How bad did ford Sandbag the Ecoboost?

[BoostedCanadianPoney]

So it's safe to say this won't spawn another video on the disenchanted Ecoboost paranoia channel?

too late video is already up... i honestly don't get it

Sponsored

 

[doulos4jc]

With the exception of the turbo all of the other built in restrictions are happily collecting dust in the basement.

 

[Rogues Gambit]

With the exception of the turbo all of the other built in restrictions are happily collecting dust in the basement.

warehouse here

 

[Glenn G]

Those were all my paper weights on display. The only thing stock about my intake and exhaust systems is the turbo.

 

[Wulf Titan]

too late video is already up... i honestly don't get it

Are you talking about Subaru wrx fan?

 

[Glenn G]

Get this man hired and be an exec. at Ford or something.

Lol, he is in his sixties, he retired in 2009 and was head of an engineering department, He started teaching in 2010 because he was bored, I don't think he even knows or cares how much the University is paying him.

 

[Redcruzer]

With all the intercooler questions in certain threads lately, I thought i'd bring this thread back. it was probably one of the most helpful threads I've seen on here. not sure the photos work anymore though.

 

[Bull Run]

I'm glad you revived this thread, because even a moderate size turbo upgrade makes a huge difference. I had my co-worker test drive my EB in various stages of upgrade (he had a '16 GT and now has a '17 350R). His comments:

FBO/tune+stock turbo: Felt like it can outgun the GT from 0-40MPH but starts to run out of breath.

FBO/tune+WMI+VS2+: Pulled hard all the way to 90MPH, felt that it can take on the GT and 350R on acceleration.

Those were all my paper weights on display. The only thing stock about my intake and exhaust systems is the turbo.

What's the ETA on your stock turbo joining your "display"?

 

[Glenn G]

I'm glad you revived this thread, because even a moderate size turbo upgrade makes a huge difference. I had my co-worker test drive my EB in various stages of upgrade (he had a '16 GT and now has a '17 350R). His comments:

FBO/tune+stock turbo: Felt like it can outgun the GT from 0-40MPH but starts to run out of breath.

FBO/tune+WMI+VS2+: Pulled hard all the way to 90MPH, felt that it can take on the GT and 350R on acceleration.



What's the ETA on your stock turbo joining your "display"?

Any day now :cheers:

 

[5.0yote]

Read this thread start to finish, I believe its so true, the first two items I upgraded was the factory IC and diverter valve, first thing the factory diverter valve, as soon as I put in the Turbosmart BOV and adjusted it the very first impression was off throttle shift change response was so much more improved, it took less time to recover boost between gears. The temps with factory IC where I am were pretty solid but still 116 degrees where my Mishimoto would sit at 90 in 87 degree weather is sad.

Compared to my 15GT my 16 EBM is definitely faster 0-40 with a tune and FBOs, then 5000RPMS happens and its done. At least even with my Precision 5862 it could carry the power to redline and make it a fair fight 0-60 and I think it would do well in the 8th. Just needs more fuel to get up there.

Its a good platform, I just wish they did more with it, or at least dropped the 3.5L in there.

 

[superblur]

I think the head is the biggest and hardest factor to overcome. It's a great design for low down torque, but it flows incredibly bad higher in the rpm range. Even with a full port and valve job it's not even close to what the coyote and cyclone flow from the factory.

This is even more evident when you compare this engine to other 4 cylinders using the same turbo. The EcoBoost makes 400 rwhp at 30 psi where other engines make 600 rwhp on the same boost on the same turbo.

Im excited to see what the EcoBoost community does with the ford racing cylinder head that allows a proper manifold instead of the head-ifold that the factory offers. The numbers should be amazing if it's done right.

 

[Juben]

I think the head is the biggest and hardest factor to overcome. It's a great design for low down torque, but it flows incredibly bad higher in the rpm range. Even with a full port and valve job it's not even close to what the coyote and cyclone flow from the factory.

