The Idea behind all of the tests. One Year dedicated to gathering Fuel Economy Data and HorsePower data. The reason I went for one year was because I thought it would be a really solid sample size. I am only going to summarize the results as I am still preparing a big report for myself.
What you will see in this thread:
HorsePower numbers (AVG and BEST)
Fuel Economy(1, 3, 6, 9, 12 Month AVGs)
Model Numbers of specific parts
Details of exhaust specifications
Engine Specifications
Other Specifications I do not want you to GOOGLE LOL
Maybe a cat here and there
What you will not see in this thread:
Picture by picture assembly disassembly: I just do not have the time.
Raw Data
Most of the data because I am just summarizing results
For the sake of not messing up my car (A Point @Kiaxa made) I am going Naturally Aspirated for the remainder of this year. Not that it cant handle it but more or less for longevities sake and well (the moneys is drying up).
Stock Engine Specifications: Ford is higher spec than Mazda/Volvo
Air Filter Changed to Cotton Gauze Dry Filter – High Flow – reusable
Allow me to point out the ford used the Duratech 20 as the base for their first EcoBoost engine. in fact the 2.0L Ecoboost is a DTech 20 with new valves and timing changes and yada yada.
Designed by Ford Racing/Eaton (Cant remember who it was machined by) In fact you can bolt this sucker on to a lot of different four cylinder engines Boost: 7.0 with/at Relief Valve
Horsepower on Dyno: 215.6@6000 RPM Best: 220.2 HP (HOT DAMN I thought my engine was gonna blow the entire year LOL) Torque: 192 lb*ft@4500 RPM (Within Margins) Best: 197.6 Lb*ft
Fuel Economy Data:
1 Month: AVG: HWY-- 35.3 MPG@65 MPH CTY 24.3 MPG Not really surprising given parasitic belt drag Best: HWY-- 37.3 MPG@55 MPH CTY 25.6 MPG
measurement methods: Absolute miles driven/ Amount of gas used (Exact according to sensor percentage *capacity)
Conclusions: Damn the power boost. Well thats to be expected given 30-35 percent boost avg over NA anyways. Certainly did not help fuel economy at ALL. LOL It was fun. Beating people off the line was pretty cool in a Focus! albeit embarrassing for some of them
Horsepower on Dyno: 235.6@6000 RPM Best: 248.2 HP (Ford designs there engines well. i called them up and asked. hey how far could I take it. They said about 265 HP is how far we got at the max << HOLY SHIT) Torque: 201 lb*ft@4500 RPM (Within Margins) Best: 206.6 Lb*ft
Fuel Economy Data: Now before you guys call Kuhscheiße. Realize that a turbo charger increases efficiency and a twin scroll can do it at an even lower RPM given how a twin scroll works. In fact I properly tuned the engine to all the specs I added on. I tuned it pretty well and I got more fuel economy with the turbo. At first I said no way but the results do not lie. I increased fuel efficiency! Thats a step in the right direction given the power. I realized then that the power was at the high end and leaned out the fuel mixture right when it begins to spool. Which made 55-65 an optimum range for ridiculous fuel efficiceny. I couldnt wait to test it. For the record The mileage is still crappy in the city but that is to be expected. You basically dump fuel when the turbocharger is fully spooled up. BTW it sounded AMAZING
What I noticed here was that the city remained pretty bad and I think that was because the turbocharger obstructs exhaust flow at low RPMs when it is not spooled up. Despite it being a twin scroll it did not aid in the fuel economy in the city. However on the highway it triumphed over everything else
Relevant Fuel mixture information will be posted on the fourth post.
measurement methods: Absolute miles driven/ Amount of gas used (Exact according to sensor percentage *capacity)
Off the line power: Go with a supercharger Best City Fuel Economy: Naturally Aspirated Best Highway Fuel Economy: Turbocharger
The ford focus though only rated at 38 highway and 28-29 City. Is surprisingly far more capable than what ford made it out to be. I have no clue why they went with such underwhelming numbers but I suspect it was for longevity.
Fuel Mixture Stock: 15.7:1 (My tune) I ran all the other chargers similarly lean proportionally. See you do not want to run a turbo that lean because youll melt your engine. i will get the exact tune here sometime soon. I have not got all the data completed.
FUEL TYPE: 91 octane E0 (Thats right Zero ethanol premium fuel) :P... Its also why my gas mileage is better (not because of octane) but because theres no ethanol :D
Feedback
If you would like to know anything else let me know. I will post information at my discretion but your welcome to ask
Pictures from some of the drives I took:
I see this everyday. Its a common sight on my routes
That is not a surprise actually.. have you paid attention to fords research with the ecoboost 2.0 and 2.3 ? They experienced both increase in power and efficiency which originally stunned them. I guess its the end of NA engines pretty soon huh?
That and their engines are modified to handle the increase much better handle it.
The End of a NA engine, atleast in the EU is allready starting to happen for a while. I mean nowdays its all about downsizing, small turbo charged engines, with a great fuell economy, and low emissions.
Remember Ford has to sell these to people who think that checking the oil means making sure the red light on the dash goes out. that kitten is soooo cute
See I think where the downsizing does not show enough improvement is the SUV market. The problem in the US is people are complaining that their SUV with a 2.0 or 2.3 or 2.7 is not getting great fuel economy and then ford figures out why they havent. most of the guys have spent most of their time in the 3000-5000 range of RPMS and they dont even need to be that high for decent acceleration. Fricken idiots here in the US sometimes.
I like what ford is doing. They are bringing all the Euro Tech here. Ford is just awesome
Yeah but in the US its also a bit of a diffrent story i think. SUV´s etc are big lumpy and heavy, you can trow a small 4 cilinder turbo charged engine in there, but it probably wont get the best fuell economy. And the engine will suffer way more, then a big NA V6 for example.
Ford has before.. and it lasts a decent amount of time. Fords SUV are built with all lightweight aluminum and composite nowadays. The 3.5 Liter ecoboost is a fricken Beast of an engine...
That and Hot Hatches are kinda a thing here now LOL Finally. I wish I had the RS so badly LOL. I test drove it. Man its a blast
there are other brands I like but I am rather picky. I also wish I had a small diesel car too. That would make me happy. wish ford would make it
Yeah I know. You know whats more messed up. Those same people who do those kinds of things and blow things to pieces are the kinda that think a forced induction service is going to help with carbonization. When all it does is blow the damn turbo Face Desk...
Doesnt the 2.7 liter ford ecoboost v6 and some of the crazy v6 tri charged engines get good MPG? Seems like they would be a modicum more affordable LOL. Also I forgot what you drove.? What do you drive?
First hand experience trumps my estimates never mind LOL
8 km/L Geez... must have been built long before 2005 LOL.. a lot of v6's have much improved economy nowadays.. granted they are rather expensive engines. Why didnt you get the Audi A3 ? Better offer or desire something else?
Anyway, in your story you are talking about a max 265HP out of your engine. Is that for the engine it self? or would go any higher then that, just be to heavy on torq for the gearbox etc?
I think that was the engine combined with the transmission. I think the transmission can not take much more than that without shredding to pieces in a spectacular eruption of metal fragments and sparks LOL. I think the engine itself is also close to its max right there. Not to bad though.
I do not like VAG either hence not owning a diesel in the US.. and the cruze is retarded so nope LOL that and they bolt on way to much tech . I prefer the simpler engines that ford makes. If you have ever operated on one you would totally love it.
I think you could probably get it in the 300's before blowing it. I think ill stay in my conservative numbers if I put the turbo back on.
