***? 5w20 in the Ford Ecoboost Turbo!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ok I guess you can blame Ford, it was their choice not to bring that car here and I don't disagree that they are better cars. But if they are indeed more expensive they may not sell. If it would have to be priced higher than the current NA model it will be competing within a different bracket. Not everyone is willing to spend more weather the car is better or not.

I think we're in agreement on the second point. The TSX sells in Japan as an Accord but they had to widen and stretch the platform to sell here. However the TSX does well here as a "luxury" model. Why would that necessarily be different in Ford's case?

Yes the new Fusion looks like it may be a hit that Ford needs right now. I haven't driven the current Fusion but it is one I would consider if I was buying. And for the record I've been a GM fan for years, that was hard to admit!
blush.gif
 
Originally Posted By: cp3
...
Yes the new Fusion looks like it may be a hit that Ford needs right now. I haven't driven the current Fusion but it is one I would consider if I was buying. And for the record I've been a GM fan for years, that was hard to admit!
blush.gif



Like all cars foreign and domestic, but would prefer to buy a North America based car in the future...

I have to say that I think the new Chevy Malibu is also beautiful and it's a shame they're in the straights they're in...

About the Euro Focus, with the gas crunch, Ford would have made enough to better than break even. Granted, the old 2000-era Focus still sold/sells well because of its fuel economy, but I think the Third-gen focus would have been a real head turner here and would have boosted their overall image sooner along with the newly arriving Fiesta...

In any case, the 2011 Focus will be the same in both Euro and NA, and will be a substantial upgrade...
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: moosestang
Originally Posted By: Anies
The car does look good I think, to bad I don't buy Ford Cars or little SUV's. Their pickup trucks would be a maybe.


To bad you are narrow minded, shame. I check out all the manufacturers when car shopping.


I'm not narrow minded, I'm quite informed. I've Owned GM and Chrysler/Jeep which I haven't had problems with. Some Ford models on the other hand I have seen first hand give quite a few problems. Their quality has improved recently but the 90's were a very bad time for them. Ford Explorers and Cougar/Thunderbird's were mostly the ones I have dealt with and walked away weary and unimpressed. Most of their models were also very labor intensive to work on for moderate work, specifically late 80's Lincolns. Have to tear down the WHOLE dash to replace the heater core, then put it all back together.

Old school classic Ford and Chevy is what I liked, 60's-70's muscle cars, 60's Camaro's etc are what I would like to have and drive. Those are fine machines and I love domestic vehicles, don't get me wrong. I don't hate them as whole, who can, they helped manufacture Wiley's for crying out loud!

Everyone has their opinion, I just stated mine, and I think their Trucks(mid-upper range) are probably the best on the market. I don't trust their craftsmanship on cars and lower tier trucks/suv's. Their vans are probably one of the most solid out of the big 3. I'm basing this on my experiences with the vehicles, and various dealers in Northern Jersey. Service is a very important thing for me, and most if not all dealers here failed in turn around time for minor work, communication, customer service. A dealer lost a car, A CAR after it was dropped off for an oil change...suffice to say, early next morning I was given a call that they found it.

Granted they introduce some very unique concepts, and well others aren't so well thought out.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Nucleon
The main dangers of the car would be the radiation, nuclear waste and a possibility of a small nuclear meltdown.

As for the blue comment, I'm not here to debate politics, there are plenty of places for that. I'm here for oil discussions, didn't want to rub people who are Ford Fanatics the wrong way, just my past experiences and opinions. I'm sure there are people who dislike Taco's(Yota's), GM etc. My Impala to this day is an electrical nightmare, mechanically its a solid machine, but electrical is horrible for me. My 94' Wrangler is a beast, still cranks on the first turn with over 120k+ miles on it. It's all opinion, so don't hate me for it, without opinion we wouldn't be able to have discussions, especially about oil!
 
Last edited:
All I can say to you Anies is that my late 90's fords have been the best vehicles I have ever owned. Not sure where the opinion that they were all junk is coming from. I owned two of the 97 and Up F150's, and they were (and one still is) hands down the most reliable vehicle I have ever owned, with by far the lowest cost is replacement parts. My '97 Explorer, which you disdain for some reason has served me well, and even been through a car-deer collision early in its life, and is still nearly as reliable as the pickups were.

