1923 Ford T-bucket Custom-built Convertible on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford Focus PHEV on the way?

A refreshed Ford Focus is in the works and that means a few details are leaking out. Spy shots from last month indicated the Focus will have a gaping grille just like its "One Ford" global C-segment comrade, the Fiesta. While Ford is being quiet about it, the Focus could also be getting an "Energi" option, joining the C-Max Energi and Fusion Energi in Ford's plug-in hybrid family. The Focus will likely use technology originated in the C-Max Energi that combines a 2.0-liter gasoline engine with an electric motor capable of a 20-mile range, according to Autoexpress. The pure electric Focus is expected to stay in the lineup despite its slow sales; its price range should be similar to what's on the market now. The third-generation Focus looked good enough to become the top-selling nameplate in the world in 2012. Some exterior changes to look for in the Euro-spec model at the Geneva Motor Show in March include a reshaped hood, front wing endplate and rear bumper. Interior spy shots have hinted at an updated dashboard design and a simplified, less cluttered control panel with updated climate controls. Under the hood, there are quite a few power options rumored to be available - a gasoline EcoBoost with up to 123 horsepower and two turbo-diesel TDCI options, a 1.6-liter or 2.0-liter mills that would produce between 94 hp and 161 hp. Then there are new 1.5-liter diesel and 1.5-liter EcoBoost gasoline variants that meet regulations in China, Brazil and Russia.

2014 Ford Fiesta 1.0L EcoBoost

I'll be honest; when Ford first unveiled its 3.5-liter EcoBoost V6, I was skeptical. Past attempts at building turbocharged American cars were almost universally awful, I reasoned, so why would Ford's latest effort be any different? This may seem foolish today, considering the success that the growing EcoBoost range has achieved - particularly the 2.0-liter and 1.6-liter mills. Yet I once again found myself questioning Ford.
It's the makeup of the 1.0-liter, turbocharged three-cylinder slotted into the compact engine bay of this Fiesta that has a way of breeding doubt. Three-cylinder engines remain an extreme rarity in the US. What's more, they earned a less-than-desirable reputation for applications in the 1980s and 1990s, and my trepidation about this latest three-pot as a result.
As I found out, though, history is a poor informant of modern technology. The thrust available in other cars with the EcoBoost badge on the back has not gone missing here; something the International Engine of the Year committee has lauded. That august body named the 1.0-liter Ecoboost the best engine of 2012 and 2013. After a week of driving, it didn't take long for my fear of threes to get turned into something like that line of thinking.

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.