Looks awfully familiar to MINI/BMW 1.6L twin scroll turbo engine (175-208HP). Should this engine be even close enough to compete, it could be lots of fun to have one of these and might turn really boring Focus in to something lively and fun to drive. Let's see if Ford can handle this properly and sharpen the edge on a dull knife.

"At the same time, EcoBoost engines will deliver the off-the-line power and performance characteristics familiar to diesel enthusiasts."

Oh, like 430hp/800+ft/lbs, 30mpg, ability to tow 5+ tons, and go 350,000 miles before overhaul (as my Cummins)?

"* A 3.5-liter EcoBoost V-6 would replace naturally aspirated V-8 engines"

So a 220cu/in V6 will replace a V8 (all you Mustang guys must be raising an eyebrow over that one).

Seriously, I don't know how longevity will be with such a small powerplant and so much heat from the turbo.

Reminds me of all the excitement when foreign manufacturers started putting "DOHC" stickers on their cars. All of a sudden people considered a pushrod engine outdated even if it had better fuel mileage and power band. Hopefully this will really live up to expectations as turbo cars are really fun to drive.

@ wvo:

The 3.5l Ecoboost that's going in the Taurus SHO will churn out 365 HP...plenty of power to match a lot of V8s. Not sure where the "Eco" part comes in though, since the gas mileage is 17/25... Car & Driver test one and got 16 mpg with a heavy foot.

Hmmm, a 2.0L turbo, where have I seen that before?

This really is like a DOHC sticker that tomt points out. BMW's 3.0L twin turbo has been around for how long now? And that doesn't get much better mileage in the 335i at 17/26 and some how manged worse in the lighter, smaller 135i at 17/25.

I would also like to see the repair bills once people start caking those turbos. I also doubt most people would be smart enough to put a catch can in them as well. I will stick with my v8s with more power and same mileage.

While all this is fine an dandy, I have to ask if insurance companies are going to slug owners a higher premium on policies with an eco boost engine over a normaly aspirated engine.

Some of you are so biased it almost just borders on being anti-American. If this technology was touted by a foreign automakers you'd be bragging about it and going on and on about it. Ford manages to achieve a great balance of economy and power and you just pass it off as another old BMW idea. Hmmm. Have you checked the ratings of Ford and BMW in Consumers Report latey? The German autos don't do all that well. Then, there is the cost of those German imports.

Some of you are so biased it almost just borders on being anti-American. If this technology was touted by a foreign automakers you'd be bragging about it and going on and on about it. Ford manages to achieve a great balance of economy and power and you just pass it off as another old BMW idea. Hmmm. Have you checked the ratings of Ford and BMW in Consumers Report latey? The German autos don't do all that well. Then, there is the cost of those German imports.

Some of you are so biased it almost just borders on being anti-American. If this technology was touted by a foreign automakers you'd be bragging about it and going on and on about it. Ford manages to achieve a great balance of economy and power and you just pass it off as another old BMW idea. Hmmm. Have you checked the ratings of Ford and BMW in Consumers Report latey? The German autos don't do all that well. Then, there is the cost of those German imports.

Well actually John, I think a lot of us wouldn't be so quick to judge if Ford had actually done anything with the "eco" part.

A 365HP turbo V6 is nice and all, but why can't you make a 260hp version that gets better gas mileage? Wasn't that the point of eco-boost? Oh I don't know try something like the miller cycle Mazda engines..

Anti-American? I don't see anything really anti-American above. Myself and others merely pointed out that other companies have been doing this for a while now. Ford slaps a 'green' title on it and all the sudden its a golden egg? Really?

Also, the 2.0L turbo I was talking about is the LNF, which is an American engine.... That's really anti-American....

As for 'great balance of power and gas mileage'. I can get the same gas mileage and more power with a v8. Does that make the v8 a supreme balance of power and gas mileage now? 16/25 for 400 hp. 16/25 for 375 hp. Both cost thousands less. Heck, even Hyundai has a 4.6L v8 good for 17/25 at 375 hp. What happens when all those v8s get DI like Ford's 'Ecoboost' line up? GM's trial 6.0L truck engine was making north of 450 hp, just by adding DI. Keep drinking the Kool Aid.

Anti-American? I don't see anything really anti-American above. Myself and others merely pointed out that other companies have been doing this for a while now. Ford slaps a 'green' title on it and all the sudden its a golden egg? Really?

Also, the 2.0L turbo I was talking about is the LNF, which is an American engine.... That's really anti-American....

As for 'great balance of power and gas mileage'. I can get the same gas mileage and more power with a v8. Does that make the v8 a supreme balance of power and gas mileage now? 16/25 for 400 hp. 16/25 for 375 hp. Both cost thousands less. Heck, even Hyundai has a 4.6L v8 good for 17/25 at 375 hp. What happens when all those v8s get DI like Ford's 'Ecoboost' line up? GM's trial 6.0L truck engine was making north of 450 hp, just by adding DI. Keep drinking the Kool Aid.

This is definitely a step in the right direction.

Why use a V8 to churn out 350hp when a well designed V6 can do it and get better gas mileage on top of that? For the longest time it was like Ford just didn't want to research more efficient engine designs and just kept with their high displacement/sucky gas mileage philosophy*. While all the old school Ford guys might revile this change, I think it is certainly a step in the right direction and it will definitely aid them to financial recovery.

* My old 95 Camry produced 188hp, 205 lbs of torque out of a 3.0 V6, whereas their 98 Mustang 3.8 V6 produced 150hp, 215 lbs of torque. Sad.

