Sign In Join 



Crossover SUV Comparison

7126 messages,  Last post on Nov 18, 2009 at 1:27 PM

You are in the SUVs Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & tidester

What is this discussion about? GMC Acadia, Mitsubishi Outlander, Subaru Forester, Hyundai Santa Fe, Ford Taurus X, Toyota RAV4, Nissan Rogue, Honda Accord Crosstour, Dodge Journey, Car Buying, Car Comparisons, SUV


Messages Page 683 of 714
1
...
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
...
714
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion

#6812 of 7126
Re: RDX TECH vs. RAV4 V6 4x4 [larryqw] by coldcranker
Dec 14, 2008 (6:48 pm)
Reply

Replying to: larryqw (Dec 14, 2008 1:40 pm)

Sounds good, but there is some marketing hype in there crediting the Ecoboost tech when it doesn't deserve 20% credit. Don't get me wrong, I do think Ecoboost alone should get around a 5% up to 10% fuel economy gain if done right. And thats optimistic, since there might be some innovation in doing VVT with direct injection + turbo. Not big gains. DI alone might give up to 5%, and maybe another 3% or so from downsizing the engine and adding a turbo to make up for the loss in displacement.
 
For example:
larrygw says: "Depending on engine selection, fuel-efficiency will improve by 20 to 30 percent versus today’s V-6 Explorer " In reality, half (10%) of the gain in fuel economy of the Explorer America over the current Explorer is due to the new Explorer America being a unit-body, front wheel drive based, lower friction drivetrain (D3 platform based), with a newer 6-speed tranny over the old Explorer's body-on-frame, 4-speed tranny, rear wheel drive, and heavier platform. All that has nothing to do with Ecoboost. In fact, we might see 5% to 10% gain in fuel economy from going to Ecoboost, which is direct injection + turbo. I believe MIT, GM, Mazda, VW, and my own mechanical engineering experience over Ford's claims.
 
I recommend not swallowing the marketing hype. Ford's real accomplishment appears to be in the Fusion Hybrid, out in 2 months, as its already getting 40 MPG in real-world, 3rd party tests recently.
#6813 of 7126
Re: RDX TECH vs. RAV4 V6 4x4 [coldcranker] by larryqw
Dec 14, 2008 (9:13 pm)
Reply

Replying to: coldcranker (Dec 14, 2008 6:48 pm)

coldcranker, I agree with you, that for sure other factors help the Ford Explorer get up to 30% better fuel efficiency. It's becoming more of a car than a truck, which is how people really use it. I don't know either how much of that mileage improvement is EcoBoost, but they're repeatedly claiming 15-20% mileage improvment and I'm sure they have a LOT of test data to back that up, opposed to random speculation by us, who are not in their engineering team.
 
 Ford has been conservative in their projections more recently. So I tend to believe them. They also claim the EcoBoost is of much greater value than Hybrid technology as it helps the gas mileage of ALL cars and trucks of all types (including Hybrid) across the board, which also makes sense to me.
 
As for Ford hype and claim versus reality, we'll all know in a few months when the EcoBoost vehicles come out and get properly rated for fuel economy by an independent firm. Till then, we just got opinions.
#6814 of 7126
Re: RDX TECH vs. RAV4 V6 4x4 [coldcranker] by tourguide
Dec 15, 2008 (4:01 pm)
Reply

Replying to: coldcranker (Dec 14, 2008 6:48 pm)

Sounds good, but there is some marketing hype in there crediting the Ecoboost tech when it doesn't deserve 20% credit.
 
I think you are EXACLTLY right in this cc. 5-10% is a good estimate. The boys and girls over on Blue Oval News who are working on the project and have some knowledge about it personally I've read saying that the 20% figures that Ford put out early on were best case scenarios as compared to V8 technology!
 
WELL NO WONDER!! I completely understand how it would compare that favorably in that light. Makes sense, huh?!
 
I personally can't wait to see what the real 'boost' ends up being. I decided after I heard where they pulled that 20% figure from that it wasn't worth waiting for. It's just more of the same kids. Soon enough we will see. Personally, I've gotta believe that if it was a true 20% boost, they'd have rolled it out sooner that this.
#6815 of 7126
Re: RDX TECH vs. RAV4 V6 4x4 [tourguide] by baggs32
Dec 16, 2008 (9:31 am)
Reply

Replying to: tourguide (Dec 15, 2008 4:01 pm)

I decided after I heard where they pulled that 20% figure from that it wasn't worth waiting for.
 