My GM, Dodge, and Jeep experiences were much, much different. I love my Jeep Cherokee dearly, but I spend two or three times as much time under the hood and replacing odds and ends. It is the nature of the beast.

I'm sorry that you experiences with Fords were apparently so traumatic. More recent statistics bear out that the quality is there and they are mere foot steps behind the supposedly untouchable foreign competition. The differences are becoming so minor, they are nearly indistinguishable...
 
Originally Posted By: MNgopher
All I can say to you Anies is that my late 90's fords have been the best vehicles I have ever owned. Not sure where the opinion that they were all junk is coming from. I owned two of the 97 and Up F150's, and they were (and one still is) hands down the most reliable vehicle I have ever owned, with by far the lowest cost is replacement parts. My '97 Explorer, which you disdain for some reason has served me well, and even been through a car-deer collision early in its life, and is still nearly as reliable as the pickups were.

My GM, Dodge, and Jeep experiences were much, much different. I love my Jeep Cherokee dearly, but I spend two or three times as much time under the hood and replacing odds and ends. It is the nature of the beast.

I'm sorry that you experiences with Fords were apparently so traumatic. More recent statistics bear out that the quality is there and they are mere foot steps behind the supposedly untouchable foreign competition. The differences are becoming so minor, they are nearly indistinguishable...


I agree, my comment(and I apologize to you all for it) wasn't meant to be a catalyst for argument and debate, I should have thought it out a bit more. But everyone has their opinions on everything, my dealings have been very sour and that had affected my opinion on them. The best way I can put it is this.

I myself am not loyal or partial to a "brand". I could say I had the lemon of all Impala's and out there 99% of people who own Impala's don't have a problem, I won't put them down that they own it, good for them that they have a really reliable car. This is just an example. I, like everyone else loves having things that work and last, sometimes its hit or miss, i had a few misses unfortunately. There isn't "one" bullet proof manufacturer or car, there are many of them all across the board, but its the cost, reliability and luck of the draw that gives us the ability to make a decision. Two people can buy the same car, and have two completely different experiences.

F150's are practically bullet proof in all year ranges. Most of my mechanic buddies are either Ford or GM fanatics, and putting them together brings me hours of enjoyment as they slander one another but in the end they hop into their respective vehicles and go home without any ill will and the funny thing is, they both work for those respective manufacturers at the dealerships. I "currently" drive a 2004 Nissan Xterra which I traded a brand new 08 Scion TC for. New for a used, why? because the Toyota is so refined it was boring, and this is coming from someone who wanted the Toyota rock solid reliability, but I couldn't tinker with it unless I turned it into something I despised..(a bodily sound that comes from ones rear-end..yes it gets censored).

The Xterra I bought was low mileage, was known to be reliable(knock on wood) and needed some work, wrenching on the truck has been a lot of fun and probably the only vehicle I have had an easy job with, but it isn't that way for everyone. I think i'm car-tarded. Either way its my last truck for a long time since I plan on taking her to the grave with me barring any horrible sequence of events.

I'm glad your experiences are better than mine, and I hope your vehicles last you for many more years to come, a good and solid vehicle is something to cherish and take care of, after all I think its in our blood if we are on this forum since oil is the lifeblood of any vehicle.
 
Last edited:
"It uses that same grade of 5W20 engine oil specified by Ford for gasoline engines, and oil changes are scheduled at the same 7,500-mile intervals".


NEW ECOBOOST V-6 ENDURES ENGINE ‘BOOT CAMP’

* Strict Ford Motor Company engine “boot camp” testing regimen ensures quality and durability as the 3.5-liter EcoBoost™ V-6 engine is introduced on the 2010 Lincoln MKS; Ford Flex, Taurus SHO and Lincoln MKT also will have EcoBoost availability this year
* EcoBoost is one of Ford’s key initiatives to deliver significant fuel economy advancements of up to 20 percent without sacrificing the performance feel customers want
* The new 3.5-liter engine is the first in a wave of EcoBoost engines coming as part of Ford’s strategy to bring affordable fuel efficiency improvements to millions. By 2013, more than 90 percent of Ford’s North American lineup will be available with EcoBoost technology

Ford Eco Boost Forum - The arrival of the 3.5-liter EcoBoost V-6 engine is eagerly anticipated by customers who want power without sacrificing fuel economy. Debuting in the 2010 Lincoln MKS this summer, the twin-turbocharged, direct-injection 3.5-liter EcoBoost V-6 engine delivers the horsepower of a normally aspirated V-8 with the fuel efficiency of a normally aspirated V-6.

To ensure the 3.5-liter EcoBoost V-6 engine delivers quality performance, a team of engineers subjected it to an extensive battery of tests as part of the company’s engine “boot camp.”

“EcoBoost was engineered with a relentless, disciplined focus on quality that required a zero-defect mindset from engineers and our supplier partners,” said Derrick Kuzak, group vice president of Global Product Development. “The finished product will represent the best combination of production-ready engine technologies of today, poised and ready to deliver the performance, fuel efficiency and value that customers expect.”

The extensive testing to prove out the 3.5-liter EcoBoost V-6 engine was accomplished through three avenues – using computer aided engineering models (CAE), in the lab with dynamometers and on roads in the real world. Between testing on the dyno and in the field, EcoBoost engines have racked up the equivalent of more than 1 million miles of customer driving.

EcoBoost System and Component Testing
The rigid testing includes 20 individual dynamometer-level tests designed to push the engine to its limits. The testing protocol verifies the reliability of the complete engine system under maximum engine speeds and loads, coolant and oil temperature and customer driving patterns.

The Road Cycle Durability test, for example, is designed to replicate real-world customer driving and vehicle maintenance patterns. For this test, engines with EcoBoost technology were subjected to 1,000 cold starts, followed by sustained operation at peak torque and peak power. During the course of the test, engine coolant temperatures ranged from 12 degrees Celsius (about 53 degrees Fahrenheit) to 95 degrees Celsius (203 degrees Fahrenheit).

In total, this single test required 1,000 hours of extreme engine operation, representing more than 60,000 miles of customer driving.

“This was a critical test for us, and the EcoBoost fleet passed with flying colors,” said Brett Hinds, Ford’s Advanced Engine Design and Development manager said. “We’re confident that EcoBoost is ready to provide consistent performance in varied conditions.”

Individual components undergo rigorous proving as well. EcoBoost’s twin turbochargers, for example, are designed to run at a very high temperature – up to 950 degrees Celsius (1,740 degrees Fahrenheit). Ford engineers proved out the turbochargers by running them at 950 degrees Celsius for 10 minutes and then “shocking” the turbos by running them at room temperature for 10 minutes. The tests were repeated at maximum boost continuously for hundreds of hours, under far more severe conditions than customers are expected to dish out.

Designed for a life cycle of 150,000 miles or 10 years, EcoBoost’s turbochargers feature water-cooled bearing jackets. This architecture is designed to prevent oil “coking” that could occur in previous-generation turbochargers. The new design means that EcoBoost drivers don’t need to observe special operating precautions, such as idling the engine before switching it off.

EcoBoost also endured Ford’s standard engine durability test signoff running at maximum revs and turbo boost for the equivalent of 15 straight days or 360 hours.

As the first Ford EcoBoost engine makes its production debut, it has earned its stripes in Ford’s engine boot camp. It uses that same grade of 5W20 engine oil specified by Ford for gasoline engines, and oil changes are scheduled at the same 7,500-mile intervals.

The EcoBoost system is part of Ford’s commitment to deliver the best fuel economy in each new vehicle. The new 3.5-liter engine is the first in a wave of EcoBoost engines coming as part of Ford’s strategy to bring affordable fuel efficiency improvements to millions. By 2013, more than 90 percent of Ford’s North American lineup will be available with EcoBoost technology.

