Perceptions Die... OK Say Again Y Foreign is Better

[Captain Awesome]

Originally Posted by All-Or-Nothing

Exactly. The Ecoboost gains up to 20% better fuel efficiency, with lower emissions, and more performance. Ford didn't design them to be race engines. They provide power of larger displacement engines while giving the efficiency of much smaller applications. 20% is a big jump.


Wonder what the Ecotec did................here you go


According to Ecotec's Chief Engineer Dean Guard, "Direct injection [Spark Ignited Direct Injection--SIDI as GM calls it] is one of those rare technologies where we get two synergistic benefits from a single technology. Direct injection offers the opportunity to increase the compression ratio due to the charge-cooling effects of in-cylinder fuel vaporization, and therefore helps both improve fuel economy, around 2 percent, and performance with roughly a 5 percent power increase." The way that direct injection precisely delivers the fuel enables a more complete combustion, particularly on cold starts when emissions are higher. Better combustion means fewer emissions and a greater fuel economy benefit from the higher compression. It's a win-win in an industry constantly trying to meet tougher government standards.


So let's see...the Ecoboost gets 18% better fuel economy than the Ecotec. I guess Ford got this one right after all.

Yeah right... and they have over 10,000 adjustable parameters too.

That's pure nonsense... it's called "specsmanship".

I bet they have 100 parameters with 100 settings per parameter to arrive at "10,000". Yawn.

[All-Or-Nothing]

Originally Posted by Captain Awesome

Yeah right... and they have over 10,000 adjustable parameters too.

That's pure nonsense... it's called "specsmanship".

I bet they have 100 parameters with 100 settings per parameter to arrive at "10,000". Yawn.

[MCPOAJ]

Originally Posted by Captain Awesome

Yeah right... and they have over 10,000 adjustable parameters too.

That's pure nonsense... it's called "specsmanship".

I bet they have 100 parameters with 100 settings per parameter to arrive at "10,000". Yawn.

so let me get this straight it's the TUNING that is diffrent not the motor design so here's what happens when they retune for performance all of that good gas milage stuff probably gets retuned for performance and all of that goes away i know when my car got retuned it ran SO much better and eve got better gas milage when no in the boost.

[All-Or-Nothing]

Does any one know what specsmanship is??

LMAO

[Cmicasa the Great XvX]

Originally Posted by All-Or-Nothing

Exactly. The Ecoboost gains up to 20% better fuel efficiency, with lower emissions, and more performance. Ford didn't design them to be race engines. They provide power of larger displacement engines while giving the efficiency of much smaller applications. 20% is a big jump.


Wonder what the Ecotec did................here you go


According to Ecotec's Chief Engineer Dean Guard, "Direct injection [Spark Ignited Direct Injection--SIDI as GM calls it] is one of those rare technologies where we get two synergistic benefits from a single technology. Direct injection offers the opportunity to increase the compression ratio due to the charge-cooling effects of in-cylinder fuel vaporization, and therefore helps both improve fuel economy, around 2 percent, and performance with roughly a 5 percent power increase." The way that direct injection precisely delivers the fuel enables a more complete combustion, particularly on cold starts when emissions are higher. Better combustion means fewer emissions and a greater fuel economy benefit from the higher compression. It's a win-win in an industry constantly trying to meet tougher government standards.


So let's see...the Ecoboost gets 18% better fuel economy than the Ecotec. I guess Ford got this one right after all.

What the hell does that have to do with the REALITY of Ecotec??? He made a statement about the GENERAL effects of Direct-Injection ONLY. Ecoboost is Direct-injection and Turbo charging a given engine... something that BMW, GM, VW/Audi have been doing for years. The fact that GM has the 2.0L Turbo on hand getting 260/260lbs while still only having a 2 MPG loss versus the non-DI, non-Turbo 2.2L with 155HP is a marvel in itself.

Bottom line son son.. Let it go. Your cheerleading for Ford on a GM Forum is gonna meet opposition. Ecoboost is a great technology.. but it's an old technology that really has just been a marketing scheme.:(


and OH YEAH... Please explain to me how Ford is saying that it's NON-hybrid Fusion is more fuel efficent than the Malibu

[All-Or-Nothing]

Originally Posted by Cmicasa the Great XvX

Bottom line son son.. Let it go. Your cheerleading for Ford on a GM Forum is gonna meet opposition. Ecoboost is a great technology.. but it's an old technology that really has just been a marketing scheme.:(

Bottom line is you are wrong. Your blind brand loyalism refuses to let you see it.

[Cmicasa the Great XvX]

Originally Posted by All-Or-Nothing

Bottom line is you are wrong. Your blind brand loyalism refuses to let you see it.

U're a funny guy. I may love GM but in this situation I am simply stating the truth... But if it makes U feel better to fool yourself into believing that ECOBOOST is the second coming of THOUGHT... Cool.

And While U're at believing in the fine pleasantries and wonderifical promises of SNAKE OIL...

I got two tickets for U to Hawaii via Greyhound. Only downside to the trip is the bus has no restrooms, so if U gotta go.. just hold it. Anyway... send my $2000 for these magnificent tickets via Paypal...

