Ford Hearts Fours

Edward Niedermeyer
by Edward Niedermeyer

Ford will be offering four-cylinder Ecoboost engines in a vast array of its forthcoming models, reports Motor Trend. The 2.0 EcoBoost will likely see base-model duty in vehicles ranging from the Edge and Mustang to the unibody 2011 Explorer, while replacing the V6 option in the Fusion and Escape. And though the EcoBoost two-liter looks good on paper (275 hp, 280 lb·ft), its projected ubiquity raises an interesting question: how important are engines in product differentiation? If GM’s blurring of the platform-sharing/brand-engineering lines hurts its brands, does the same hold true for Ford’s engine-sharing? Though modern engine control units theoretically allow Ford to customize engine characteristics (torque curve, power, efficiency) for each application, we’re not hearing anything about any such plans in the EcoBoost PR material. Could Ford’s engine uniformity hurt its appeal?

Edward Niedermeyer
Edward Niedermeyer

More by Edward Niedermeyer

Join the conversation
4 of 50 comments
  • Patrickj Patrickj on Aug 20, 2009

    @gregaryous The bigger question is why do we need to waste the owner's money, petroleum, and the time of mechanics on stupid engine covers in the first place.

  • Anonymous Anonymous on Aug 20, 2009
    Ford offers V8 power with V6 fuel economy, No they don't. They offer a 3.5 V6 that gets V8 economy. Personally I think it’s useful being in a state that gets a lot of snow in the winter. RWD sucks in the winter. I’m sure you can drive fine in it, but I don’t like to and so do a lot of other people. I had NO PROBLEM driving a open-diff, V8 sedan on bald Eagle RS-A tires...with no traction a Minnesota winter... In today's world...if you cannot safely drive a RWD vehicle in the simply shouldn't be driving. And you certainly shouldn't use AWD as a crutch for your poor driving skills. I’m sure the people reviewing the SHO weren’t driving it at 60 miles an hour cruising on the freeway. You're right. They were driving like the average person would. Personally I trust information coming from an independent government body designed to test vehicles to a standard. 20 MPG isn’t Ford’s estimate, it’s the EPA’s estimate. And where did the EPA get that estimate? Do you even know how the EPA tests vehicles? Silly me, of course you do. You obviously know that the EPA cannot possibly test every single car every single year. You know that they test only a handful of cars every year and TAKE THE MANUFACTURES WORD on the rest. Of course you know that...
  • Ajla Ajla on Aug 20, 2009

    I remember having a bar debate with a die-hard Ford guy back in 2003. I told him that the Bonneville SSEi was a better car than the Mercury Marauder because it turned in the same (or better) performance and handling figures, FWD was more manageable in bad weather than RWD, and the Pontiac turned out better fuel economy figures. He told me I was wrong because a V8 RWD setup is a necessity for an American performance car. I defended Pontiac's honor, but deep-down I wished the Bonneville followed that formula. I wonder what he thinks about the product direction FoMoCo is going these days. _________ I also remember Ford fans (and ads) ripping into Buick, Cadillac, and Chrysler because they didn't offer a V8 RWD car. Man, what a difference six years can make.

  • Greenb1ood Greenb1ood on Aug 21, 2009

    I've read this entire thread and have made a couple distinct realizations. (1) Most TTAC commenters seem to think that the idea of an EcoBoost lineup is either non-damaging, or at best a positive branding strategy. (2) No one really knows yet whether the EcoBoost performs as advertised because their really isn't enough real-world data yet. (3) P71_CrownVic seems to enjoy bashing Ford with vague accusations but never responds back to posts that include actual DATA refuting his/her claims. Did Henry Ford run over your Great Grandma? What exactly is the reason for that oval shaped chip on your shoulder?