What happened to ecoboost?

Nasher said:
Yea right up until you get to a corner :D

Those pickups are mostly quite crap, except for the engine lol
Click to expand...

What's a corner? ;)

"Technically" the engines are there so they can pull massive loads with ease, in reality the only stuff "hauled" by most of them are a set of bikes for the kids or cool box for a picnic. Does make them fun though, rather than the slightly lumbering rest of the world diesels.

The smaller ecoboost (2.7) does appear to have better fuel consumption than the bigger engines (like the 5.0 Coyote), but it's also down on power and torque. The larger ecoboost (3.6) provides similar power and more torque than the 5.0, but has a similar fuel economy.

From a fuel economy point of view they're all a bit crap, but the ecoboosts are quite popular because the torque curve is supposed to be a lot more usable, the turbos giving more grunt low down rather than at 5,000rpm with the NA Coyote (which will rarely get above about 2,000 RPM in normal day to day driving, in he pickup form).
 
People are told that high revs=bad fuel economy so turbo engines with that feeling of push at low rpm are becoming more popular. I wouldn't be surprised if there are thousands, if not millions of car owners who have never seen above 4,000 rpm.
 
MissChief said:
People are told that high revs=bad fuel economy so turbo engines with that feeling of push at low rpm are becoming more popular. I wouldn't be surprised if there are thousands, if not millions of car owners who have never seen above 4,000 rpm.
Click to expand...

With auto transmissions you don't really get a choice. The only way you're going to get a 5.0+ up to 4,000+ RPM is if you're mashing the throttle on a sliproad or lugging a significant amount of weight up a hill.

In a more normal smaller engined vehicle it's a lot easier, but again it will depend on the auto timing. You also have the additional noise and vibrations caused by the engine working harder. Having more usable torque down low is more beneficial for most people IMO. Not as "fun" to drive, but more usable when pulling off at a junction or overtaking someone at normal speeds.
 
Thing is, by moving all the power to the lower end of the revs your probably not getting better economy. The turbo will kick in earlier and that is when it starts using more fuel :D
 
Which is pretty much what we're seeing in this thread.

I guess that's the tradeoff car manufacturers are having to consider when designing and configuring their engines:/transmissions. Do you aim for more usable torque down low, or better fuel economy, or try for a bit of both. The vehicle it's going in will probably be a significant factor in which has more priority.

The negative with that being if you don't use the vehicle in the way it was intended the fuel economy/power sucks. :p
 
Yea I think people are forgetting how to use a fast revving NA engine with most being turbo now. Take it all the way to the red line, then change gear. 4k is almost tick over :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom