Ford's 3 cylinder 1.0 liter ecoboost Fiesta off to good start

[Kal-El]

http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20140508/AUTO0102/305080129/Ford-s-3-cylinder-EcoBoost-engine-off-fast-start

Looks like a 3 cylinder comeback is coming to the US, as it should. If 4 cylinders power most mid-size sedans, then 3 cylinders is obviously sufficient for sub-compacts.

This Ford powerplant is turbo charged and has plenty of kick. It is rated 32 city 45 highway.

:thumbsup:

http://cmsimg.detnews.com/apps/pbcsi.dll/bilde?Site=C3&Date=20140508&Category=AUTO0102&ArtNo=305080129&Ref=AR&MaxW=640&Border=0&Ford-s-3-cylinder-EcoBoost-engine-off-fast-start

[nookandcrannycar]

http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20140508/AUTO0102/305080129/Ford-s-3-cylinder-EcoBoost-engine-off-fast-start

Looks like a 3 cylinder comeback is coming to the US, as it should. If 4 cylinders power most mid-size sedans, then 3 cylinders is obviously sufficient for sub-compacts.

This Ford powerplant is turbo charged and has plenty of kick. It is rated 32 city 45 highway.

:thumbsup:

http://cmsimg.detnews.com/apps/pbcsi.dll/bilde?Site=C3&Date=20140508&Category=AUTO0102&ArtNo=305080129&Ref=AR&MaxW=640&Border=0&Ford-s-3-cylinder-EcoBoost-engine-off-fast-start

This may have been touched upon in another thread, but any idea how this engine mated to the turbo has faired (reliability wise) in other markets?.......... (Have they ever been mated in another market ? :iono:)

[bronsin]

Might consider it without the turbo and if it was well under $15,000. :thumbup:

Whats it go for...$20,000? :iono:

Maybe Toyota will counter with a 2 cylinder? :biggrin:

[marauder]

You can buy an old V8 RWD and $15,000 of gas for that... doesn't make sense.

[Thirty-Nine]

You can buy an old V8 RWD and $15,000 of gas for that... doesn't make sense.

With that mentality, you can buy any car and have gas left over.

I haven't driven the 1.0, but look forward to doing so. Everyone that I know that has driven it says it's great.

[marauder]

Sorry, I'm just on a bit of a rant lately with people justifying their 7 year $250/month vehicle payments because they're saving at the pump. I know this does not apply to everyone, it's just a soap box I stand on from time to time. If you can afford this car with cash on hand and you are buying it because you love subcompacts then it's actually not a bad looking ride. If someone is spending 20k of money they don't have to "save on gas" they are an idiot. Plain and simple. That's my point.

My apologies though, I wasn't trying to distract the point of topic. I was simply agreeing with bronsin's observation. The mentality is simple when you look at the debt problem in the USA. Right now these gas savers are selling like crazy and the prices are going through the roof. People will lose their butts on a gas guzzler trade in just to get better gas mileage, but none would be caught dead driving a 10+ year old gas getter and putting their money in the bank.

Back on topic, we had a Chevy Sprint Turbo with the 1.0 Turbo/Intercooled engine. It was actually a lot of pep and I think averaged high 40's without effort, low 50's if you kept it around 55-60. It was a lot of fun. Maybe when these cars used hit my price range I'll be ready to replace my Yaris. I just can't get past the hackjob aston martin grill Ford is using on everything. The way they scale it on these cars it looks like a catfish mouth.

[bronsin]

Hmm the 1.0 liter is a $3000 option....

[Thirty-Nine]

Sorry, I'm just on a bit of a rant lately with people justifying their 7 year $250/month vehicle payments because they're saving at the pump. I know this does not apply to everyone, it's just a soap box I stand on from time to time. If you can afford this car with cash on hand and you are buying it because you love subcompacts then it's actually not a bad looking ride. If someone is spending 20k of money they don't have to "save on gas" they are an idiot. Plain and simple. That's my point.

