What power levels are the ecoboost engines capable of?

[monk36]

Some have speculated 300hp/310tq. The torque is what's really important here, since EB motors get full torque very early in the powerband.

I'd hope that the motors had a little more factory oomph, but the thing with boost is you can always add more.

Stock 2.3 will run on 87 octane as well, so that may limit manufacturer numbers. (Would probably be a good thing for EPA ratings as well) Add in a 93 tune with a boost bump, and you're looking at a solid performer for the weight advantage.

 

[Whiskey11]

Some have speculated 300hp/310tq. The torque is what's really important here, since EB motors get full torque very early in the powerband.

I'd hope that the motors had a little more factory oomph, but the thing with boost is you can always add more.

Stock 2.3 will run on 87 octane as well, so that may limit manufacturer numbers. (Would probably be a good thing for EPA ratings as well) Add in a 93 tune with a boost bump, and you're looking at a solid performer for the weight advantage.

The turbo's are pretty small so I'm not sure you'll get huge peak numbers out of the stock turbo. That said 90% of torque available from 1500 RPM to red line sure sounds pretty damn sweet.... Ford has to pull some weight out of the car though and it'll feel like a rocket!

 

[monk36]

The turbo's are pretty small so I'm not sure you'll get huge peak numbers out of the stock turbo. That said 90% of torque available from 1500 RPM to red line sure sounds pretty damn sweet.... Ford has to pull some weight out of the car though and it'll feel like a rocket!

Chassis weight savings would be great, but even if the gt didn't end up with weight savings overall, much of the "new" weight would be in the rear. Chassis weight savings aside, the 2.3EB should have some of the best F/R distribution of any factory mustang ever produced.

 

[Jinx]

I expect with the Mustang, that Ford has engineered some flexibility with the 2.3 Eco. Hopefully the type BMW did with the N54 engine. Granted it's a inline 6 with a twin scroll turbo , displacement minus the two extra cylinders is 2.3. Given if the turbo is sized accordingly, maybe two thirds of the power possible of a full bolt-on N54? Lol Jk

 

[Steve@Tasca]

I believe I saw a piston this forum saying something about the Eco Boost lines being hard to modify because of the direct injection. Either Fuel pumps or Injectors are the limit, I do not recall who or where I saw it posted.

^ It's the pumps.

Once you guys are done joking around maybe we can talk about my original question (the title of the thread). Has this engine been put in anything else already? How much power can be coaxed out of it?

I'm not sure anyone knows for sure. There's a few 450whp SHOs running bigger turbos but like cam said they run out of pump. There's currently no fuel options to support more power.

There's MazdaSpeed3s in the 700 hp range, not sure what they're doing for fuel mods but those are also direct injected.

Pretty sure the only reason there are no fuel options for SHOs is because no one has tried hard enough, I could be wrong but just look how creative people have been with Mustang fuel systems in the past.

-Steve

 

[Steve@Tasca]

It'll likely take a while before anyone pushes one of these to the limits, I'm not aware of anyone that's pushed the new Focus ST that far and it's been out for a year now.

The 2.3 in the mustang should have a TON of potential.


.

 

[Falkinman]

We've tried telling that already, he's too lazy to go read.

Not too lazy. I just don't have all day to read every thread on the internet. If if bothers you that much then don't reply any more.

Anyway, I don't understand a couple of things. Why is it a problem getting a fuel pump thy can supply this engine when we have fuel pumps that can supply top fuel cars. I'm just making a point that there has to be a pump that will do the job. Maybe I just don't understand what the difference is with direct injection and how it complicates things.

 

[GallopingFord]

The difference with direct injection is that instead of the usual electrical fuel pump, a mechanical fuel pump has to be utilized, hence that is the bottle neck. Mechanical fuel pumps are most commonly found in a non-fuel injected engine... with a carburetor - this would be very costly and unlike normal electrical fuel pump R&D we've seen with the current Mustangs.

Until now the R&D cost-value-benefits were not worth digging into solutions. Expect a lot more R&D that will pump out (pun intended) new aftermarket Ecoboost fuel solutions when the 2.3 hits the market.

 

[ford20]

800rwhp 5.0
1370whp 2.3 ecoboost
1800whp 3.7 v6

This ... 3.7>3V

 

[05yellowgt]

The limit of the EB's is the mechanical HPFP. It is mounted on one of the heads as is driven by an extra lobe on the intake or exhaust cam. Depending on which EB motor, that extra lobe is either 3 or 4 sided. This high pressure pump operates at pressures up to 2150psi. There is a standard low pressure pump in the fuel tank that feeds the HPFP.

