Ford To Build Cleaner Engine At Ohio Plant

(AP)  The first Ford Motor Co. plant to make a new line of fuel-efficient engines will help the company deliver the kind of fuel economy that customers demand, officials said Friday.

The plant in suburban Cleveland, idled since 2007, was chosen to make the 3.5-liter, V-6 EcoBoost engines that will be standard on the Ford Taurus SHO and optional on the Lincoln MKS and MKT, and Ford Flex cars.

EcoBoost engines combine direct injection technology and turbo-charging for improved fuel efficiency and lower CO2 emissions. Ford says they can achieve up to 20 percent better fuel and 15 percent lower CO2 emissions, compared with larger displacement engines, without sacrificing power.

Pressured by Washington and last year's spike in gasoline prices, the troubled auto industry has accelerated what was a gradual push toward smaller and more fuel-efficient cars.

The new EcoBoost engine will get an estimated 25 to 26 miles per gallon on the highway and 18 to 20 miles per gallon in city driving, said Gary Johnson, Ford's director of powertrain manufacturing.

He said pressure on the industry in Washington was not a factor in the decision to introduce the EcoBoost engine production now in the economically struggling Cleveland area.

"The EcoBoost technology has been worked on for a couple of years now," he said.

Ford made a $55 million investment in Cleveland Engine Plant No. 1 to get it ready for the EcoBoost engine because a previous retooling in 2004 and its availability now allowed for needed flexibility, he said.

The program is designed to be a first step toward using the technology in four-cylinder engines, and it is not expected to affect ongoing V6 engine production in Lima, Ohio, he said.

Cleveland Engine Plant No. 1, which was Ford's first engine plant in Ohio when it opened in 1951, had more than 500 employees when it was shut down in May 2007. It was retooled to make 3.5-liter engines, but production wasn't immediately needed, and the opening date was pushed back at least twice.

Dearborn, Mich.-based Ford said Friday it initially will use about 250 workers from another engine plant and a casting plant at the Cleveland-area site.

The announcement is a slight reprieve for Ohio, a state reeling with layoffs and whose ties to the auto industry are second only to Michigan. Ohio released new jobless figures Friday showing that the state's unemployment rate was 8.8 percent in January, up from the revised rate of 7.4 in December and the highest level in more than 20 years.

Mike Gammella, president of the United Auto Workers Local 1250, said the union hopes the new EcoBoost engine will lead to more jobs.

"It's really a good thing," he said. "Whenever you can bring a new product in, especially a product of this magnitude, it's sensational news, especially in this economy."
By AP Business Writer M.R. Kropko

[andygow]

Woah hang on a minute. 3.5L and 20-26 mpg? Where's the 'eco' in that? No wonder Ford USA is in trouble.
Perhaps Ford should start talking to .... Ford!!! but Ford in Europe. I recently hired a Ford Mondeo in England with Ford's 2 liter TDCi diesel engine. After thrashing around city and highway driving for a week it returned 54 mpg (UK) which is 45 mpg (US) - amazing. Yet it was one of the most plush drives I've ever had - 136 hp - but brilliant torque on top of that so really hauls from intersections, and would beat any US 3 litre petrol unit I've ever driven. Quiet too with almost no diesel rattle!!! I'm dead sure that if the States was able to try this stuff and get diesel more mainstream we'd have it.

[mrthinker1]

VW diesels are the Sh*t. If I were King, I would have them put in all the cars.

[mrthinker1]

The big 3 make more money on bigger cars, thats why they make them. Problem is, we are not buying them now and their screwed. They dont make enough for their UAW saleries on $7500 cars. This twin turbo beast is staring at $30,000.

The add says they going to make 4 cylinders with a similar design all turbo'd out and stuff. With their new design the engines could be like 1.3 liters, get 45mpg like the prius and have more power from the turbos.

Then add a hybrid electric version with lithium plug in batteries and 110 mpg would be for real. America is getting there, but we have to help out by buying the more expensive hybrids and electric cars to make the transition.

By the way, American's discovered the Lithium Battery and are going to be the first to use it in a production car in the Chevy Volt in 2010. We are going to take back the lead in having the best cars. No question.

[_ryan9]

My Fusion gets roughly 35 in the summer and 28 in the winter (mostly highway driving - subtract 4 for city driving). So Ford already has engines capable of doing this. Not sure why they'd retool for another engine.

The cars that are going the fastest (from the lots) are the old Geo Spectrums and Geo Trackers. Why can't one of the big-3 mass produce a car like that again - $7500, no nice features, but 45+ mpg. Slap one of the new VW blue diesels in there and you'd see over 50 easily.

The technology is out there... it just takes some foresight and some risk.

[Yes_ABWH_Fan]

I have a 2004 Mitsubishi stock Lancer w/ 2.0L engine. In 2004, the Evolution version of this sedan, using the same 2.0L block engine, was THE FASTEST mass-produced car made, including the likes of Ferrari, Porsche, etc. Look it up. Yet, in summer, I get 44 mpg highway and 37 city, tank-to-tank averages. In winter it drops to 38 highway and 34 city. I have NEVER gotten below 32 mpg tank average with this car. But despite my stock version, I can still blow most anybody away at a green light. Even the fastest version, Evo, gets 24 highway, 21 city! My Lancer is now 6 model years old, and doesn't use a drop of oil. My son's 1997 Mirage, the older version, also uses no oil. Now THAT's how engines, at least piston ones, should be made! I defy any American made model to equal that combination of performance, efficiency, and durability.

[mrthinker1]

You guys have to know that that new engine is not just a standard v6. I read about it a few day ago. Its a twin turbo with way over 300hp and fast enough to keep up with the fast V8s out there. I think it said it had like 365hp. Move over Mustang. The new Tauris with that engine will blow the doors off the Honda V6 with similar fuel economy. My 2002 Camery 4 banger gets 21 city and 28 hwy. I would trade that any day with a 300+hp twin turbo Tauris. Ya all need to GET REAL.

[MikeRinFlorida]

Yeah, turbos! Now how about a longitudinal mid-engine sportscar? Porsche would
tremble. Only Ford has an international winning reputation from racing for fifty years.
Over 100 Grans Prix victories, the 24 Hours of Le Mans, countless rallies and titles....
We also need those 4 cylinder turbos.....and in smaller sportscars, too!

[lami987]

With that kind of gas milage Ford will easily be left in the dust by foreign built engines. Ford brags about an engine that wouldn't even meet CAFE standards a few years from now. That engine would be useless possibly before the engine was even built. GM is planning to build a small turbo capable of more than 40 mpg. I hope GM can make it. Good luck Ford you need a lot of it.

[lami987]

If Ford brags about that kind of mediocre gas milage, it'll be easily left in the dust by foreign engines. That kind of gas milage wouldn't even meet CAFE standards a few years from now. Possibly before Ford produces the engine. Even GM is planning a small turbo capable of more than 40 mpg. Good luck Ford. You need a lot of it.

[Yes_ABWH_Fan]

The only gas engine that will ever approach near full efficiency has never been built - a TRUE gas-rotary with near-zero drag: it is possible, but has never been done. Wankels are NOT true rotary. Piston engines will always lose vast energy due to upstroke loss, which provides NEGATIVE POWER - engine drag, and dooms the engine to eventual vibration failure.

Drive trains that DO NOT drop engine RPM to @700 or less by TOTALLY disengaging WHENEVER I take my foot off the gas will never be efficient - no automatic tranny does that, only manuals. What is needed is an "automatic tranny computerized to use manual tranny hard-shift methods" - lose the inefficient torque-converters!

Such a intelligent tranny can "see the road ahead" for uphills, downhills, and curves to adopt a pre-emptive optimal shift strategy, just as good drivers can do.

It is NOT hard acceleration that wastes gas (you get faster miles and less time pressing the gas pedal out of that), but rather what I call "accelebraking", where you "throw away the gas you just spent accelerating for" by braking just after in traffic. Any car design that does not recapture this wasted braking energy is "auto"matically at least 25% inefficient.

No one ever explains how all-electric cars will keep me warm & windshield ice-free on a trip when it's -10 outside. The excess heat a gas-engine gives off is needed for that, for now.

So - the best short term solution I foresee to reconcile all these issues is by creating a small true-rotary gas engine, with an electric hybrid stacked on the same drive, possibly a flywheel as well, and the use of Stor-Technology lightweight capacitor stacks (NOT HEAVY, DANGEROUS, and SHORT LIFESPAN BATTERIES) to hold the captured electricity.

Unlike batteries, these capacitors can charge on a AC plug-in in 5 minutes before leaving, or from the motor stack while en-route, and will be used to power 4 small motor/generator/brakes on each wheel, which will also electro-brake, capturing braking energy back to the capacitor stack, and will power the wheels as well.

These motors will "freewheel disengaged" (coast) on moderate downhills, and brake/generate and/or divert mechanical energy to the flywheel on steeper downhills to slow the car, capturing the energy nonetheless for the next uphill.

The flywheel energy can be used to initially get the car rolling in a hurry, and for "smoothing out" energy demands of small uphills & downhills.

Solar panels can also assist with recharging the Stor-Stack while parked.

Since such a motor /drive system will be expensive and more expendable than the rest of the vehicle, then I expect standardized component-usage, and a "swap out" ability to back that "small tow motor" into my mini-car, mini-van, pickup, snowplow, 4-wheeler, lawn mower, small dozer / backhoe, or RV payload module of my choice. I would also like it to be an emergency backup generator for my home. As a consumer, I?m tired of paying for similar and redundant capability!

I also want full manual gas-engine / manual tranny override ability in case the car is not behaving the way I believe it should.

Until Detroit leapfrogs the competition by coming out with such a totally re-invented vehicle SYSTEM - one that meets all my vehicular consumer needs affordably, including affordable to operate ? then I will stick with Japanese.

THAT is the personal transport system my family desires! And more!