Ford 1.5 Ecoboost Petrol lacklustre
Discussion
The Ford 1.5 Ecoboost Petrol Mondeo has a sluggish, flat throttle mapping/response, has a very little low rpm torque/flat spot, a narrow "power" band (for what it is - it never really comes hard on boost), doesn't pull hard to the red line and isn't economical compared with other modern engines.
It only ever feels vaguely urgent in third gear with the revs up.
The VAG TSI 1.4 is vastly better.
What are the reasons for this?
Is it down to compliance with emissions regs?
What in particular has changed to blunt engine responsiveness so much?
Can these engines be transformed with a re-map?
It only ever feels vaguely urgent in third gear with the revs up.
The VAG TSI 1.4 is vastly better.
What are the reasons for this?
Is it down to compliance with emissions regs?
What in particular has changed to blunt engine responsiveness so much?
Can these engines be transformed with a re-map?
Edited by MC Bodge on Friday 27th November 15:31
MC Bodge said:
The Ford 1.5 Ecoboost Petrol Mondeo has a sluggish, flat throttle mapping/response, has a very little low rpm torque/flat spot, a narrow "power" band (for what it is - it never really comes hard on boost), doesn't pull hard to the red line and isn't economical compared with other modern engines.
It only ever feels vaguely urgent in third gear with the revs up.
The VAG TSI 1.4 is vastly better.
What are the reasons for this?
Is it down to compliance with emissions regs?
What in particular has changed to blunt engine responsiveness so much?
Can these engines be transformed with a re-map?
You say this....so are you referring to a car you own ? Have you driven others and every single one is the same ?It only ever feels vaguely urgent in third gear with the revs up.
The VAG TSI 1.4 is vastly better.
What are the reasons for this?
Is it down to compliance with emissions regs?
What in particular has changed to blunt engine responsiveness so much?
Can these engines be transformed with a re-map?
Edited by MC Bodge on Friday 27th November 15:31
Or are you implying there is a fault of some sort with the vehicle ?
And "for what it is" ?
It's a 1.5....not some miracle engine. I'd expect most small engines in a big car to feel pretty crap.
I have the manual version of this in a kuga. I'm generally ok with the response - provided you stir the stick a lot, but if you do, the fuel economy is utterly s
t. I thought it was because I was driving an automotive brick.
Town driving, mid 20's mixed, low 30's if you drive carefully, otherwise high 20's if you are bit... spirited.
Colleagues of mine with the Skoda karoq (1.4 tsi) & pug 3008, 1.2, are all getting a good 10 mpg better than me without having to drive like miss daisy.
I guess it's just a st engine in a bigger vehicle, although other makers seem to do it a lot better.
t. I thought it was because I was driving an automotive brick.Town driving, mid 20's mixed, low 30's if you drive carefully, otherwise high 20's if you are bit... spirited.
Colleagues of mine with the Skoda karoq (1.4 tsi) & pug 3008, 1.2, are all getting a good 10 mpg better than me without having to drive like miss daisy.
I guess it's just a s
t engine in a bigger vehicle, although other makers seem to do it a lot better.techguyone said:
I have the manual version of this in a kuga. I'm generally ok with the response - provided you stir the stick a lot, but if you do, the fuel economy is utterly st. I thought it was because I was driving an automotive brick.
Town driving, mid 20's mixed, low 30's if you drive carefully, otherwise high 20's if you are bit... spirited.
Colleagues of mine with the Skoda karoq (1.4 tsi) & pug 3008, 1.2, are all getting a good 10 mpg better than me without having to drive like miss daisy
Yes, it isn't that slow when driven hard, but it does need a lot of gearstick stirring and the throttle response is slow. It feels restricted. t. I thought it was because I was driving an automotive brick.Town driving, mid 20's mixed, low 30's if you drive carefully, otherwise high 20's if you are bit... spirited.
Colleagues of mine with the Skoda karoq (1.4 tsi) & pug 3008, 1.2, are all getting a good 10 mpg better than me without having to drive like miss daisy
Yes, fuel economy increases dramatically with even the slightest hint of non-steady speed driving. Taking it easy it averages out at 36mpg, used only for longer drives. On the motorway at 70mph, it is mid 30s mpg.
I do very few miles at the moment, so the economy isn't too much of a concern, but it is a shame to be burning so much fuel for such gentle driving and such weak urge.
drmike37 said:
Why are these new small engines so appallingly bad?
My 14 year old 3.5litre v6 merc does high twenties to the gallon. It’s a lot nicer to drive than some piddly 1.4/1.5 too.
I was expecting there to have been some progress.
They're built to meet some bs eco target, being driven in completely un-real world terms.My 14 year old 3.5litre v6 merc does high twenties to the gallon. It’s a lot nicer to drive than some piddly 1.4/1.5 too.
I was expecting there to have been some progress.
When you need to press on, (or drive like a normal human) the economy drops through the floor (for Ford at any rate) other makers seem to do it better.
I don't suppose today's bloaty cars help any too, fair bit of weight for a small engine to lug around.
techguyone said:
They're built to meet some bs eco target, being driven in completely un-real world terms.
When you need to press on, (or drive like a normal human) the economy drops through the floor (for Ford at any rate) other makers seem to do it better.
I don't suppose today's bloaty cars help any too, fair bit of weight for a small engine to lug around.
