. There are two big differences:
• A Miller-cycle engine depends on a supercharger.
• A Miller-cycle engine leaves the intake valve open during part of the compression stroke, so that the engine is compressing against the pressure of the supercharger rather than the pressure of the cylinder walls. The effect is increased efficiency, at a level of about 15 percent.”

They don’t tell about high (geometric) compression ratio. See also Wikipedia, if you want.
I would not to make a religion war about the Miller cycle. The important thing is: the motor performs well, has a good mileage and low emission

joe.vanni

@ Reel$$

We hope that the engines will soon retire.

Depends on the price of alternative energies

However, next 10 years, with continuous improvements, (at least as hybrid) engines will play the game

Reel$$

Right joe. Just sayin' - after a century of ICE, it'll be a lot more fun to play with non-combustion alternatives.

Engineer-Poet

Feel free to take your activity to a more exciting blog, Reel.

Peter_XX

@Joe
The high compression ratio is for increasing efficiency. If you do not want high efficiency, you do not have to care about that. It would be kind of stupid if you did not increase the compression ratio. If you do not, you basically only reduce pumping losses. According to your definition, we would have many Miller system engines on the road. We do not.

If you take a naturally-aspirated engine as basis, you can keep the compression ratio at the same level as before and also increase power density. However, this engine will have a higher compression ratio than a turbocharged conventional engine. In an apple-to-apple comparison, an engine with Miller system should have higher compression ratio than a corresponding conventional engine.

I am getting sick and tired of having to explain all kind of engine basics at this site, so I will take a break now.

HarveyD

Good news...ALL ICE will be progressively phase out. People will talk about ways to improve e-motors and batteries in the very near future.

joe.vanni

@Peter xx

Too much high compression ratios in gas engines cause several problems.
For the naturally-aspirated, for turbo and Miller: engine knocking, bad combustion and soot, high temperature (NOx).

With Miller system coupled with turbo, I can adjust compression and mixture as I desire and when I desire, but it is not convenient to overcome some compression ratios values.

There are other ways for improve gasoline engines

I’m stopping here, I don't want that someone could get bored

ToppaTom

The end of the ICE's reign is neigh,
just as it has been for the last 15 years.

The comments to this entry are closed.