This is the Twin-Force technology renamed because Ford thought the original name didn't hint at the fuel saving associated with Direct Injection.

Personally, I think Twin-Force sounded better.

"At the same time, this V-6 gives customers an approximate 2 mpg improvement..."

2 mpg. Great improvement?

I bet the machining on those heads costs alot!

John Chippy:

I think you misunderstood the concept. A twin-forced (or EcoBoost) V6 delivers 30 more lb-ft of torque over a Modular 4.6, and increases the fuel economy by 2mpg.

This is engine-to-engine improvement, all done for the effects of turbos and direct injection. This also means that the same engine (V6) will weight less than the V8. Less weight means better fuel economy as well. Combined, you end up with a far more efficient drivetrain, but suffer no performance loss from the smaller engine.

This is not a hybrid tech, and isn't suppose to replace alternative fuels. Its an improvement of existing technology on existing drivetrains, and you can drop it in any vehicle on any existing engine.

What this article doesn't tell you, is that Ford plans to use Twin-Force (EcoBoost) on All its engines...including the upcoming new V8 (Boss).

I've got nothing against Hybrids. In a few years, the cost should come down to the point where you can easily do a Hybrid vehicle for not a lot more than a vehicle with a normal drivetrain. But Ford needed something to offer now, that can address fuel economy now, at a price that is effective for the average car buyer who can't afford a hybrid. EcoBoost is that solution. And the fact that it offers an increase of power (or no loss of power), means your getting a double wammy: More power with greater fuel economy, or slightly better fuel economy and a power boost to boot....depending on how you look at it.

"But Ford needed something to offer now, that can address fuel economy now, at a price that is effective for the average car buyer who can't afford a hybrid. EcoBoost is that solution. And the fact that it offers an increase of power (or no loss of power), means your getting a double wammy: More power with greater fuel economy, or slightly better fuel economy and a power boost to boot....depending on how you look at it. - morgande"

The Prius bases at about $20k, a loaded Camry hybrid is about $30k, and VW's using the 2.0L FSI engine range from about $24-30k. These models are about half the price of what this Lincoln will be. So, how is cramming this tech (that's rip of Audi's FSI) on a $48k Lincoln (eek) effective for the average buyer?

At the MKS's price I would be looking at the Lexus GS450h and various Audi's and BMW's (335i) that already have turbocharged and/or direct injected engines.

Ford is too late to the table again and the MKS is already a flop. Only Audi can sell $40k+ cars that FWD based in profitable numbers.

Its nice that they have the technology implemented, but they've implemented it in the wrong way. 2mpg is hardly significant, when gas is $3.50. As others have pointed out, bmw audi and mb have clean diesel tech in the wings that will have the same or better performance but maintain 50mpg. This car will be lucky to get 25mpg. The big 3 are still oblivious to the market.

I think its good development for turbo 4 stroke engine technology. because it will increased power and lower consumption gasoline.

While 2 MPG doesn't seem significant consider its about a 10% increase. Also this is nothing new, Ford is just a bit late to market. GM and other makers have had this out for at least 3 years.

At the MKS's price I would be looking at the Lexus GS450h and various Audi's and BMW's (335i) that already have turbocharged and/or direct injected engines.

Ford is too late to the table again and the MKS is already a flop. Only Audi can sell $40k+ cars that FWD based in profitable numbers.

The MKS should start at about $38K, and thats well equipped (SYNC is standard). Yes Ford is not the first to offer a direct injection/turboed drivetrain. But since they aren't the first, does that mean they shouldn't bother?

Also, the MKS is not going to be the exclusive vehicle with EcoBoost. It will make its way as an option on just about all Ford vehicles (including Lincoln and Mercury) in a few years. Thats how Ford plans on controlling its cost...rolling out the technology across as many lines as they can. That means vehicles like the Ford Focus should be getting it soon, and thats far less that the BASE Pirus price of 20K...and significantly more power than anything Hybrids have to offer.

"with an estimated 340-horsepower and more than 340 lb.-ft. of torque" - put it in the Mustang!

Anything that gives more power and more economy at the same time is good by me.

It sounds like the DI-Turbo technology is not solely in the realm of elite luxury brands anymore. It's coming to the masses and costs are dropping. I like that too.

Why not use a smaller one of these engines as part of a hybrid setup? I would think that both 'sides' of a hybrid setup should be maximized.

"with an estimated 340-horsepower and more than 340 lb.-ft. of torque" - put it in the Mustang!"

Gee whiz...340...wow. My '05 GTO (LS2 6.0L) puts out 400hp and 395ft/lbs while getting (real world) 25mpg highway and 18-19mpg city...

Good job Ford...not.

to Sabby:

OK, comparing a 3.5L V-6 to a 6.0L V-8? Come on now, be reasonable. If this tech were applied to a similar engine size, it would beat it hands down.

To sabby...

That's fantastic. My modified 2.0L 3SGTE 4 cyl has 420 horsepower and 370ft/lbs of torque, and I get consistent 22 mpg in the city and 32 on the highway.

That didn't prove anything, did it? No... so explain what your post proved?

Thanks for coming out.

In todays USAToday's business section, Ford hinted at this engine technology in a new car based Explorer replacement. While, direct injection has been utilized before, Ford does have the right idea in paring smaller engines into lighter platforms for efficiency improvements. I believe it is a stopgap technology, until hybrid's become more cost effective to car companies.( perhaps within the next 5 years). In the article, the ecoboost 2.0liter 4 cylinder will be at 275hp or the 6cylinder @375hp, both significantly more powerful than the 6 and 8 cylinder engines currently offered.

Ford, and other manufacturers, are still focusing on increasing horsepower instead of realizing fuel economy gains with new technology. In their press release, they brag about how the V6 is more powerful than the V8.

You can turbo a 2.0L engine and get 250 HP easy, or you can turbo a 1.6L and get 172 HP with decent fuel economy, 27/34 for a car that weighs 2700 lbs(Mini Cooper S). My civic SI 2.0L has 160HP, and similar weight, only gets 26/30 mileage.

Hopefully congress will increase the fleet mileage requirements significantly, so automakers will actually start offering efficient engines.

"The MKS should start at about $38K, and thats well equipped (SYNC is standard). Yes Ford is not the first to offer a direct injection/turboed drivetrain. But since they aren't the first, does that mean they shouldn't bother? - morgande

Start is the key word. If you've read other info about the MKS you would realise the DI Turbo 6 is the top model, and well be priced at around $48k. $38k gets you an NA 3.5L V-6 (similar to every other $25-35k FWD sedan). And Sync is just a gimmick and a way for MS to increase its dominance.

I'm not saying they shouldn't bother at direct injection with forced induction...it's the future of gasoline performance cars in the mainstream price segment. But going above and beyond (like offering it on bottom line cars like the Focus and F-150) is what is needed for a company that's in the red like Ford Motor Co.

"Also, the MKS is not going to be the exclusive vehicle with EcoBoost. It will make its way as an option on just about all Ford vehicles (including Lincoln and Mercury) in a few years. Thats how Ford plans on controlling its cost...rolling out the technology across as many lines as they can. That means vehicles like the Ford Focus should be getting it soon, and thats far less that the BASE Pirus price of 20K...and significantly more power than anything Hybrids have to offer." -morgande

I don't think we'll ever see a direct injected / turbo engine in a less than $20k Ford Focus. The only company that actually puts money / quality into it's cheapest cars is Honda, with the Fit and Civic.

when will they realize that people do not need to do 140mph, but instead need 60mpg. Good ol' US of A...

Perhaps I am missing something in the statement: "Ford sees this new engine technology as a cheaper alternative to hybrids and diesel engines,"
Hybrid, maybe. However, in Europe Ford has some of the sweetest diesels around. So, they have the technology, they do not have to re-invent it.
The MPG cannot be touched by a petrol/gasoline, CO emissions are lower and with particulate filters pass the strictest emviromental legislation and the engine itself will last much longer.
Diesel has a bad rap in the US, I understand, but drive a Focus or Mondeo TDCi and you will change you mind forever.
But then, the R&D spent is probably cheaper then trying to educate the American public.

Turbo lag is always a concern with having the "same response" as a non-turbo engine. Better to look at clean diesel technology.
Hope Ford makes it as a car company, what it brings to market sure misses the mark for the american market ie, ugly and slow.

The mustang is going to be getting a NA boss engine 5.0 which will be making 425hp. while all of you people bitch and moan about the fuel economy in the us we are not allowed to have diesels because of the particle emission which up until recently with the uria filters were not clean enough to be introduced here except for in the trucks which have reduced standards. The vw golf made an entrance but it was to expensive and vw has a bad rap with make bad cars here in the us. Plus in the 70s diesels were brought here in a rush so they just modified fas engines which were not strong enough to work as diesels and got a bad rap as well for being unreliable.