Ford are asking for a premium on a smaller engine?

[OBI_agent]

This news kind of bemuses me. Lets get the facts right before I make my point.

Ford's new 2.0 ecoboost(turbo) stats=237hp/250lb-ft and tow rating of only 2000pounds.

Ford's new 3.5 V6 Non-turbo=292hp/255lb-ft and a tow rating of 5000 pounds.

I don't know the exact pricing but many articles point out that FORD will be charging a premium on the smaller, less powerful turbo engine compared to the bigger, naturally aspirated more powerful engine. Hmmm.

Now, if I was in the market in this particular segment, would I really be bothered to pay a premium for a engine that gives more miles per gallon??

My answer is plain NOOooOOO. I don't think so.

To explain better, I don't think the petrol cost has gone that far up to make them justify the fuel savings.

2nd .... camonnnn, isn't the bigger more powerful engine should be more exclusive? It's like Audi charging more for their 2.0T then their 3.0SC V6 in the S4 or even Accord charging more for their 4cylinder engine compared to the V6.

3rd Turbo engines have a higher maintenance compared to a naturally aspirated engine. So am I going to save that much money to justify the fuel gain?

4th The power deficit. The tow rating difference is massive and down on power too. 237 vs 292.

To summarize, I think Ford has made a bad decision.

Read this from caranddriver.com

the Explorer’s optional engine will be one of Ford’s EcoBoost-branded mills. But it won’t be the twin-turbo 3.5-liter V-6; instead Ford plans to charge a premium for a turbocharged, direct-injected 2.0-liter four-cylinder. It’s less powerful than the standard six, making 237 hp and 250 lb-ft of torque. This one sounds like a tough sell to us, even with its expected fuel-economy boost of 30 percent over the outgoing 4.0-liter. Ford defends the 2.0-liter’s higher price by citing the complexity and cost associated with turbocharged engines. The fact that the engine is built in Spain and then shipped to Ford’s Chicago plant for installation can’t help, either.

I don't care if the engine is made in Antarctica, you just can't charge more for a smaller less powerful engine.

Here's a link to the article
http://www.caranddriver.com/news/car...hotos_and_info

P.S I'm not interested in buying this car even though it looks ok

[Silver-Bolt]

The complexity of the turbo motor make them more expensive than a N/A motor.

[Ignignokt]

They're a bit late to the SUV MPG party IMO; however, how many Exploder shoppers ACTUALLY care about the tow rating? And of those who look at it, how many will use it? Not an incredibly high percentage. The V6 is still available to them. The American car market is a moving target, usually the consumers in general have blinders on when shopping, looking at only the issue-du-jour, and with another rise in gas prices imminent, I think it's a good move by Ford.

[majin ssj eric]

So, 60 hp less and unable to tow even a Mazda Miata is MORE expensive???? Yeah, in your dreams Ford....

[Muffnbluff]

Subaru does this with the Legacy, although the turbo engine there is 265hp vs 256hp for the H6.

I definitely wouldn't want a 2L turbo on a car the size of the Explorer, it'll be interesting to see how that works out for them.

[majin ssj eric]

Originally Posted by Ignignokt

They're a bit late to the SUV MPG party IMO; however, how many Exploder shoppers ACTUALLY care about the tow rating? And of those who look at it, how many will use it? Not an incredibly high percentage. The V6 is still available to them. The American car market is a moving target, usually the consumers in general have blinders on when shopping, looking at only the issue-du-jour, and with another rise in gas prices imminent, I think it's a good move by Ford.

Uhhhh, I would bet that would be ALOT of Explorer buyers. For a vehicle as big as the new Explorer, 2000 lbs is a joke. Who the hell buys a seven passenger SUV and is willing to pay extra to gain 2-3 mpg?? Not exactly saving the planet here??

[mtla4]

Now Ford can can the Escape and sell this thing at a lower price. What are they waiting to put a diesel in there.

[Ignignokt]

Originally Posted by majin ssj eric

Uhhhh, I would bet that would be ALOT of Explorer buyers. For a vehicle as big as the new Explorer, 2000 lbs is a joke. Who the hell buys a seven passenger SUV and is willing to pay extra to gain 2-3 mpg?? Not exactly saving the planet here??

Really?

If people were so concerned about towing, they would probably not be shopping unibodies.... Just sayin'

Old Explorer? Buy for truck stuff. New Explorer? Buy to get to and from soccer practice.

[kyleb350]

It should have been the 3.5L EcoBoost It's made here in the States compared to the 2.0L made in Spain

[OBI_agent]

Originally Posted by Silver-Bolt

The complexity of the turbo motor make them more expensive than a N/A motor.

