Lincoln unveils EcoBoost-powered MKS

[SVT666]

Lincoln unveils EcoBoost-powered MKS

Lincoln finally unveiled its long-awaited EcoBoost-powered MKS sedan at the 2009 North American International Auto Show in Detroit. The MKS with the EcoBoost powertrain ? a turbocharged, direct-injected V6 ? puts out a V8-like 355 horsepower and 350 pound-feet of torque while delivering what Ford says is V6 fuel economy.

The MKS is expected to attain fuel economy figures of 16 mpg in the city and 25 mpg on the highway - which Ford says puts it up favorably against the Lexus GS460 and Infinti M45.

A six-speed transmission mates up to the 3.5-liter twin-turbo V6. Ford says that turbo lag has been essentially eliminated due to use of small, quick-spooling turbochargers.

MKS EcoBoost models will be available in the summer of 2009 and will come standard with 19-inch wheels, paddle-shifters, all-wheel-drive and auto highbeam HID headlamps. Externally, the MKS EcoBoost features a revised bodykit and unique badging.

Lincoln hasn?t announced pricing for the EcoBoost MKS.

[cozmik]

I'm just not really impressed by the EcoBoost engines. I mean, the power output is good, but nothing unusual for a turbocharged engine. 100 hp/L is pretty average. They might be good, but they aren't really all that special IMO.

[Submariner]

I'm just not really impressed by the EcoBoost engines. I mean, the power output is good, but nothing unusual for a turbocharged engine. 100 hp/L is pretty average. They might be good, but they aren't really all that special IMO.

The fuel economy isn't spectacular either. 

[FoMoJo]

I'm just not really impressed by the EcoBoost engines. I mean, the power output is good, but nothing unusual for a turbocharged engine. 100 hp/L is pretty average. They might be good, but they aren't really all that special IMO.

The uniqueness, real or not, is that the turbos are used to gain efficiency rather than power; at least that's what the promotions say .  Beyond that, it's a good move on Ford's part to transition their I/C gasoline engines to direct injection.  It improves control over fuel distribution and leads to many other possibilities.

[cozmik]

The uniqueness, real or not, is that the turbos are used to gain efficiency rather than power; at least that's what the promotions say .  Beyond that, it's a good move on Ford's part to transition their I/C gasoline engines to direct injection.  It improves control over fuel distribution and leads to many other possibilities.

They're definitely being used to gain power here. They aren't getting that much power from the DI alone. DI is definitely a good move, turbo isn't a bad idea either, but the number on the power side and the efficiency side aren't really anything unusual from an engine with a turbo or making that kind of power.

The fuel economy isn't spectacular either. 

25 isn't that amazing. Competitors current V8s aren't that far off, if at all.

[Payman]

The fuel economy isn't spectacular either. 

Not too shabby for a 355hp CUV pushing 5000 lbs.

[SVT666]

Not too shabby for a 355hp CUV pushing 5000 lbs.

with the aerodynamics of a brick.

EDIT: Sorry, I was thinking this was the Flex thread.

[FoMoJo]

They're definitely being used to gain power here. They aren't getting that much power from the DI alone. DI is definitely a good move, turbo isn't a bad idea either, but the number on the power side and the efficiency side aren't really anything unusual from an engine with a turbo or making that kind of power.

25 isn't that amazing. Competitors current V8s aren't that far off, if at all.

I believe the message they are trying to get through is that the power is there but so is the efficiency.  That they don't happen at the same time is not mentioned.  However, apart from marketing perception, the technology is good and provides a wider range of control over engine management.

[Submariner]

Not too shabby for a 355hp CUV pushing 5000 lbs.

No no no...it's the sedan we're talking about.  I get them confused all the time too, it's quite frustrating. 

[omicron]

I'm just not really impressed by the EcoBoost engines. I mean, the power output is good, but nothing unusual for a turbocharged engine. 100 hp/L is pretty average. They might be good, but they aren't really all that special IMO.

The 362hp/406lb-ft turbo six in the Falcon G6E Turbo achieves 20.1mpg combined, without all this EcoBoost malarkey.

[SVT666]

The 362hp/406lb-ft turbo six in the Falcon G6E Turbo achieves 20.1mpg combined, without all this EcoBoost malarkey.

So this the EcoBoost gets 5 additional miles per gallon and is pretty much just as powerful?  Sounds pretty good to me.

[omicron]

So this the EcoBoost gets 5 additional miles per gallon and is pretty much just as powerful?  Sounds pretty good to me.

Not quite.

The MKS is expected to attain fuel economy figures of 16 mpg in the city and 25 mpg on the highway

Oz fuel consumption figures list only the combined total, not the split city/highway figure, so the MKS' combined figure of 20.5mpg is practically the same as the G6ET's 20.1mpg.

[the Teuton]

16 MPG?  I didn't see that.

You could practically have a lead foot with a 5 Series, any model but the M5, and it would still do better than that.

16 city sucks.

[TBR]

Not quite.

Oz fuel consumption figures list only the combined total, not the split city/highway figure, so the MKS' combined figure of 20.5mpg is practically the same as the G6ET's 20.1mpg.

Did anyone actually think that "EcoBoost" was ever anything more than a marketing ploy? I sure didn't...

Though, to be fair, do you all use the imperial gallon?

[cozmik]

Did anyone actually think that "EcoBoost" was ever anything more than a marketing ploy? I sure didn't...

Though, to be fair, do you all use the imperial gallon?

Ford kept saying they were not doing V8's and going EcoBoost because of how much more efficient it was. Right about now, I'm not seeing why they aren't using V8s instead.

[TBR]

Ford kept saying they were not doing V8's and going EcoBoost because of how much more efficient it was. Right about now, I'm not seeing why they aren't using V8s instead.

Maybe it's to save money versus a complete redo of their now dated modular V8s?

[the Teuton]

Boost eats fuel like none other.  The engine only acts like a V6 when the turbos aren't spooling.

A torquey V8 with high gearing would probably get better mileage.

[omicron]

Did anyone actually think that "EcoBoost" was ever anything more than a marketing ploy? I sure didn't...

Though, to be fair, do you all use the imperial gallon?

Not for years. I converted the official Australian litres/100km figure to mpg via Google, which uses US gallons (to the best of my knowledge). 

[TBR]

Not for years. I converted the official Australian litres/100km figure to mpg via Google, which uses US gallons (to the best of my knowledge). 

Of course, now I just feel stupid.

[Laconian]

Not for years. I converted the official Australian litres/100km figure to mpg via Google, which uses US gallons (to the best of my knowledge). 

Perhaps not, your IP address betrays you as a crown colonist and so it might assume you are only interested in imperial gallons.

[FoMoJo]

Boost eats fuel like none other.  The engine only acts like a V6 when the turbos aren't spooling.

A torquey V8 with high gearing would probably get better mileage.

The implication is that direct injection will allow the engine management system to regulate for efficiancy under normal circumstances and to better modulate the fuel flow when the turbos are spooling.  Any V6, given the same displacement per cylinder, will run more efficiently than a V8, given the same displacement per cylinder, under most normal driving conditions.  When power is needed, the turbos can be utilized to produce more than a N/A V8.  If done right, it has the ability to be more efficient than a V8 yet produce more power when needed.

We'll just have to see how well it works.  Although the MazdaSpeed 6 has a 2.3 direct-injection turbo, I expect it's tuned for performance rather than efficiency.