This is even more evident when you compare this engine to other 4 cylinders using the same turbo. The EcoBoost makes 400 rwhp at 30 psi where other engines make 600 rwhp on the same boost on the same turbo.

Im excited to see what the EcoBoost community does with the ford racing cylinder head that allows a proper manifold instead of the head-ifold that the factory offers. The numbers should be amazing if it's done right.

The valves are smaller on the IEP head, as it was designed for the 2.0, and if I recall correctly, Adam didn't think it offered much benefit over the factory head unless it was ported out significantly.

 

[TheLion]

Why not just buy a V8 and super charge it as opposed to doing all the custom work? Unless your just so curious to see how much power you can push through a 4 cylinder...you can buy a roush super charged coyote with ECU, harness, tranny and drive shaft from midway mustang for 10.5k....it'll put out over 400 rwhp all day long on pump gas without a hitch.

I think the 2.3T make sense up to a point, but once you start going past a certain power output the cost goes up exponentially and it becomes a grenade waiting to explode.

Considering my 2007 NA Focus ST only made 165 hp with exhaust and CAI, with had a 2.3L (same stroke but nothing else in common), I think 335~345hp on pump gas is pretty impressive.

We forget that just 7 years ago Ford's 4.9L V8 in the mustang made 325 HP / 350 ft-lbs with worse fuel mileage and just as heavy. GM wasn't much better either in their previous generation PIG of a Camaro.

I think they were making around 400 hp in a 3800 lb car, which isn't slow, but it's no where near the blistering 12.3 they run now with their 6.2L and A8 auto.

REgarding the heads though, Ford designed the 2.3 Ecoboost for the factory turbo which is supposed to provide a good balance of power and drive ability.

Ever drive a Subaru WRX STi? The drive ability sucks compared to the EB, it makes 30 HP less and 100 ft-lbs less torque with none of the low end grunt that makes the EB mustang enjoyable.

So to criticize that particular part design I think in this case is a bit short sighted. There's always after market upgrades as well, the sky is the limit when it comes to engine mods and built engines.

I don't think the head is part of sand bagging the engine like the inter cooler and tune was, I think it's just the nature of their intention. I think it's pretty impressive what you can do on the stock block compared to what Subaru, GM or Mazda has and EB's are super cheap if you get a base model, I paid 26k out the door for mine including their 6 year triple care plan. I know, I know, I'm playing devil's advocate there, but we can criticize every part of the car in some way and say it sucks...some parts deserve that criticism, others don't.

It's a good cheap mod platform and offers more than it's competitors at the price point. And there's always that super charger 5.0 waiting at midway or even a 5.2 flat plane if you can snatch it up quickly enough!

 

[Souldriver]

It's that Ford actually spent money to slow it down to maintain that 125 hp advantage. It would be nowhere near that otherwise.

And if there were no cost concerns or corners cut the GT would probably mae ~$500. I mean even the Gt and Gt350 have costs pulled back, how kuch would it of been to put in a real OPG and not have customers crack it open later and spend magnitudes moee than if it was just done from the factory.

 

[Glenn G]

And if there were no cost concerns or corners cut the GT would probably mae ~$500. I mean even the Gt and Gt350 have costs pulled back, how kuch would it of been to put in a real OPG and not have customers crack it open later and spend magnitudes moee than if it was just done from the factory.

I think you are missing the point, Cost cutting is one thing, actually spending money to deliberately limit performance is another.
as it stands, the difference between an EB and a GT is a bit more than the difference between a GT and an SS. With a proper tune only (like the FRP tune) the gap narrows even more.

The point was that had those changes not been made, the GT would still be faster, but you would be talking about 100ths to 60 and 10ths in the quarter for $7k more.

Given the reaction of alot of GT owners to any ecoboost performance thread, Ford marketing probably hit the nail on the head in nerfing the EB to protect the higher profit GT.

And yes once you cross the 450WHP mark, which requires a built engine, the Price equation shifts to favor the GT with FI, While boost is the replacement for displacement, there is no replacement to displacement with boost, or needing less than half of the BEMP for the same power.

Sponsored