Focus Ecoboost 1.0L I-3

Status
Not open for further replies.
My 1996 Contour with the 2.0L Zetec with a throttle cable and a 5 speed manual tranny has held a higher rpm when stopping for a number of seconds since new till it returned to idle. I'm assuming it's emission related for a manual tranny 1996 vehicle to stop sudden throttle closing which increases emission.

Whimsey
 
That rev hang with modern manual transmissions is annoying as heck.

I have "modified" all my cars with this horrible trait so that don't have that trait. The small amount of extra emissions is tiny.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Miller88


I'm genuinely interested in this powertrain combo for many reasons. I HATE the MTX-75 transmission that is in current NA focuses; 1st gear is too tall (it should be 2nd gear

What are you getting for fuel economy out of it? Can you link the fuelly account?

It seems like 1st gear is pretty short - I like that. Are you able to take off in 1st gear without riding the clutch or giving it a lot of gas?

Other than having to shift a lot, it's not underpowered?


I'm still on my first tank, so there's no Fuelly data posted yet. The computer says 36 MPG even right now, but climbs higher every time I drive it. My driving is probably 60% city / 40% highway. I drive at the speed limit and accelerate light-moderately. I estimate my driving style/routine will give 35-40 MPG. But it's still way too early to determine that, so who knows.

In the last decade I've owned a 1996 BMW 318ti and a 2003 MINI Cooper, so everything I say is in comparison to those two. Acceleration-wise, It's definitely faster than the MINI. Probably similar or just slightly slower than the BMW. Two totally different engines and experience though. The BMW is peaky, buzzy (esp. >5,000 RPM) and loud. The 1.0 is quiet, smooth with a continuous pull through the revs. The Ford probably is faster in-gear with that torque. The BMW and MINI pulling in 5th gear on the freeway are dogs. Absolutely no torque that low. The Ford at least pulls gently.

As for pulling from a dead stop. I agree 1st is short. And I don't feel any excess revs or slippage is necessary vs the BMW or MINI. I thought so at first, but it's just been getting used to the clutch engagement point. I installed clutch pedal stops on both the BMW and MINI so their engagement points were much different than stock.
 
Originally Posted By: Miller88
I'll throw the scanner on to see. I can't imagine the compressor is *that* bad - otherwise the car wouldn't be able to get out of its own way and fuel economy would really suffer. Some of it is drag, but the instant throttle response - when pressing - is not a result of increased drag.


Since many smaller engined cars do the behavior even with the AC off it cannot simply be ascribed to AC operation...
 
Originally Posted By: badtlc


No, it isn't programming at all. It is the increased drag on the motor from the compressor being engaged. Without the extra mass of a larger engine, this drag is much more pronounced. When coasting in gear, the fuel pump is shut off so programming has no effect. The wheels are the ones doing the work to power the compressor during this period. More work from the wheels means faster slow downs.

The programming matters when the fuel pump is running as the programming increases idle fuel rates to maintain steady RPMs when the compressor engages.


Throttle blade positioning and/or IAC operations while coasting WILL matter even if fuel is cut off. The rate of coast will be radically different with throttle open versus closed to reduce NOX emissions in cars that do not cut the fuel aggressively.

Give it some thought...
 
Last edited:
I know the car has "deceleration" fuel cutoff. It ... just doesn't decelerate unless I press the brake pedal. The throttle does not close until the revs drop below a certain point - but it does cut the fuel easily.

Unfortunately, the bluetooth scanner is not quick enough at polling to see if it's programmed to have more throttle response or if it is the AC on doing it.
 
I'm almost at 1,000 miles on my Focus 1.0 and average fuel economy is at 40.1 MPG. Longest single leg was 29 miles, so nothing resembling a "road trip" yet. Just around town and 11 miles each way to work and back. Very little Stop and Go traffic or stoplight-to-stoplight driving. I'm sure it'll hit near 50 MPG on a long highway trip. So far, so good. Not missing my old BMW 318ti at all.

In 6th gear, 60 MPH is 2300 RPM and 70 MPH is 2550 RPM.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Miller88
I know the car has "deceleration" fuel cutoff. It ... just doesn't decelerate unless I press the brake pedal. The throttle does not close until the revs drop below a certain point - but it does cut the fuel easily.