Originally Posted by Ignignokt

They're a bit late to the SUV MPG party IMO; however, how many Exploder shoppers ACTUALLY care about the tow rating? And of those who look at it, how many will use it? Not an incredibly high percentage. The V6 is still available to them. The American car market is a moving target, usually the consumers in general have blinders on when shopping, looking at only the issue-du-jour, and with another rise in gas prices imminent, I think it's a good move by Ford.

Hmmm...ok for a moment, forget about the tow rating. Think about the maintenance on the 4 cylinder. I bet the 3.5 NA V6 is easier on the pocket compared to the 2.0t 4.
Plus, are you really going to save that much money on gas to justify the premium and maintenance on the engine? i bet it won't.

And on top of that, you're down on power?
Don't tell me consumers don't want power anymore. And if you're getting the extra power for lesser price, why not. If the oil prices were through the roof, I would have agreed with you. But it ain't so. I question Ford's timing on this scheme. With the current oil prices, people will opt for the more powerful engine. And ''intelligent'' buyers will also know that they are getting a hassle free engine as you and I know, turbo engines aren't that reliable

[OBI_agent]

Originally Posted by majin ssj eric

So, 60 hp less and unable to tow even a Mazda Miata is MORE expensive???? Yeah, in your dreams Ford....

Lol...this made me laugh because this is what I thought.

Originally Posted by Muffnbluff

Subaru does this with the Legacy, although the turbo engine there is 265hp vs 256hp for the H6.

I definitely wouldn't want a 2L turbo on a car the size of the Explorer, it'll be interesting to see how that works out for them.

Exactly my point. If the turbo engine was more powerful, the premium on the engine would have been justified. And in the Subaru, the turbo H4 is way quicker then the NA H6. So it's justifying it's premium

Originally Posted by kyleb350

It should have been the 3.5L EcoBoost It's made here in the States compared to the 2.0L made in Spain

Hey, you read the article.
And many people believed that the 3.5 V6 Twin turbo would have been a option but alas it didn't happen. It would have been fun though and I'm sure it will come in the future.
Actually man, you know what. I'm waiting for the 3.5 V6TT to make it's debut on a Mustang. That would be awesome. And it's possible because this engine is finally going to debut in the F-150. That means Ford has made it applicable in Rear wheel drive application. I know the V8 is more fun and sounds better but the twin turbo V6 on a RWD car would be awesome. Rumor's are that it could debut as a special edition GT350 form
P.S you can still get the edge with a ecoboost. The turbo V6 is going to debut on it soon.

[Ignignokt]

Originally Posted by OBI_agent

Hmmm...ok for a moment, forget about the tow rating. Think about the maintenance on the 4 cylinder. I bet the 3.5 NA V6 is easier on the pocket compared to the 2.0t 4.
Plus, are you really going to save that much money on gas to justify the premium and maintenance on the engine? i bet it won't.

And on top of that, you're down on power?
Don't tell me consumers don't want power anymore. And if you're getting the extra power for lesser price, why not. If the oil prices were through the roof, I would have agreed with you. But it ain't so. I question Ford's timing on this scheme. With the current oil prices, people will opt for the more powerful engine. And ''intelligent'' buyers will also know that they are getting a hassle free engine as you and I know, turbo engines aren't that reliable

You make some good points. I'd bet that the V6 would be easier on the budget as far as maintenance goes, but we're talking about new cars, so a lot of people dismiss that due to warranty coverage.

You question Ford's timing. I think they're trying to be proactive rather than reactive here. It took the US automakers too damn long to adjust their lineups to be easier on gas, and while they were shifting their focus, it hurt them pretty bad. I think they're aiming to prevent a repeat.

There are rising gas prices in the future, no doubt about it, the severity of which will determine how big the MPG thing becomes again. I think people on this forum have a hard time seeing things through the average American car shopper's eyes. They (your average American car shoppers) don't know shit about cars. All they know is what they see on the news, and that leads them to believe that oil=bad, MPG=God, for so many damn reasons, and that gas is "expensive" (relative only to this continent) and will spike again soon.

Currently, oil is cheap. That will change. It's just a matter of exactly when and exactly how much. This will determine whether or not the 2.0 Ecoboost will be a hit in this vehicle. I wish they would have put it in the Fiesta instead though.

Would I buy the new unibody Exploder with a 2.0T? No. But I can see the angle they're playing here.

[Muffnbluff]

From a tuners perspective the 2L turbo is better, but we're not talking about a tuner car. I'm sure those 2L ecoboosts are capable of over 300hp.

[OBI_agent]

Originally Posted by Ignignokt

You make some good points. I'd bet that the V6 would be easier on the budget as far as maintenance goes, but we're talking about new cars, so a lot of people dismiss that due to warranty coverage.

You question Ford's timing. I think they're trying to be proactive rather than reactive here. It took the US automakers too damn long to adjust their lineups to be easier on gas, and while they were shifting their focus, it hurt them pretty bad. I think they're aiming to prevent a repeat.