My apologies though, I wasn't trying to distract the point of topic. I was simply agreeing with bronsin's observation. The mentality is simple when you look at the debt problem in the USA. Right now these gas savers are selling like crazy and the prices are going through the roof. People will lose their butts on a gas guzzler trade in just to get better gas mileage, but none would be caught dead driving a 10+ year old gas getter and putting their money in the bank.

Back on topic, we had a Chevy Sprint Turbo with the 1.0 Turbo/Intercooled engine. It was actually a lot of pep and I think averaged high 40's without effort, low 50's if you kept it around 55-60. It was a lot of fun. Maybe when these cars used hit my price range I'll be ready to replace my Yaris. I just can't get past the hackjob aston martin grill Ford is using on everything. The way they scale it on these cars it looks like a catfish mouth.

And to each their own. I understand what you're saying, however. At some point, people need to buy new cars, and many will do so with the intent to save gas, and I get that. Yes, there are some people out there that are spending a ton of cash they don't have to save fuel. And from a financial standpoint, often it doesn't make sense (at least to me).

I've always wanted to drive a Sprint Turbo, and they come up for sale on craigslist from time to time (as well as TeamSwift.net). Love those cars!

I also agree with the Fiesta grille comment. Like I said in my review of the '14: Not everything looks good with an Aston Martin Grille.

[Golddeenoh]

it works better in this car:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tmZMwk14r4c

[kimona]

I think the grille-work looks very good. Actually, I like the look of all the newer Fords far more than any of the current Toyotas!

[Kal-El]

I hadn't even seen the price that Ford is charging for the 1.0 liter. I can't believe this is the upgrade to the 1.6 liter. I understand overall performance may be better but it's still odd that a much smaller engine would be an upgrade. Especially when reliability of a turbo 1.0 may be questionable.

I agree, paying $3,000 more to save some gas is hardly a winning proposition. It will take a LOT of miles to make that back.

[nookandcrannycar]

At some point, people need to buy new cars, and many will do so with the intent to save gas, and I get that. Yes, there are some people out there that are spending a ton of cash they don't have to save fuel. And from a financial standpoint, often it doesn't make sense (at least to me).

Also, it makes more sense for people who know how to do all of there own work to buy older cars that have experienced most of their depreciation. This can result in a very low overall cost. For those of us without significant chunks of that knowledge, it often makes sense to buy a new car that we think is going to be very reliable and drive it 'until the wheels fall off' (so to speak). I've never made payments on a car, so i've never factored that into the equation.

[nookandcrannycar]

If you can afford this car with cash on hand and you are buying it because you love subcompacts then it's actually not a bad looking ride.

I fall into this category, but I don't think I'd buy one. It might be better looking than a Yaris, but I don't think it provides as much value for the money when compared to a Yaris.

If someone is spending 20k of money they don't have to "save on gas" they are an idiot. Plain and simple. That's my point.

If you don't know how to do all of your own repairs (and don't have the time...or another vehicle to drive while you do the repair at your leisure) it would likely make sense (even if you had to make payments) to buy a new subcompact rather than an old/older V8 that has experienced most of its depreciation. I agree, spending 20k if you have to make payments often doesn't make sense, but buying a bare bones Yaris or Spark (or the outgoing model year (discounted) re another subcompact) and making payments could make sense.

The way they scale it on these cars it looks like a catfish mouth.

:bellyroll:. I might not have found this funny prior to moving to the South :biggrin:.

[marauder]

Works better with visual aids to assist. :bellyroll:

[jcboy]

Works better with visual aids to assist. :bellyroll:

:bellyroll: great editing skills! :thumbsup:

to be honest, i partly agree with Kimona as the grille actually made Ford's newer cars look better than they used to. i just hate it that they copied it from Aston Martin and looks like the ugly version of AM's front end. :thumbdown:

[marauder]

Yeah, I can't take credit for that image... but if you google "catfish car grille" you only see new fords for the most part, lol.

