Midsize Sedans 2.0

akirby

Turbo lag and reliability problems are a thing of the past. Have you seen the torque curve on the 3.5L Ecoboost engine? You get max torque from 1500 rpm up to about 5500 rpm. Doesn't get much flatter than that.

The reason to consider it as a base engine is 20% better fuel economy. And yes - it would make a nice performance option for a Fiesta or a mid level Focus engine.

The 2.0L Ecoboost engine making around 250 hp will be available in the 2010 Explorer and one other vehicle which escapes me now (no pun intended).

stephen987

But won't it still cost more to manufacture than a non-turbo of comparable output?

akirby

Probably, but what's a 20% improvement in fuel mileage worth from a CAFE standpoint?

stephen987

Not much, if folks won't buy it because it costs more than the competition. . .

m6user

And yes - it would make a nice performance option for a Fiesta or a mid level Focus engine.

You think 180hp would be a mid level Focus engine? It seems that would be substantially more than has ever been offered. If so, then what would you consider for a top Focus engine?

lilengineerboy

You think 180hp would be a mid level Focus engine? It seems that would be substantially more than has ever been offered. If so, then what would you consider for a top Focus engine?

Its 10 more horsepower...Focus SVTs had 170. They weighed considerably less then the next ones will.

Turbocharging is like Diesel in NA. People think of 80's K-cars when they think of Turbo and they think of '78 Oldsmobiles when they think of Diesel. Its time for some education.

100 HP/Liter is about where a boosted engine should be, and the torque curve should be flat as Kansas.

I am looking forward to the C-Max minivan with an EcoBoost turbo engine. I think that would be a bit above adequate, and carry child seats well.

We will see if any of these engines come with a manual, in any of these vehicles. That will put them on my list when the time comes.

m6user

But to answer my question, what would be a feasible top HP for the new Focus if 180 isn't enough? I guess we are straying from the main topic a bit but since Ford is bringing the Fiesta over maybe the new Focus will be classified as "midsized".

stephen987

If it works for the Elantra. . .

jeffyscott

"The reason to consider it as a base engine is 20% better fuel economy."

That does not make it a base engine, being offered in the base trim level would make it the base engine. If they do bring that engine here, assuming it costs more than the 2.5L, why would it be put in the base model, rather than putting in the cheaper 2.5 and offering the new engine as an optional upgrade?

Does this new engine require premium? If so, that'll be another problem for it in the US, even though premium now costs only about 4% more than regular.

akirby

I was calling it a new base engine based on the power level. It's equal to the current NA 2.5L in the Fusion. Depends on how much more the 1.6L EB costs and what happens with CAFE I suppose. Maybe it will just be an option.

And no, it does not need premium fuel last I heard.

akirby

You think 180hp would be a mid level Focus engine? It seems that would be substantially more than has ever been offered. If so, then what would you consider for a top Focus engine?

The 2.0L EB will also be available by then putting out 250+ hp. I would expect that to be the top Focus engine although it may just be a SVT/RS edition.

m6user

I don't know. It just seems to be real overkill to think of the Focus or any similar "compact economy car" with 250+ hp. Most midsize cars did not have 250 hp V6s until just the last few years and many think that is still overkill. I realize that with all the added features both from safety and creature comfort aspects the weight of vehicles has gone up but it seems not proportionately to hp. While I like some good hp as much as the next person(maybe even more) I also value fuel efficiency.

I would have liked the new Mazda6 a lot more if it the V6 offered a little less hp, better gearing, maintained the driving characteristics but achieved 30mpg hwy. I think that was attainable but the quest for the "most hp in class" got in the way. That would have been a killer combo IMO.

akirby

The European Ford Focus RS actually has close to 300 hp and 300 lb/ft. The revoknuckle suspension supposedly eliminates torque steer. There is no reason they can't have fuel efficient versions and high performance versions of the same vehicle.

And we are getting the Euro Ford Focus here in a couple of years.

jeffyscott

I see I was assuming it would have more power than the 2.5. But it's gotta be higher torque, anyway...right? or at least a lower rpm for peak torque and a flatter curve.

mz6greyghost

I would have liked the new Mazda6 a lot more if it the V6 offered a little less hp, better gearing, maintained the driving characteristics but achieved 30mpg hwy. I think that was attainable but the quest for the "most hp in class" got in the way. That would have been a killer combo IMO.

If that's the case, then check out the 6i. Despite the 4-cylinder, it's still one of the highest-HP 4-cylinders in the class (and pulls similarly to the last-gen V6 IMO), it'll get an easy 30 MPG on the highway, and IMO it handles better than the current-gen V6 (due to better weight distribution).