COLLABORATION WITH PARTNERS KEY TO ECOBOOST’S INDUSTRY-LEADING FUEL-CHARGING SYSTEM, OUTPUT

* Holistic, systems approach used to fine-tune each subsystem of Ford Motor Company’s new 3.5-liter EcoBoost™ V-6 engine for optimized function and performance. The engine debuts in the 2010 Lincoln MKS luxury sedan this summer and also will be available this year on the Ford Flex, Taurus SHO and Lincoln MKT
* New fuel rail developed to handle demands of the new 3.5-liter EcoBoost V-6 engine, which delivers fuel through two rails that are pressurized up to 2,150 PSI
* The 3.5-liter EcoBoost V-6 engine – the first V-6 direct-injection twin-turbocharged engine produced in North America – is one of Ford’s key initiatives to deliver fuel economy advancements of up to 20 percent without sacrificing the performance feel customers want

Ford EcoBoost Forum - The new twin-turbocharged 3.5-liter EcoBoost™ V-6 engine – which debuts in the 2010 Lincoln MKS this summer – is a complex, carefully balanced machine. But developing a new engine technology of this magnitude required unprecedented collaboration with supplier partners.

The result is an engine that delivers V-8 power with V-6 fuel economy, by optimizing the additional power gained from turbochargers and combining it with the efficiency of direct fuel injection. To deliver this performance, each component required special attention to help maximize the potential of combining these existing technologies in a new approach.

That meant Ford needed to forge new bonds with its suppliers as its engineers developed the EcoBoost system. Just as the success of the engine is tied to the quality of its various components, so too is Ford’s ability to create groundbreaking solutions tied to its supply partners.

Fuel-Charging System Engineering Collaboration
The twin-turbocharged 3.5-liter EcoBoost V-6 engine’s enhanced fuel-charging system, and the fuel pipe that feeds them, are good examples of the collaboration between Ford and its suppliers – in this case Bosch. The fuel pressures in the EcoBoost’s direct-injection system can reach up to 2,150 PSI, more than 35 times the norm seen in a conventional port-fuel-injected V-6, and required specific engineering to meet the required robustness as well as improved function.

Most fuel systems also are broken into subsystems such as fuel pump, fuel lines, fuel rails and injectors. But, there are significant common factors that affect the entire system performance – such as fuel flow, thermal distribution, fuel distribution, NVH and hydraulic pulsations. Those input factors require system tuning and design techniques to improve the whole system performance, which is achieved by combining the technical expertise and resources offered by the supplier and OEM.

“Our own Ford Vehicle Benchmarking Center showed that many suppliers applied a common practice design approach of ‘one size fits all’ and with little consideration as to how the subsystems could be fine-tuned for optimized function and performance,” said Joseph Basmaji, direct injection fuel system technical specialist.

For example, hydraulic pulsations – or hammering – is a common issue in all direct-injection fuel systems and can cause a range of issues, from poor fuel distribution to component durability. Knowing how to address these pulsations in each of the subsystems is critical to being able to effectively reduce the pulsations of the entire system to an acceptable level and achieve optimized performance.

The Ford and Bosch teams worked for months to develop hydraulic models and prototypes to provide the data leading to optimized orifice sizing, placement and spacing in order to tune in the hydraulic frequencies in each of the subsystems. “As a result, hydraulic pulsations to the entire system could be reduced, providing better fuel distribution for improved component durability, function, performance and reduced emissions,” Basmaji said.

Another new approach used on the EcoBoost engine is the bolting pattern for the high-pressure fuel rails. Ford’s collaboration with Bosch led to a fastening design concept that incorporates a criss-cross pattern across the rail, as opposed to brackets on one side of the rail only. This pattern reduces the moment arm on the rail as well as some of the high stresses that can result because of the tendency for the rail to lift under the 2,150 PSI hydraulic pressure of the fuel.

“Close collaboration with our suppliers and sub-suppliers also helped us in the design and development of a fully automated fuel-charging assembly and rundown station at Cleveland Engine Plant. It’s the first of its kind and possibly a benchmark for the industry,” Basmaji said.