[All-Or-Nothing]

Originally Posted by Cmicasa the Great XvX

U're a funny guy. I may love GM but in this situation I am simply stating the truth... But if it makes U feel better to fool yourself into believing that ECOBOOST is the second coming of THOUGHT... Cool.

And While U're at believing in the fine pleasantries and wonderifical promises of SNAKE OIL...

I got two tickets for U to Hawaii via Greyhound. Only downside to the trip is the bus has no restrooms, so if U gotta go.. just hold it. Anyway... send my $2000 for these magnificent tickets via Paypal...

It's not simply believing it. I have facts to support what I say. Anyone who can read can see the facts too. All you do is tell jokes but FORD is on a roll no matter how you try to spin it.

I have found 3 websites that show the Non-Hybrid Fusion as having better MPG's. So which website is right?

[syr74]

Originally Posted by Cmicasa the Great XvX

Bottom line son son.. Let it go. Your cheerleading for Ford on a GM Forum is gonna meet opposition. Ecoboost is a great technology.. but it's an old technology that really has just been a marketing scheme.

Again, this just isn't accurate. Whether or not you believe that EcoBoost can deliver what Ford claims the reality is that the setup is very different than what has been done the past with only the most recent offerings from BMW and Audi being similar in concept....and the difference is in the engine control technology.

Ford is paying royalties to use the Bosch designed engine control system for a reason, very few organizations possess the capability to produce a setup that can control a direct injected, torbocharged setup this effectively and efficienctly. Earlier somebody mentioned something about a tune in this thread, let me say that this isn't an 03 Cobra or an 01 SS on the strip somewhere and we aren't simply talking about different parameteres here....we are talking about a system that apparently handles engine functions in a very different manner.

Could that be as significant as Ford claims? Of course it could, and we know this because the ultimate breakthrough with every technology used in modern engines hasn't been the concept or even the mrchanicals, but in the ability to control them effectviely. Multi-point fuel injection is the perfect example, never really working as advertised until engine control hardware caught up with the concept, a reality which took some time.

Effectively that is what Ford is claiming here, that they have licensed a Bosch system which is among the first three or so capable of controlling these engines in such a manner and that, of those three or so existing systems, their Bosch-sourced system works best.

Again, whether you believe them or not is entirely up to you, but Ford is making the claim and they are giving us a credible reason to back it up by demonstrating that they are using a new engine management setup. And to be fair to Ford the 3.5L EB does deliver much of that promise, even if utlizing the system in a 4400lb, awd car blunts a lot of the awe which might otherwise have accompanied the tech there for obvious reasons.

Will the four cylinder be the mighty-mite they claim? We'll know when we see it. But, the notion that there is nothing different here simply isn't true.

[Bullitt]

Originally Posted by Cmicasa the Great XvX

and OH YEAH... Please explain to me how Ford is saying that it's NON-hybrid Fusion is more fuel efficent than the Malibu

The Malibu from Edmunds:
http://www.edmunds.com/chevrolet/mal...10/review.html

Fuel economy for the LS is 22 mpg city/30 mpg highway and 25 mpg combined, while the other trims with their six-speed autos achieve 22/33/26.

The Fusion from Edmunds:
http://www.edmunds.com/ford/fusion/2010/review.html

Fuel economy ratings for the four-cylinder Fusion S with the automatic transmission are an impressive 23 mpg city and 34 mpg highway and 27 mpg combined

There's your explanation, but I think somehow you'll refuse to believe it.

[Captain Awesome]

Originally Posted by All-Or-Nothing

Does any one know what specsmanship is??

LMAO

Please list off the 10,000 parameters that are adjustable for me.

[Cmicasa the Great XvX]

Originally Posted by Bullitt

The Malibu from Edmunds:
http://www.edmunds.com/chevrolet/mal...10/review.html


The Fusion from Edmunds:
http://www.edmunds.com/ford/fusion/2010/review.html


There's your explanation, but I think somehow you'll refuse to believe it.

I used the EPA findings.. which for some reason have been revised for Ford.. no longer showing them in favor.

Truth is.. if GM simply used their new version of the 2.4L (from Equinox) with Direct Injection U would see a Malibu NON-HYBRID that should easily go from it's current 33MPG to at least 36MPG, considering the larger, heavier 'Nox gets 32MPG already... with 13 More HP

[Cmicasa the Great XvX]

Originally Posted by All-Or-Nothing

It's not simply believing it. I have facts to support what I say. Anyone who can read can see the facts too. All you do is tell jokes but FORD is on a roll no matter how you try to spin it.

I have found 3 websites that show the Non-Hybrid Fusion as having better MPG's. So which website is right?

So is GM... but Ford's "Roll" is much like the one that gave Toyota a bunch of BS perception that was undeserved. The thing is that I'm trying to be nice about this... because Ford is a domestic.

[Cmicasa the Great XvX]

the OHV stigma... for some reason despite the engine's contemporary configuration, superior HP and fuel efficiency and low maintenance... GM still allows peoples idiotic perceptions... caused by even more idiotic Media, to influence their use of this engine company wide as the V8 of choice. They have tested successfully Direct-Injection in the Small-Block as well as HCCI.

