Look what the yanks get

[jbi]

Seems like fords thinks the Americans won't like our puny little turbo diesel engines and are offering the 3.5 litre ecoboost V6 in the transit when it debuts there to replace the econoline.

365 horsepower and 420 pound-feet of torque



http://www.autoblog.com/2012/03/05/ford-transit-va...

Shame we wont be getting it... would go nice in the "sportvan"

[frosted]

jbi said:

Seems like fords thinks the Americans won't like our puny little turbo diesel engines and are offering the 3.5 litre ecoboost V6 in the transit when it debuts there to replace the econoline.

365 horsepower and 420 pound-feet of torque



http://www.autoblog.com/2012/03/05/ford-transit-va...

Shame we wont be getting it... would go nice in the "sportvan"

Why would anyone need a 10mpg van ?

[kambites]

A RWD Transit? Presumably it's a completely different platform to the current European one?

[jbi]

frosted said:

Why would anyone need a 10mpg van ?

The engine get's 22 mpg combined in the F150 (heavier platform)

[jbi]

kambites said:

A RWD Transit? Presumably it's a completely different platform to the current European one?

The transit is a global platform, this is the same van as we will get

The current van is offered in RWD, AWD and FWD

[Trommel]

kambites said:

A RWD Transit? Presumably it's a completely different platform to the current European one?

Current version comes in both varieties (Ford had a demonstration swapping from one to the other when it was launched).

[frosted]

jbi said:

The engine get's 22 mpg combined in the F150 (heavier platform)

A diesel transit gets that

[kambites]

jbi said:

kambites said:

A RWD Transit? Presumably it's a completely different platform to the current European one?

The transit is a global platform, this is the same van as we will get

The current van is offered in RWD, AWD and FWD

Fair enough. I thought the primary reason for going FWD was to lower the load bed so there wouldn't be space for a driven rear axle. Obviously not, though.

So is the engine longitudinal in the FWD ones?

[hairykrishna]

frosted said:

jbi said:

The engine get's 22 mpg combined in the F150 (heavier platform)

A diesel transit gets that

Wrong figure. 18 mpg combined according to the link. Given how much of work of fiction official mpg tests are 10mpg in real world wouldn't surprise me.

[jbi]

I'm guessing the FWD and AWD options were to offer better grip in snowy countries.

The RWD is cheaper and simpler to maintain

Edited by jbi on Tuesday 6th March 12:36

[jbi]

hairykrishna said:

frosted said:

jbi said:

The engine get's 22 mpg combined in the F150 (heavier platform)

A diesel transit gets that

Wrong figure. 18 mpg combined according to the link. Given how much of work of fiction official mpg tests are 10mpg in real world wouldn't surprise me.

I converted it from US gallons into UK gallons.

18mpg US
22mpg UK

Yes, as with all turbo engines, the test cycle will be optimistic.

[hairykrishna]

jbi said:

I converted it from US gallons into UK gallons.

18mpg US
22mpg UK

Yes, as with all turbo engines, the test cycle will be optimistic.

Sorry, that makes sense.

[jon-]

jbi said:

I'm guessing the FWD and options were to offer better grip in snowy countries.

The RWD is cheaper and simpler to maintain

I'm struggling to work this out.

To my mind FWD will only offer better snow traction when the load is less than the engine weight, which in a van of that size shouldn't be too often.

Also RWD shouldn't be cheaper or easier to maintain, as all things being equal it just introduces a diff outside the gearbox

Edited by jon- on Tuesday 6th March 12:42

[ivantate]

Whats not to like?

Base engine in anything in the US that isnt the bottom rung of hire car-ery is atleast 3.5l.

I am sure they will do a 2.2 four and a none turbo to keep the daisies happy.

[jbi]

With RWD, since all the auto parts are spread out over a wide area, the repair and maintenance costs of RWD cars are relatively lower. Their repair does not require complicated disassembly and uses lesser specialized tools.

FWD offers a grip advantage when the van is empty or the load is light, for towing and heavy weights RWD is the way to go.

[5lab]

jbi said:

hairykrishna said:

frosted said:

jbi said:

The engine get's 22 mpg combined in the F150 (heavier platform)

A diesel transit gets that

Wrong figure. 18 mpg combined according to the link. Given how much of work of fiction official mpg tests are 10mpg in real world wouldn't surprise me.

I converted it from US gallons into UK gallons.

18mpg US
22mpg UK

Yes, as with all turbo engines, the test cycle will be optimistic.

The american test is far more realistic than the eu test though - typically 20% lower figures, so 22mpg is probably a realistic 'day to day' figure, which, for a 350bhp van, really isn't bad

[CraigMST]

Gasolineeeeeeee

[irish boy]

This engine on lpg would be the way forward. Big smiles all round.

Ford.....please send it our way

[mackie1]

They finally get decent police cars too:

http://www.autoblog.com/2011/09/30/2012-chevrolet-...

[jbi]

irish boy said:

This engine on lpg would be the way forward. Big smiles all round.

Ford.....please send it our way

The next sportvan?