Unfortunately, the bluetooth scanner is not quick enough at polling to see if it's programmed to have more throttle response or if it is the AC on doing it.


Exactly. It is difficult to evaluate without the help of the engineers who wrote the controlling software. Way back in the days of carburetors my Dad had a Corolla that simply went 35 mph until you hit the brakes. The second you did the car lurched as the throttle closed.

And in those days the AC went on with a lurch, too...
 
Originally Posted By: E365
In 6th gear, 60 MPH is 2300 RPM and 70 MPH is 2550 RPM.


This is interesting. My 15' ST has the same gearing. I would not have expected that. Wonderful gearbox. Light clutch, shifter clicks perfectly into each gear...reminds me of my old Audi A4. I've been averaging 30 on my work commute. 30 miles each way, mostly hwy/interstate. I am rather playful with the car though. Can't help it. I could probably do better if I tried for mpg.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: E365
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Originally Posted By: E365
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
No offense, OP, but the "lack of friction" you describe is throttle programming, NOT superior engine design. Your car, like many these days, holds the throttle open a bit whenever you are underway, even if the pedal is lifted.

But it sounds like a fantastic candidate for an aftermarket programmer. Most cars respond well to them and become much more fun to drive. Some even increase their fuel economy...


If you're talking to me... I trust the Ford engineers and the SAE over those who elude to me being an idiot.

http://articles.sae.org/10714/

Why wouldn't a 1 liter engine have less friction losses than a much bigger engine with more cylinders?


Ahem, the word you were looking for wasn't "elude". Perhaps it was "allude"?

But regardless of how your feelings got hurt, no one was arguing your assertion. Simply pointing out that your foot no longer controls that throttle, the computer does! And what you describe is a common issue on many modern cars. You did what anyone can do, missed the real reason entirely and got caught up in the hype.

Grow some skin, man...


My feelings aren't hurt - I really don't care. Simply pointing out how my observations and those of SAE engineers are exactly the same. My MINI Cooper with an electronic throttle certainly didn't do this to this extent. Not even close.







So your observations are the same as the SAE engineers eh.

Was that before or after you read the article.
This whole "less friction" thing is relative.

Let us know how much the first repair bill is and at what mileage. Screaming turbo coupled with high stressed engine equals short life.
But time will tell. I'm sure you're very happy about paying ford to beta test their new products. I suggest following warranty requirements to the letter.
 
Originally Posted By: Clevy


So your observations are the same as the SAE engineers eh.

Was that before or after you read the article.
This whole "less friction" thing is relative.

Let us know how much the first repair bill is and at what mileage. Screaming turbo coupled with high stressed engine equals short life.
But time will tell. I'm sure you're very happy about paying ford to beta test their new products. I suggest following warranty requirements to the letter.


What new product? This engine started production over 3 years ago.
 
I have been torn on Fords plans here. On the one hand, I like that fact that these engines are so small and light as its great for boosting gas mileage. But on the other, my conservative nature tells me there will be a lot of expensive repairs on turbos in the future and/or, a pretty limited life span of these motors. But who knows, time will tell I suppose.
 
Originally Posted By: philipp10
I have been torn on Fords plans here. On the one hand, I like that fact that these engines are so small and light as its great for boosting gas mileage. But on the other, my conservative nature tells me there will be a lot of expensive repairs on turbos in the future and/or, a pretty limited life span of these motors. But who knows, time will tell I suppose.


Can't really say, but in the past any highly boosted engine usually had a shorter fuse. I am not saying they can't be nursed out to high miles by a dedicated owner, but in any abusive situation they tend to degrade faster. Modern electronics can manage fuel delivery much more accurately and perhaps help protect the motor from damage.

My friends Focus ST will pull the boost around 20-30 seconds or so, I've never timed it but it is quite noticeable...
 
Originally Posted By: E365


What new product? This engine started production over 3 years ago.



I have been doing a lot of research on this engine. I can NOT find any failures for this engine. I want to not trust it (I have issues with timing belts and the oil pump belt scares me) but I just can't find any evidence for so.

Not only has it started production 3 years ago, but it is used in everything in Europe. Commercial vehicles and passenger vehicles.

It seems to be holding up extremely well, so far.


Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8

My friends Focus ST will pull the boost around 20-30 seconds or so, I've never timed it but it is quite noticeable...



The engine itself is built pretty well. Because it is so small, they can afford the weight penalty to make it "right".


Originally Posted By: E365
I'm almost at 1,000 miles on my Focus 1.0 and average fuel economy is at 40.1 MPG. Longest single leg was 29 miles, so nothing resembling a "road trip" yet. Just around town and 11 miles each way to work and back. Very little Stop and Go traffic or stoplight-to-stoplight driving. I'm sure it'll hit near 50 MPG on a long highway trip. So far, so good. Not missing my old BMW 318ti at all.

In 6th gear, 60 MPH is 2300 RPM and 70 MPH is 2550 RPM.


40 MPG is great! What octane of gas do you use? I can't wait to see what it gets on highway trips! It's either that good or you know how to drive a GTDI engine to get good mileage. One of the people one the Fiesta forums made some sort of vacuum switch to leave the wastegate open all the time, preventing boost. I think there was a slight fuel econ improvement.

I saw a 2015 1.0L "SE Ecoboost" package in race red the other day. Tried to wait it out and speak to the owner but that didn't happen.

I love the look of the 2015. I have a really, really bad feeling that I am going to make a poor financial decision and purchase one of these.

Originally Posted By: stranger706
Originally Posted By: E365
In 6th gear, 60 MPH is 2300 RPM and 70 MPH is 2550 RPM.


This is interesting. My 15' ST has the same gearing. I would not have expected that. Wonderful gearbox. Light clutch, shifter clicks perfectly into each gear...reminds me of my old Audi A4. I've been averaging 30 on my work commute. 30 miles each way, mostly hwy/interstate. I am rather playful with the car though. Can't help it. I could probably do better if I tried for mpg.


I believe the ST and the 1.0 use the same trasnmission? MMT6? It seems to be geared similar to my 2011 5 speed as well, except the 1.0L has a proper 1st gear with the 6 speed transmission.
 
Originally Posted By: DrDusty86
I think with a 0-60 run of 12.5 seconds, people would get slammed in the rear by Semis trying to enter the highway. I would have to cut the driver some slack if they could not get up to the speed of traffic using the on ramp. I will break the tires lose in my Escort, and shift it a 7k to make 70-75mph if I need to. For ANYTHING more than a Smart, getting on the highway slower than the speed of traffic is [censored] dangerous and the BOZOs that pull this [censored] should be ticketed/lose points.
Dusty


If that's the case a good portion of the population would be dead by now. Honestly, I almost never use even 1/2 of the power of my 4 banger cars to merge on the highway. Where is the heck are entrance ramps so short?
 
Originally Posted By: philipp10
If that's the case a good portion of the population would be dead by now. Honestly, I almost never use even 1/2 of the power of my 4 banger cars to merge on the highway. Where is the heck are entrance ramps so short?

In cities?

There are a couple entrance ramps near where I work (one of which I use on the way home every day) where I need to use wide open throttle to get up to 60 mph in time to merge.
 
I see your in New York. In Minnesota, yes in Mpls/ST. Paul, I don't believe there are any really short ramps left. They went thru years ago and re-built them all. Most are minimum 2-3 blocks long now.
 
The 2016 Focus 1.0 will be available with a 6-speed automatic (non-DCT) according to the order guide.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

S
My gen 1 3.5 Ecoboost; An inauspicious Start
2
Replies
28
Views
2K
benjy
C
Acceptable Amount of Tolerance for Clutch Fan
Replies
3
Views
1K
cutlassvillager
Hermann
3 Month review of 2021 Toyota Venze LE
2
Replies
34
Views
4K
Joe1
B
Bought a "Trash Can"
Replies
8
Views
1K
bunnspecial
john_pifer
First New Coffeemaker in 9 Years!
2 3 4
Replies
66
Views
4K
Cropduster172
Back
Top