We currently have these well known OHV engines on the market... and if U are lucky, u have driven at least one car that they show up in and can agree or disagree with what I'm saying:

5.3L 303HP/323 lbs AFM

6.0L 361HP/385 lbs AFM

6.2L 402HP/402 lbs AFM

6.2L 415HP/415lbs

6.2L 426HP/420 lbs

6.2L 430-436HP/424 lbs

7.0L 505HP/470 lbs

6.2L 556HP/550 lbs S/C

6.2L 638HP/604 lbs S/C

These are just the CAR V8s... I did not touch truck the ones simply because there is no need. This full range of V8 engines which have been mainstays on Wards "Best Engines" for years in their previous and current configs. should be held up in HIGH REGARD with in GM, and in the automotive community as a whole.

The only other maker that matches GM's V8s in terms of power and durability is Mercedes Benz. I always liken it to the fact that both makers have been around for almost the same amount of time, and operated in every single country on the planet as the other... Giving both a diversity in Engineering that seemingly is only rivaled by each other.

One thing that Mercedes doesn't do in a comparison between the two... is match GM's efficiency... These OHV engines in some cases are as efficient as many other makers's V6s. Imagine a Chevy Tahoe weighing 1000 lbs more than a Honda Pilot... getting almost identical F/E as that Pilot while touting about 60 more HP.

My RANT has been for several years that GM hold fast to there great creation... Drop it into their FULL LINE... from Chevy to Cadillac. The gripe once was that OHV engines were not as quiet and smooth as a OHC... perhaps 15... perhaps even 10 years ago... but not today. I challenge ANYONE of U to go out and test drive a 550i... then go test a G8 GT... I will guarantee that U will not notice much of a difference in driving dynamics, specifically in the engine. The one thing U might notice and gripe about... is that the V8 growl is in absent in the car that it should be... and present in the one it shouldn't...

I didn't include the 4.8L V8 because it is used in the Trucks/Suvs, but GM could take there new Direct-Injected tech and put it in there... boosting the 4.8L's output from 295HP... to about a 15% jump... giving us a 4.8L with 340HP... a 6.0L would be pushing 460HP... and the 6.2L... 495HP



What hurts the OHV in SMOOTHNESS.. and Finesse reputation

In the old days my dad used to blame it on balancing... but the LS1... and even more importantly... the LS2 made that argument moot. While the BMW 8 and 10 cylinders are nice.. they are equal at best to the LS engines running around in cars like the G8 GT, Lacrosse Super, and Corvette. The issue that most people seem to fail to realize in this type of debate is that they very often have had only one example of the LS engine to compare against the Germans.. and that is of the Corvette. And let me say that it absolutely IMPOSSIBLE to use the Corvette as an example of how smooth an engine can be in a car. The Vette's very structure, need for weight savings (thus minimal sound deadening) and aggressive exhaust make it this way. When U rev a Corvette LS3 NPP (NPP= Valve controlled exhaust like on Z06/ZR1) or ZO6 U are certainly gonna feel a vibration as the exhaust system is aggressive as hell.. not to mention U are literally sitting right on top of it...

Engine for engine U could put a G8GT up against a 550i and I guarantee U won't kno the difference in engines in regards to noise, or vibration.. power delivery is seen in far superior torque band the G8GT has. I driven damn near every BMW currently on the market with exception to one.. the X6. I driven the S8, I driven the S600... I've driven the LS460... I've driven the Grand Turismo.. .and I'm sorry.. with the exception to the Maserati... I don't see your point.. as far as the V8s go. I will certainly agree that the Honda 3.5L, or BMW 3.0L I6 is smoother than the 3.5L or 3.8L.. but I simply can't make that same statement concerning the V8s... GM has perfected the OHV V8 for now. despite the additional cost it takes to manufacture a OHC engine versus the OHV ones.. with exception to REVVING.. I have yet to find a real reason why the OHC design is superior. And the Revving argument might be moot.. if U have ever driven a LS3 or LS7 powered car

The average Joe out there reads DOHC on the side of a Mitsubishi and automatically thinks that he is playing with the "big dogs." I remember COUNTLESS battles where the 320HP 3000GT (not picking on Mitsu) would come up against a 300HP LT1 Vette and get spanked... and when the thing broke down...WHOOOOAAAH. Park it for a month and thumb your ass to work, cause it was so expensive to fix. And the LT1 was not a simple engine either. My thoughts in buying a performance car lay on the POWER/Weight ratio... not where the CAM is.

OOOOH!!! The Irony



OHC vs OHV Weight... SIZE

People often fail to see in the Liters vs Liters argument is WEIGHT and SIZE... specifically when engines are "dressed..." which is really the only way to run them anyway.. For example...

In a comparison somewhere between the weight of the LS7 7.0L, LSA 6.2L S/C versus the Ford 5.4L S/C... the LS7 was lighter. In fact, if I remember correctly the LSA weighed in at approx 490lbs...including the addition of a SuperCharger ... the LS7... 458 pounds, while the Supercharged 5.4L in the GT500 I could swear weighs about 740lbs...