As for the V6, I'd say that a vast majority of V6 owners care more about the power than the fuel economy, and the last-gen v6 was SORELY lacking in that department, with a paltry 212 HP compared to the 265-270 of the competition. I'm sure those numbers turned off a lot of potential buyers after 2005.

In this segment, the 4-cylinder has to offer modest power with good fuel economy, while the V6 is for the minority that prefers the power and smoothness of a V6 over mileage. As confirmed by sales, there are many more of the former than the latter, and that may only get more lopsided as time goes on.

akirby

I think the torque is about the same, but the torque curve might be flatter.

m6user

I have a 6i and have driven both the new and old 6i and 6s. There is still a large difference between the new 6i and the old 6s IMO. It's not just hp but the smoothness in which one can attain speed that makes a big impact on me. I just wish someone that wanted the smoothness of a V6 didn't have to suffer so much in mpg. I believe the Sonata is rated at 29mpg hwy which isn't bad. My '93 3.8 V6 Buick had plenty of power(170 I believe) and would easily do 30mpg cruising and that was with the lower "sport" gearing. And before everyone has fun with the Buick pls notice I put sport in quotes. It certainly wasn't a rocket but had all the power needed.

m6user

An article on autoblog reports that the 2011 Sonata will not be offered in V6 form. It states that only 15% of Sonata sales were of the V6 variety and the new direct injected(200hp) 4 cyl will be it.

I haven't heard any mpg #s regarding this 2.4liter direct injected engine but assume they will as good or better than the current 4cyl offering plus the extra hp. Kind of a win-win in my book.

backy

I wouldn't mind if there were no V6 in the 2011 Sonata, but I don't think that will happen. Almost all of Hyundai's competitors offer a V6 in their mid-sized sedans in the US. and Hyundai is reportedly going for the jugular with the new Sonata. So I expect there will be a V6 and it will be more powerful than the current 3.3L unit. I saw one report that mentioned a 3.5L V6.

mickeyrom

Seems to me that the Sonata V6 has enough power to justify it's continued existence,but the KIA Optima would do very well to dump that 2.7 V6 which serves no purpose at all since it has only marginally more power then the 2.4 in line engine.A 200 HP 4 cyl getting 34-25 MPG highway it would be a dream for me.If somebody NEEDS more than 200 HP in their car,they are planning to break the law.

mz6greyghost

If somebody NEEDS more than 200 HP in their car,they are planning to break the law.

Yeah, that's right. I'm planning to break the law with my 220-HP Mazda6 since I "NEED" the extra power for those short on-ramps onto freeways or for passing on a two-lane...

Please...

I said it before and I'll say it again: Automakers wouldn't offer a V6 option (with over 200 HP) if nobody wanted one. I like a V6, since they're generally smoother both at idle and at speed compared to a 4-cylinder, the extra power is nice to have when it's needed, and if driven conservatively, 28-30 MPG is easily achievable, something that I can get, and something that I know some 4-cylinder drivers don't.

And by the way, I've seen a lot of Civics (well beneath 200HP) and other 4-cylinder vehicles that break the law quite frequently...

mz6greyghost

It's time for the mid-cycle freshening for the Altima, and despite Nissan's tight-lipped policies, they leaked a photo of the '10 Altima when announcing a recall.

...And the "official" image from Nissan (so far):


Is it me, or did they take a step backward when they made it look like the last-gen Maxima?

m6user

I read somewhere where the Optima is going to get the 3.3 next year along with it's redesign. Edmunds has some spyshots but I'm not real good(or fond of) looking at cars all masked up. I think both of these cars, Sonata and Optima are going to be very interesting for the 2011 model year. They've been a little behind in the styling dept which I feel has been holding them back.

backy

Other than different fog lamps, what's the change?

gooddeal2

1. I don't think it looks like the last gen Maxima.
2. changes: bumper, headlight, hood, grill.

thegraduate

1. I don't think it looks like the last gen Maxima.

Really?

akirby

Holy cow - that IS the last gen Maxima!

thegraduate

My thoughts exactly. Doesn't get much closer than those two.

gooddeal2

Well, the only thing I can say is that if we think the 2010 Altima looks the same as the last gen Maxima. I can also say that the 2007-09 Altima looks the same as the last gen Maxima b/c the only thing that is similar to last gen Maxima is the headlight. The new hood on the 2010 is the same as the hood on the current Maxima or the G. The grill is the same except they re-design the line.

akirby

Say what? :confuse: