1928 Model A Ford Roadester on 2040-cars

Auto blog

MotorWeek remembers pre-EcoBoost Ford with the Thunderbird TurboCoupe

Sometimes it feels great to embrace nostalgia for a trip down memory lane, and MotorWeek indulges that occasional desire with its regular Retro Review series. This time, the long-lived show goes back to the '80s to check out two of the top performance vehicles in the Ford lineup at the time – the 1987 Thunderbird TurboCoupe and Mustang GT. Both models had just received thorough refreshes after several years on the market. Long before an EcoBoost badge ever met its models, Ford made early forays into experimenting with turbocharging on vehicles like the T-Bird TurboCoupe. Based on MotorWeek's assessment, the company was on the right track. The boosted 2.3-liter four-cylinder was apparently a bit coarse but offered 190 horsepower with little turbo lag, compared to 155 hp the year before. The Mustang GT is likely the more-fondly remembered of these performance Fords today and provides an interesting point of comparison against the TurboCoupe. MotorWeek found some faults with the 'Stang, though. While it was quick for the time with a sprint to 60 mph in 6.5 seconds, the 'car was described as "a nose-heavy beast" for its handling. And for a look at Ford's future in turbocharging – the GT will have an EcoBoost powerplant – check out our Related Video:

Ward's calls out Ford's EcoBoost engines for their crummy fuel economy

With a name like EcoBoost, one might expect Ford's line of turbocharged engines to be somewhat, um, economical. In other words, replacing displacement with a turbocharger is supposed to deliver better fuel economy. Based on the experience time and time again of multiple Autoblog editors, your author included, this is simply not the case. Now, Ward's is calling out the cruddy efficiency numbers of Ford's EcoBoost line of engines. The column dresses down not just the new 2.7-liter V6 of the 2015 F-150, but also the 2.3-liter of the Mustang, the 1.5-liter from the Fusion and the 3.2-liter PowerStroke diesel found in the Transit, while also explaining why just one Ford engine was named to Ward's 10 Best Engines list. In its testing of all four engines, Ward's editors never came even remotely close to matching the 2.7's claimed 26 miles per gallon (for two-wheel-drive models), with the truck's computer indicating between 17.6 and 19 mpg over a 250-odd-mile run. Calculating the fuel economy manually revealed an even more depressing 15.6 miles per gallon. Criticisms with the 2.3-liter four-cylinder focused on its strange soundtrack, although it was business as usual with the 1.5-liter and 3.2 diesel, with Ward's criticizing the fuel economy of both engines. The 1.5, which Ward's claims is sold as a hybrid alternative, failed to get over 30 miles per gallon, while the five-cylinder turbodiesel's figures couldn't stand up against FCA's 3.0-liter EcoDiesel. The entire column really is worth a read, especially if you were disappointed in Ward's decision to only salute Ford's three-cylinder EcoBoost while shunning the rest of the company's new turbocharged mills.

Ford Q3 pretax profits drop to $1.18B

Following positive third quarter financial results recently from General Motors, rival Ford took a tumble in Q3. The automaker posted pre-tax profits of $1.18 billion, compared to about $2.59 billion in Q3 2013, a drop of around 54 percent. Net income also suffered with $835 million made in the quarter, versus $1.272 billion last year, a decline of about 34 percent. The Blue Oval blamed the gloomy figures on three reasons in its release: "lower volume, higher warranty costs and adverse balance sheet exchange effects."
There were problems of one kind or another in practically every region. North America experienced higher warranty costs than expected, partially due to recalls. The sales volume for the quarter was 665,000 units, versus 725,000 in Q3 2013, and pre-tax results amounted to $1.41 billion versus $2.296 billion last year.
South America and Europe both posted worse pre-tax results than last year. On the bright side, European volume was up slightly to 321,000 vehicles, from 303,000 in Q3 2013. The Middle East and Africa also lost $15 million, but that was an improvement compared to the $25 million loss previously experienced in this region.