Y-Pipe Fuel Delivery System
Ford and Bosch also developed a new Y-pipe fuel delivery system, rather than a conventional multi-pipe system, to feed the fuel rails. The Y-pipe method provided several advantages in a direct injection system, including reduced pulsations, hydraulic frequency separation, improved fuel distribution and assembly improvements. The Y-pipe also fills both rail halves simultaneously, as opposed to a multi-pipe system, where one rail must fill completely before filling the other rail. This solution reduces green start times at the vehicle plant as well as vehicle start time in the field.

“Development of the Y-pipe was a first for us and a first for Bosch,” Basmaji said. The Y-pipe also provides better fuel thermal distribution, minimizing fuel distribution issues from fluid density changes. “The result is a more-precise delivery of the fuel mass required for a more-efficient fuel burn in the combustion chamber and better fuel economy,” Basmaji said. “The fuel distribution is improved bank to bank as well as injector to injector. That’s very critical and one of the major reasons our fuel-charging system runs as well as it does.”

Developing new methods of engineering and strong relationships with partners are key to Ford being able to develop world-class technologies and maintaining a leadership position with systems such as EcoBoost.

“We don’t just take technologies at face value; instead, we work with our partners to drive better technologies,” Basmaji said. “We know we have to be better than the competition and that’s what we’re out to do.”

Twin Turbochargers a New Approach for Gasoline Engines
The EcoBoost system uses two Honeywell GT15 turbochargers – one on each bank working in tandem – to harness exhaust gas to pump V-8 power out of the smaller-displacement V-6 engine. This technology – in conjunction with direct fuel injection – allows EcoBoost to punch above its size in terms of power and responsiveness. The 3.5-liter EcoBoost V-6 is the first gasoline direct-injection twin-turbocharged engine produced in North America.

Close collaboration between Ford and Honeywell created a system that met Ford’s rigorous durability and safety criteria with such refinement that the driver never notices the turbocharger operation. Sophisticated electronic controls balance boost and torque levels to give the driver the feeling of continuous torque delivery without turbo “whines” and “whooshes” that characterized some previous-generation turbocharger engines.

“One of the principles behind EcoBoost is that it isn’t intrusive,” said Keith Plagens, Turbo System Engineer. “EcoBoost delivers added power seamlessly. Using Honeywell’s GT15 turbochargers gave us the performance feel and low-end response our customers demand.”

The turbocharger system features a pressure-controlled waste gate with an internal valve set at the Honeywell factory to within 3/10ths of a PSI. “That means our side-to-side balance is well controlled and, again, gives the customer seamless operation,” Plagens said.

Exhaust gas flowing through the turbocharger spins a turbine wheel at very high speed – approximately 170,000 rpm – which drives a compressor turbine on the clean-air side of the turbo. This fan effect densely packs intake air into the engine – compressed air up to 12 PSI that results in increased performance. With its twin turbochargers, the EcoBoost V-6 swallows about 25 percent more air than its normally aspirated cousin, the 3.5-liter Duratec V-6.

The EcoBoost approach eliminates several customer worries from previous turbocharger applications. Designed for long-life reliability, EcoBoost’s turbochargers feature water-cooled bearing jackets. This architecture is designed to prevent oil “coking” that could occur in previous-generation turbochargers. The new design means that EcoBoost drivers don’t need to observe special operating precautions, such as idling the engine before switching it off. The turbochargers are designed for a life cycle of at least 150,000 miles or 10 years.

About EcoBoost
The 3.5-liter EcoBoost V-6 engine – the first V-6 direct-injection twin-turbocharged engine produced in North America – is one of Ford’s key initiatives to deliver significant fuel economy advancements without sacrificing the performance feel customers want. By 2013, more than 90 percent of Ford’s North American lineup will be available with EcoBoost technology – part of the company’s strategy to bring affordable fuel efficiency improvements to millions.
 
if it were my car i'd drain that Xw20 after 1k miles and put in some Xw30.
 
These are pretty small turbos, they are designed for things like 1.4 litre diesels.

I think Ford designed them for a quick spool more than anything to boost low end power, and between the water-cooled turbo bearings, relatively low boost levels, and the direct injection to prevent detonation, I don't think they are too out of whack in their reccomendation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top