Upgraded have not yet come out for the HPFP for any current EB engine. A Flex owner fabbed up an intake that has traditional port injectors controlled by an aux fuel controller. Slightly upgraded turbos and e85 netted a true 600awhp.

The turbo on the 2.3 EB is a twin scroll unit manufactured by Honeywell of unknown specs.

 

[Falkinman]

Thanks GallopingFord, I was going to ask you why it had to be a mechanical pump but 05YellowGT mentioned the 2150psi fuel pressure. Holy crap! That sounds like an expensive ass fuel pump! Not to mention the rest of the fuel system that has to contain that pressure without leaking. I would imagine that when the aftermarket does come out with a better fuel pump it's going to cost an arm and a leg.

 

[05yellowgt]

There have been no ground up aftermarket DI High pressure fuel pumps for any DI gas engine that I am aware of. There have been a couple of companies that have bored out the stock pumps which seems to give up to a 20-30% bump in delivery.

Otherwise, increasing the number of lobes of the cam lobe that drives the HPFP can also increase delivery, though the ECU programming could be troublesome.

 

[s8v4o]

It doesn't have to be mechanical to achieve those pressures. IIRC my 2011 F250 has an electric high pressure fuel pump. Most newer diesels run around 3000 bar (not psi). I'm sure somebody will come up with a solution. Perhaps a feeder pump would help out a lot?

 

[05yellowgt]

It doesn't have to be mechanical to achieve those pressures. IIRC my 2011 F250 has an electric high pressure fuel pump. Most newer diesels run around 3000 bar (not psi). I'm sure somebody will come up with a solution. Perhaps a feeder pump would help out a lot?

Are you sure about that? I assume you have the 6.7 diesel, which has a low pressure electric feeder pump and then a mechanically driven HPFP. It has had a bad reputation for failures and is the same pump that both Dodge and Chevy also use on their diesel if I understand correctly.

 

[cbass]

Fuck DI! I had an engine pop in my VW because of the HPFP. Cam follower shattered and plugged the oil pickup, catastrophic failure. VWoA has extended the warranty on HPFP related repairs to 10 years or 120k. I saw the bill that the dealer submits, over 8k in shit to fix it. Not about to try that voodoo again until somebody finally gets it right.

And I think it was in the hundreds for bar. Stupid high.

edit: pic of carnage on the trilobe for the cam follower that drove the HPFP.





They didn't have the bottom end ready for picturing when I went in. They approved the whole engine before I got back and continued to document how broken it was if they tried to deny my coverage.

 

[05yellowgt]

VW, BMW, and Audi have all had suspect DI systems. The ecoboost seem to do much better so far in that department. The HPFP's had issues with leaking fuel past their seals and getting into the oil, which as we know is terrible for the performance of the oil and you get what is shown above from lack of proper lubrication. DI is a great technology that has been used on diesels for years.

 

[s8v4o]

Are you sure about that? I assume you have the 6.7 diesel, which has a low pressure electric feeder pump and then a mechanically driven HPFP. It has had a bad reputation for failures and is the same pump that both Dodge and Chevy also use on their diesel if I understand correctly.

No I'm not sure. I thought I read it a while back but I may have been mistaken. I know the fuel system is different from the 6.0 and 6.4. Oh well.

 

[VTXFrank]

How much power can be coaxed out of it?

As with all things engine wise, you can get as much power from it as your wallet is deep.

/thread

 

[JDM74]

DI engines tend to carbon up the intake valve due to the PCV system dumping oil mist into the intake manifold and there not being a conventional injector spraying down the back side of the intake valve. VW (also Audi), Mazda (Mazdaspeed 3), and Chevrolet (Cobalt SS LNF motor) have issues with this from what I have seen. I've owned 2 of these three and it was a known issue. Hopefully Ford got the PCV system right on the ecoboost.

 

[07TGGT]

DI engines tend to carbon up the intake valve due to the PCV system dumping oil mist into the intake manifold and there not being a conventional injector spraying down the back side of the intake valve. VW (also Audi), Mazda (Mazdaspeed 3), and Chevrolet (Cobalt SS LNF motor) have issues with this from what I have seen. I've owned 2 of these three and it was a known issue. Hopefully Ford got the PCV system right on the ecoboost.

Well considering that there has been 2 different EB engines out since 2011+ and no issues reported, I'm pretty sure they figured it out...