When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Good thing they didn't allow towing on those things, it would have resulted in some serious overheating and tranny warranty claims.
GM went so far as to put warning labels on the dash. Part of it was that the engine was tuned more for high-RPM HP than low-RPM torque, which is generally what you need for towing.
Yes, I agree that GM hardware of that era was junk (and that engine, especially, was unreliable), but, if GM chooses to develop a similiar engine today that would rival the Ford EcoBoost, I'm sure they will do a much better job.
G
Yes, I agree that GM hardware of that era was junk (and that engine, especially, was unreliable), but, if GM chooses to develop a similiar engine today that would rival the Ford EcoBoost, I'm sure they will do a much better job.
I would hope so, otherwise they have no reason at all to stay in business.
EcoBoost is a lame name and Ford should dump it. There's nothing strong-sounding about it when you add in the word "echo." And it doesn't even live up to anything super green or efficient.
Really? Well let's take a look at how the Ecoboost 3.5 V6 in the Taurus SHO compares to V8 engines and similar turbo offerings.
Here the Ecoboost is in the heaviest car and is the most fuel efficient. Look how the twin turbo ecoboost fares against the twin turbo I6 from BMW. It's equally efficient with more power and torque in a far heavier application. It outperforms the Audi 4.2 V8, the Chrysler Hemi, Cadillac 4.6 V8, and even the BMW 4.8V8 in RWD.
To me the Ecoboost lives up to the hype of V8 power (based on some older V8s and not the latest and greatest) and does have V6 fuel efficiency. The ecoboost could be even more impressive if Ford could shed 200-400 lbs from the Taurus or find a lighter platform to drop this engine in to.
Here the Ecoboost is in the heaviest car and is the most fuel efficient. Look how the twin turbo ecoboost fares against the twin turbo I6 from BMW. It's equally efficient with more power and torque in a far heavier application. It outperforms the Audi 4.2 V8, the Chrysler Hemi, Cadillac 4.6 V8, and even the BMW 4.8V8 in RWD.
To me the Ecoboost lives up to the hype of V8 power (based on some older V8s and not the latest and greatest) and does have V6 fuel efficiency. The ecoboost could be even more impressive if Ford could shed 200-400 lbs from the Taurus or find a lighter platform to drop this engine in to.
Not all bread and butter examples and not the whole picture. There are more commonly sold vehicles that get just as good mileage or better and have strong 0-60 numbers. Look at the RWD Infiniti G, Lexus IS350, Toyota Camry V6, Honda Accord V6, RWD BMW 328i, and Mercedes RWD C300. Many of these models have long been achieving what Ford is now trying to do with their Ecoboost.
Not all bread and butter examples and not the whole picture. There are more commonly sold vehicles that get just as good mileage or better and have strong 0-60 numbers. Look at the RWD Infiniti G, Lexus IS350, Toyota Camry V6, Honda Accord V6, RWD BMW 328i, and Mercedes RWD C300. Many of these models have long been achieving what Ford is now trying to do with their Ecoboost.
That is the picture. The V6 ecoboost pumps out v8 power but is more efficient than the traditionl V8. The Taurus is a full-sized sedan weighing in at 4400 lbs. The Taurus wtih Ecoboost is not cross shopped against entry level luxury sport sedans like the IS, C-class, 3 series, and G37. The Camry and Accord may be cross-shopped against a regular Taurus but not the SHO and in that case the Fusion is what is comparable.
Ford has other ecoboost engines (I4 variants) in the works that they intend to pump out V6 power but with better efficiency.