Ford I believe owned Aston Martin when they designed that grille for them so it is technically their design. I just think they could've done something fresh rather than recycle the old design. Besides, why buy the fusion when you can buy a <10k mile aston martin equivalent for about the same cost, lol.

(*** Insert logical car enthusiast thought disclaimer here.)

[Kal-El]

The grill was executed very well on the Fusion but not so much on any other Ford. The overall consensus among public opinion is that the Fusion is the best looking mid-size sedan.

[jcboy]

Yeah, I can't take credit for that image... but if you google "catfish car grille" you only see new fords for the most part, lol.

Ford I believe owned Aston Martin when they designed that grille for them so it is technically their design. I just think they could've done something fresh rather than recycle the old design. Besides, why buy the fusion when you can buy a <10k mile aston martin equivalent for about the same cost, lol.

(*** Insert logical car enthusiast thought disclaimer here.)

makes sense to me. but for one you get a brand new vehicle. for another those big engines definitely are more expensive to maintain insurance-payment-wise. lastly, a fusion is a family car.

yeah i believe they do own that design. well good point, if you come to think of it, they do have other options for signature design, which they can use as trademark such as this:

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2013/03/shelby-raptor-ny.jpg

[kimona]

Ford has had large grilles for years!

http://mustangattitude.com/cgi-bin/statsexplorer.cgi?year=all&f1=grille

[nookandcrannycar]

The way they scale it on these cars it looks like a catfish mouth.

Yesterday I was driving on a street where all of the houses on one side of the street are on Lake Conroe and each house has its own dock. One of the houses on that side of the street has a (production, not homemade) Catfish mailbox (so well done, it almost looked real). I chuckled, and thought of this thread. Apparently there are hundreds of thousands of Catfish in Lake Conroe. Perhaps they are what the owner looks for when he takes his boat out to fish, or fishes from his dock.

[Synyster]

Hmm the 1.0 liter is a $3000 option....

Seriously? EcoBoost has always been a $995 option on F-150 and Fusion ... I wonder why it costs so much more on Fiesta. They probably added more standard equipment.

[bronsin]

Seriously? EcoBoost has always been a $995 option on F-150 and Fusion ... I wonder why it costs so much more on Fiesta. They probably added more standard equipment.



Yes to get things like ecoboost or a diesel option say, you often have to get one or more "packages" with other things that raise the price.

In 1980 I wanted a diesel VW Rabbit in the worst way. A gas Rabbit was like $5500 and a diesel almost $8000. The diesel option itself was like $750 but you had to get three other packages to get the diesel option.

I wound up with a 1980 Subaru Standard Hatchback for $4600, bottom line. I doubt the VW diesel option would ever have paid for itself.

[Synyster]

I used to own a 2002 Golf 1.9 TDI diesel in Europe, which was also converted to run on bio-diesel. I had two gas tanks, so I could choose which fuel to use.
But anyways, I was averaging close to 45 mpg city. It had a lot of mechanical issues before 200,000 km, but when it came to fuel economy it couldn't be beaten - I would usually get close to 1,200 km in city driving.

[bronsin]

I used to own a 2002 Golf 1.9 TDI diesel in Europe, which was also converted to run on bio-diesel. I had two gas tanks, so I could choose which fuel to use.
But anyways, I was averaging close to 45 mpg city. It had a lot of mechanical issues before 200,000 km, but when it came to fuel economy it couldn't be beaten - I would usually get close to 1,200 km in city driving.

Biodiesel sweet! Nothing like fuel for (nearly) free.:headbang:

But I wonder what the future of economy cars is now that gas is sub $2...:iono:

[Synyster]

Actually, this was in Serbia (eastern Europe) where bio-diesel is barely any cheaper than regular diesel. I only drove my Golf on bio-diesel once. My friend, who's a mechanic, said that he doesn't recommend it on newer cars.