All of the Ford Media literature I've read on EcoBoost claimed UP TO A 20% increase in FE. Never have I read that 20% was guaranteed across the board.
#6816 of 7126
Re: RDX TECH vs. RAV4 V6 4x4 [baggs32] by coldcranker
Dec 16, 2008 (1:35 pm)
Reply

Replying to: baggs32 (Dec 16, 2008 9:31 am)

baggs32, It depends on what is compared to what. For example, my '05 Freestyle has 205 HP in a 3.0L V6, so a meaningful comparison would be to an Ecoboost 1.5L 4 cylinder, since you could get the same power out of that engine. Doing that, it is possible I could see better fuel economy. Its doubtful if the gain would be 20% based on all the evidence I've seen so far, without using alcohol injection of some kind to keep the compression ratio high and knock absent. Alcohol injection was used in WWII on the P-38's Allison V12 engines to get rid of knock while being supercharged at a high compression ratio for efficiency. Allison Engine Link -- click here MIT's Sloan labs are now investigating new twists on this old idea, needed to get 20% efficiency gains.
#6817 of 7126
Re: RDX TECH vs. RAV4 V6 4x4 [coldcranker] by baggs32
Dec 17, 2008 (10:43 am)
Reply

Replying to: coldcranker (Dec 16, 2008 1:35 pm)

It depends on what is compared to what.
 
Exactly, and that's why they never guaranteed 20% across the board. They did a blanket statement for the tech as a whole stating that 20% gains were possible but when you actually read the literature they tell you that the gains will be a good bit less in some applications. I'm guessing that going from a 5.4L V8 to an EB 3.5L V6 will net larger gains than going from the 4.6L V8 to the EB 3.5L V6 for the F150 for example.
#6818 of 7126
Re: RDX TECH vs. RAV4 V6 4x4 [baggs32] by coldcranker
Dec 17, 2008 (5:53 pm)
Reply

Replying to: baggs32 (Dec 17, 2008 10:43 am)

baggs32 said: "They did a blanket statement for the tech as a whole stating that 20% gains were possible "
 
One point that should be made. Ecoboost tech doesn't deserve the full 20% on any application. As was pointed out earlier, Ford was holding up their upcoming Ford Explorer and then comparing it to the current Explorer. Only problem is the new Explorer will have a unit body, 6-speed tranny, and will be lighter, all good for about a 5%-10% fuel economy gain without adding Ecoboost. That means the Ecoboost part is good for about a 10% gain. Not bad, but the marketing hype for it is misleading. As I've said before, you need alcohol injection to get a 20% increase in fuel economy in a direct injection turbo application.
#6819 of 7126
Re: RDX TECH vs. RAV4 V6 4x4 [coldcranker] by baggs32
Dec 18, 2008 (10:39 am)
Reply

Replying to: coldcranker (Dec 17, 2008 5:53 pm)

Ecoboost tech doesn't deserve the full 20% on any application.
 
You might want to hold off on making statements like that until we all learn of the applications first. There is talk of an EB I4 in the F150 in 2010 or 2011 probably to replace the base 2V 4.6L V8. Since you would be going from a V8 to an I4 in that case the gains very well might be 20% without any other mods to the model as in the case of the Explorer. But we don't know any of this for sure yet so I'll believe their claim until all of the planned applications are announced and tested.
#6820 of 7126
Re: RDX TECH vs. RAV4 V6 4x4 [baggs32] by coldcranker
Dec 18, 2008 (11:37 am)
Reply

Replying to: baggs32 (Dec 18, 2008 10:39 am)

baggs32,
For the comparison to be valid, the power from the new EB I4 you mentioned needs to be equal (or nearly equal) to the 4.6L V8. I own an '05 F150 with the 4.6L, and it is rated at 231 HP and 293 ft-lbs. OK, you could get to that power level with an EB 4 cylinder of about 2.2L, but you would either need A) add a 6-speed tranny, or B) add alcohol injection, to get a 20% gain. Ecoboost alone won't do it.
#6821 of 7126
Re: RDX TECH vs. RAV4 V6 4x4 [coldcranker] by coldcranker
Dec 18, 2008 (11:43 am)
Reply

Replying to: coldcranker (Dec 18, 2008 11:37 am)

I'm a member of the SAE, and I know someone who knows someone inside Ford. I'll see if I can't get an anonymous leak of information about Ecoboost fuel economy gains potential in the years to come.

Messages Page 683 of 714
1
...
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
...
714
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion
To POST a message, please Sign In.

New? Join Now!

Forum Tools

Please sign in.
Email Address:

Password:

Forgot Password?

Search Forums

Enter Keyword(s)

Advanced Search

Browse by Vehicle



View All Vehicles
Advertisement
Ask the Community
See What People Are Asking

Browse by Board

Browse by Topic


View All Topics

Today's Chats

Advertisement