At least Ford has been trying to make a better product. Unlike GM, who puts out new sheet metal with the same crap under it, Ford has been working on the heart of a better car: the engine.

At least Ford has been trying to make a better product. Unlike GM, who puts out new sheet metal with the same crap under it, Ford has been working on the heart of a better car: the engine.

My insurance went down by 1000 dollars when I switched from my Legacy GT to my IS350.

Main reason for the decrease was definitely the turbo. Legacy cost 10k less, had 50 less horses and had AWD. My coworker pays more on his Audi A3 than I do on my Lexus as well. Car cost 15k less.

The average life of a turbocharger is 100k miles.It can be more with conscientious driving but I've also seen many a turbo fail before 50k.

I owned a Camaro with the LS1 engine. It was a V8 and returned 18/25mpg and ran like it was burning it. To compare that to Ford's V6, yea, maybe the hp was close, but in the long run, it would seem the higher revs the V6 has to make to match the V8 would give it a shorter lifespan.

By the way, are any of you experiencing problems posting to the Torquereport? When I do, my PC,after a minute or so, responds with a message about the gateway has timed out, but my post appears anyway.

Tisk tisk t_r_nelson. Guess this is why the new Equinox gets better highway mileage then a Ford Escape Hybrid? I wouldn't call that the same old. The LNF came out a few years ago which is good for 30 mpg highway and 22 city with 260 hp. What does Ford currently have that can do that? Then let's move onto the LLT. 304 hp good for 18/29 mpg. Again, what does Ford have that comes close?

Ford has been making a better product then they were, yes. But they are still playing catch up in the drive train department.

wvo, same issues here.

It's to bad turbo charging a smaller engine to get more HP doesn't actually equate to any better fuel economy over a naturally aspirated larger engine, like the ecoboost 3.5L in the the Taurus SHO vs the 5.7 Hemi in the Charger R/T, the Taurus get's 365hp/350lb.-ft and the Charger gets 375hp/410lb.-ft, for the sake of argument sure it's close to V8 performance but low on the torque, but the Taurus get's 17/25 and the Charger gets 16/25, so it's still V8 fuel economy, at which point you're better off with a naturally aspirated V8 as it will be more reliable.

@wvo:

Well, for all out performance, under some circumstances a V8 makes sense. But my point is that Ford's smaller powerplants have always been high in displacement, low in power and gas mileage. The current 3.5 V6 in the new Taurus has been sorely needed for a long time. As for longevity; if they designed it right, I'm sure it'll last. Toyota's primary V6 engine (GR series) puts out similar power with the same displacement; and knowing Toyota, they never would have built that V6 if they knew it wasn't capable of running for 200k plus miles.

TorqueReport's comment system has been screwed up for months. I think the problems started when they were bought by Bestofmedia. Looks like they have news posters, but nobody to do basic maintenance =P

Rather slap a pair of 57-61mm turbos on a 4.6L V8 and be able to decide between 850 RWHP or 20-25 mpg.

I'm not really seeing the point of "ecoboost" other than to trick hippies who will pat themselves on the back when they see V6 instead of V8 even if they perform identically (HP/TQ & MPG).

Japanese 4-cyl turbo charged engine is more reliable then American V8. It's sad but true.

Ford is attempting to do what Japanese Car industry does for long time and kudos for that.

I'd rather drive Lancer EVO 4-Cyl Turbo Charhed then joke called Mustang with V8 4.6L.

Japanese 4-Cyl Turbo Charged engine is more reliable then American V8. It's sad but true. Ford is attempting to do something Japanese car industry does for long time and kudos for that.

Japanese 4-Cyl Turbo Charged engine is more reliable then American V8. It's sad but true. Ford is attempting to do something Japanese car industry does for long time and kudos for that.

Nissan can squeze 350HP out of V6 engine without Turbo (Nissan 370Z Nismo) and that tells you enough of how inferior American Car industry is.

Nissan can squeze 350HP out of V6 engine without Turbo (Nissan 370Z Nismo) and that tells you enough of how inferior American Car industry is.

Maybe Nissan spent all their money on a v6 miki, since their v8s are a joke. 325 hp and 336 lb-ft and returns 16/21, lmao. 390 hp and 369 ft-lb with 14/20? Then the truck engines: 317 hp, 385 ft-lb, 13/18 and 320 hp, 390 ft-lb, 12/18.

Turbo 4 more reliable then a v8, American none the less? That's grand. Show me a turbo 4 that has lasted a million miles with just fluid changes and filter changes and isn't a diesel. Also where is a turbo 4 that's better then a v8 power, torque, and gas mileage wise.

i'm not a fan of american cars but this effort by Ford is really logical for me since it has been my idea for a long time, to improve efficiency in low displacement but performing engines, is to have turbo charging.
the idea is, use the least displacement to have enough/acceptable torque then tune it to have a lot power.
additionally, imagine the coolness of leaving other cars behind on high altitudes.

i'm not a fan of american cars but this effort by Ford is really logical for me since it has been my idea for a long time, to improve efficiency in low displacement but performing engines, is to have turbo charging.
the idea is, use the least displacement to have enough/acceptable torque then tune it to have a lot power.
additionally, imagine the coolness of leaving other cars behind on high altitudes.

I bought a Ford product before, and I'm wating for the Ford product to be proven to buy again. But a lot of you guys should do a little more reading before you comment. Anyway according to Ford, the turbos are water cooled. So it doesn't require any extra or special oil. 5W20 will do. Also other parts of the SHO drive train, especially the inverse engine configuration limits the power to 365HP. the 3.5L Ecoboost can do a lot more.