Jump to content
   
DapperVan

LWB + Ecoboost = No Dice. Why????

Recommended Posts

I'm going to be buying a SWB Ecoboost XLT wagon soon. I'd much prefer the LWB, but the 1.6 motor is priority. I also own a Fiesta ST so I know how great this engine is. Ford really shot themselves in the foot by limiting the configurations. I'd love to hear from someone at Ford why such a decision was made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

This configuration actually is available, it's just the marketing department decision not to offer it in your area.

1.6 + LWB is available over here but we don't get the 2.5 Ecoboost at all.

post-2153-0-68675700-1459072736_thumb.jp

Edited by mrtn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody gets an ecoboost 2.5 , The 2.5 here is a non turbo engine. If there was an ecoboost 2.5 it would come in about 278 hp and would be great.

The 2.5 and the 1.6 turbo are 169 hp and 178 hp respectively. the 1.6 gets its 178 hp on 93 octane. Ford does not say what the hp is on 87 octane.

The difference in the way the engines feel in the car is when the engine torque comes on.

The base weight of the Lwb Van is 3650, and the Wagon base weight is 3970. This could have something to do with the 1.6 not being offered in the Lwb wagon model, while being offered in the Lwb Van.

Edited by G B L

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, okay, N/A engines seem to be rare these days. Haven't driven either of them, so I have no idea how they perform. The fuel economy of the 1.6 + autobox looks to be the worst end of class tho.

There have been some weird engine decisions over here too: the Edge only gets a 2.0 diesel, no other options. Anyone looking for a near luxury crossover will go get a Murano/EX/FX, Volvo XC, a matching German or a Grand Cherokee. I would love a TC with that engine. Would be nice to bang on the Autobahn, instead we only get 1.0/1.6 Ecoboosts and 1.5/1.6 turbodiesels.

Edited by mrtn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that the the engine options of a line are determined by the total corporate fleet average desired. If the company is having trouble meeting the Mileage. offering an a high hp engine option in a popular vehicle could hurt the fleet average.

The Ecoboost engine allows for the possibility for a higher average while allowing the advertising possibility of enhanced Zoom for the ads.

In the case of the Diesels the Turbo is needed to make those engines acceptable in terms of performance.

The modern auto box's have closed the mileage penalty with the electronic controls and the lockup converter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've discovered that XL 2014-16 models that can have LWB + the 1.6 Ecoboost.

It's just no dice for the XLT or Titanium.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The LWB engine limitations are applied to the passenger models . The Work version is available with both engines in the XL and XLT versions.

Could be the extra weight of the LWB Passenger package or just they don't want to make it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/7/2016 at 1:02 PM, DapperVan said:

I've discovered that XL 2014-16 models that can have LWB + the 1.6 Ecoboost.

It's just no dice for the XLT or Titanium.

I guess you could order whatever configuration from the dealer.  But when I went to dealerships in NorCal, they all had 2.5 engines.  The standard answer was that I could place a deposit, order whatever I wanted, then wait, or simply buy what the dealership had in stock.  

 

 

At the end of the day, you're buying a van, not a sports car.  If you feel underpowered, move up to the next grade of vehicle.  For anything more than what this vehicle can handle, I have a truck.  I doubt if this little van is going to replace my truck.  If I want to go fast, that is another conversation.  7 people won't fit into a performance car, and tend to get wet in a truck bed.  Large bulky items won't fit into a performance car, and tend to get wet in a truck bed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did some checking on internet about the Ecoboost engines and at least some people are saying that they need a major valve/head cleaning at about 80,000 miles due to poor performance. There are photos showing the gunk build-up. Costs about $800 to clean-up. I calculated I would save about $800 in gas over that time so it would be a break-even cost scenario, but there would be lost time getting it to the shop and out again. Maybe these folks run cheap gas or something however, I did not go into great depth on the situation, especially since the Ecoboost ended up not being available on my 2017 SWB XLT Wagon anyway. I could swear it was available on the 2016 however. Anyone seeing this gunk build-up at 80K?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was up till the 2017 model.  The numbers must not have added up for Ford.  The small gain in mileage and performance did not bring in the sales.

If the engine has the right internal parts then it should hold up fine.  The turbo might not like city life.

I wonder if the EU model will retain the 1.6 turbo

Edited by G B L

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just checked.

Only 1.0 Ecoboost for the Connect, the rest are TDCi

1.5 Ecoboost for the Focus and 1.6 Ecoboost for Fiesta ST.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is good you made your move this year.  The propane conversion makes your TC a very nice thing.

Your timing was PERFECT !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the company that makes your propane conversion make one for the 2.5 liter ??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/7/2016 at 4:02 PM, DapperVan said:

I've discovered that XL 2014-16 models that can have LWB + the 1.6 Ecoboost.

It's just no dice for the XLT or Titanium.

 No, I just viewed ads for XLT 1.6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/3/2016 at 10:13 AM, Patterson said:

I did some checking on internet about the Ecoboost engines and at least some people are saying that they need a major valve/head cleaning at about 80,000 miles due to poor performance. There are photos showing the gunk build-up. Costs about $800 to clean-up. I calculated I would save about $800 in gas over that time so it would be a break-even cost scenario, but there would be lost time getting it to the shop and out again. Maybe these folks run cheap gas or something however, I did not go into great depth on the situation, especially since the Ecoboost ended up not being available on my 2017 SWB XLT Wagon anyway. I could swear it was available on the 2016 however. Anyone seeing this gunk build-up at 80K?

 Fords (and most others) had a lot of trouble with the direct injection (the main issue) engines developing bad and fast carbon buildup.  I've read of plenty of people needing the service prior to 30k miles.

15 minutes reading made the engine choice a no brainer for me.  Especially since the turbo won't make ANY more power on regular gas.  (25hp difference on my Audi 3.0 between reg and premium gas)

The 2.5 seems matched to the transmission very well.  

Edited by MLB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did lots of reading on both engines before we went shopping.  There seemed to be many more documented problems with the 1.6 than the 2.5, especially after the warranty period expires  -  Don't need any of that!  Plus needing premium gas to make 5% more horsepower than the 2.5 made the decision easy for me  -  I don't want anything that needs premium gas as the cost difference VS the gain is too expensive for me.  You buy the premium gas, but never get any real benefit from it other than the few times you actually stomp in it . . . . and at my age, I don't do nearly as much 'stomping' as I used to  -  Consequently, my tires, engine and transmissions all seem to last me much longer than they used to!  :clapping:

Don

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/23/2017 at 9:14 PM, Beta Don said:

I did lots of reading on both engines before we went shopping.  There seemed to be many more documented problems with the 1.6 than the 2.5, especially after the warranty period expires  -  Don't need any of that!  Plus needing premium gas to make 5% more horsepower than the 2.5 made the decision easy for me  -  I don't want anything that needs premium gas as the cost difference VS the gain is too expensive for me.  You buy the premium gas, but never get any real benefit from it other than the few times you actually stomp in it . . . . and at my age, I don't do nearly as much 'stomping' as I used to  -  Consequently, my tires, engine and transmissions all seem to last me much longer than they used to!  :clapping:

Don

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×