There are rising gas prices in the future, no doubt about it, the severity of which will determine how big the MPG thing becomes again. I think people on this forum have a hard time seeing things through the average American car shopper's eyes. They (your average American car shoppers) don't know shit about cars. All they know is what they see on the news, and that leads them to believe that oil=bad, MPG=God, for so many damn reasons, and that gas is "expensive" (relative only to this continent) and will spike again soon.

Currently, oil is cheap. That will change. It's just a matter of exactly when and exactly how much. This will determine whether or not the 2.0 Ecoboost will be a hit in this vehicle. I wish they would have put it in the Fiesta instead though.

Would I buy the new unibody Exploder with a 2.0T? No. But I can see the angle they're playing here.

You raised some good points there. I'm sure that most american consumers will fall for this setup of smaller engine is worth the premium as they will assume, it will save them loads of oil.

BUt I still think Ford should have encouraged rather then discouraged to buy the smaller engine. They shouldn't have asked for a premium on the smaller engine and that's that. Ford being a huge company could have sourced the engine to be manufactured somewhere in USA rather then Spain but that didn't happen.
If they want the ecoboost 4cylinder to be more common in their lineup, they have to get their R&D right and make it cheaper.

[Sniz]

a 2,000lb tow rating is PATHETIC.

[majin ssj eric]

Originally Posted by Ignignokt

You make some good points. I'd bet that the V6 would be easier on the budget as far as maintenance goes, but we're talking about new cars, so a lot of people dismiss that due to warranty coverage.

You question Ford's timing. I think they're trying to be proactive rather than reactive here. It took the US automakers too damn long to adjust their lineups to be easier on gas, and while they were shifting their focus, it hurt them pretty bad. I think they're aiming to prevent a repeat.

There are rising gas prices in the future, no doubt about it, the severity of which will determine how big the MPG thing becomes again. I think people on this forum have a hard time seeing things through the average American car shopper's eyes. They (your average American car shoppers) don't know shit about cars. All they know is what they see on the news, and that leads them to believe that oil=bad, MPG=God, for so many damn reasons, and that gas is "expensive" (relative only to this continent) and will spike again soon.

Currently, oil is cheap. That will change. It's just a matter of exactly when and exactly how much. This will determine whether or not the 2.0 Ecoboost will be a hit in this vehicle. I wish they would have put it in the Fiesta instead though.

Would I buy the new unibody Exploder with a 2.0T? No. But I can see the angle they're playing here.

This is the exact problem. We are being fed a bunch of BS daily by a proactive media and a bloviating regime in Washington. There is no market reasoning for gas prices to continue to rise, just government regulations/taxes. We aren't running out of oil anytime soon, but the media and the leftists in this country want you to believe that we're down to the last dregs of the stuff.

You wanna see oil/gas prices plummet? Get rid of the restrictions on drilling, eliminate the different state requirements for gas blends, lower the gas tax, and exert more pressure on our OPEC allies to maintain high levels of production. Voila, cheap gas for at least the next 50 years.

There is no crisis that needs to be solved. Obama wants everyone running around thinking the world will be out of oil by 2016...

[mtla4]

Originally Posted by Sniz

a 2,000lb tow rating is PATHETIC.

At that point you put an hitch on a car and call it a day

[Ignignokt]

Originally Posted by Sniz

a 2,000lb tow rating is PATHETIC.

Yeah. I think Ford's basically saying "You don't tow with this." I wonder if there has been a statistical analysis of mid-size SUV owners and what percentage never tow anything. I guess you'd have to specify unibody as well because there are still a lot of people who buy body on frame SUV's just because they want to tow and have a full interior at the same time.

Originally Posted by majin ssj eric

This is the exact problem. We are being fed a bunch of BS daily by a proactive media and a bloviating regime in Washington. There is no market reasoning for gas prices to continue to rise, just government regulations/taxes. We aren't running out of oil anytime soon, but the media and the leftists in this country want you to believe that we're down to the last dregs of the stuff.

You wanna see oil/gas prices plummet? Get rid of the restrictions on drilling, eliminate the different state requirements for gas blends, lower the gas tax, and exert more pressure on our OPEC allies to maintain high levels of production. Voila, cheap gas for at least the next 50 years.

There is no crisis that needs to be solved. Obama wants everyone running around thinking the world will be out of oil by 2016...

You're preaching to the choir here. I'm not saying I agree with anything behind why I think the engine won't be a failure in this vehicle; I was just saying I understand the approach by the marketing team.

I think that 2.0L Ecoboost engine is going to be pretty cheap to manufacture pretty soon, as it looks like Ford is going to be introducing it into a lot of models (again, unfortunately, I don't think we'll see it where it belongs; in the Fiesta).

Originally Posted by mtla4

At that point you put an hitch on a car and call it a day

Yeah. Euro-style.