I'm interested to know which aspect of the eco test spoils the driveability/throttle response.When you need to press on, (or drive like a normal human) the economy drops through the floor (for Ford at any rate) other makers seem to do it better.
I don't suppose today's bloaty cars help any too, fair bit of weight for a small engine to lug around.
As previously mentioned, the VAG TSI 1.4 is excellent, which lulled me into thinking that the 1.5 Ecoboost would be similar.
MC Bodge said:
techguyone said:
They're built to meet some bs eco target, being driven in completely un-real world terms.
When you need to press on, (or drive like a normal human) the economy drops through the floor (for Ford at any rate) other makers seem to do it better.
I don't suppose today's bloaty cars help any too, fair bit of weight for a small engine to lug around.
I'm interested to know which aspect of the eco test spoils the driveability/throttle response.When you need to press on, (or drive like a normal human) the economy drops through the floor (for Ford at any rate) other makers seem to do it better.
I don't suppose today's bloaty cars help any too, fair bit of weight for a small engine to lug around.
As previously mentioned, the VAG TSI 1.4 is excellent, which lulled me into thinking that the 1.5 Ecoboost would be similar.
The engine predates WLPT so would have used the tape everything up, remove all that you can, run it in a temp controlled rolling road under he best possible circumstances so the magical co2 & mpg can be proudly published.
Alternatively, the Ford engineers cocked up badly somewhere, as PSA & VAG equivalent engines seem to do so much better.
techguyone said:
No idea, I know when you look at the instant consumption, the second that you're not gliding along trying to coast as much as possible, it goes from 99/75/45/30/15 mpg in a few seconds.
The engine predates WLPT so would have used the tape everything up, remove all that you can, run it in a temp controlled rolling road under he best possible circumstances so the magical co2 & mpg can be proudly published.
Alternatively, the Ford engineers cocked up badly somewhere, as PSA & VAG equivalent engines seem to do so much better.
The 4 cylinder 1.5 Ford CO2 and mpg test numbers aren't actually that good from memory. There appears to be a lot of tech(and hardware under the bonnet! The TSI + gubbins is compact, the Ecoboost and ancillaries fills the large Mondeo engine compartment) to achieve somewhat unimpressive results. The very different 3 cylinder 1.0 Ecoboosts I've driven are better, in smaller cars admittedly. I don't know if the 3 cylinder 1.5 is good. The engine predates WLPT so would have used the tape everything up, remove all that you can, run it in a temp controlled rolling road under he best possible circumstances so the magical co2 & mpg can be proudly published.
Alternatively, the Ford engineers cocked up badly somewhere, as PSA & VAG equivalent engines seem to do so much better.
MC Bodge said:
I'm interested to know which aspect of the eco test spoils the driveability/throttle response.
As previously mentioned, the VAG TSI 1.4 is excellent, which lulled me into thinking that the 1.5 Ecoboost would be similar.
Did you not drive the car before buying ?As previously mentioned, the VAG TSI 1.4 is excellent, which lulled me into thinking that the 1.5 Ecoboost would be similar.
I can't imagine why anyone would buy a large heavy car with a crappy small engine.
stevieturbo said:
MC Bodge said:
I'm interested to know which aspect of the eco test spoils the driveability/throttle response.
As previously mentioned, the VAG TSI 1.4 is excellent, which lulled me into thinking that the 1.5 Ecoboost would be similar.
Did you not drive the car before buying ?As previously mentioned, the VAG TSI 1.4 is excellent, which lulled me into thinking that the 1.5 Ecoboost would be similar.
I can't imagine why anyone would buy a large heavy car with a crappy small engine.
Take a look at the 'regular' manufacturers (as this is what we are talking about rather than luxury/sports types)
They are all 1.5, 1.3, 1.2 3 & 4 cylinder turbocharged engines. I won't include DERV as they're dying out in any case, and many makers are not even making them now in favour or petrol and phev types.
techguyone said:
You are aware lots of cars now (to meet WLPT and other emission type targets) are all large heavy cars with crappy small engines, simply because they don't make them without small crappy engines anymore.
Take a look at the 'regular' manufacturers (as this is what we are talking about rather than luxury/sports types)
They are all 1.5, 1.3, 1.2 3 & 4 cylinder turbocharged engines. I won't include DERV as they're dying out in any case, and many makers are not even making them now in favour or petrol and phev types.
Yep, and I certainly won't be buying any of them !Take a look at the 'regular' manufacturers (as this is what we are talking about rather than luxury/sports types)
They are all 1.5, 1.3, 1.2 3 & 4 cylinder turbocharged engines. I won't include DERV as they're dying out in any case, and many makers are not even making them now in favour or petrol and phev types.
Far too much money to spend on something that's crap.
Glosphil said:
Comparing my current 2018 Leon 1.4TSi (150) with an earlier 2005 Civic 2.0 VTECi (160). Both cars weigh about the same. The Leon has more torque, slightly better 0-60, pulls a more than 50% higher top gear & returns 12mpg overall more.
I much prefer the smaller engine.
The TSI is a great engine. I much prefer the smaller engine.
I have the 1.5T on the Honda Civic. Great engine for me. Fast enough, economic enough mixed driving 47mpg but can do 55mpg on the motorway. Downside is that it’s only available within the Honda range which can be a bit of an acquired taste. I like it though.
In fact for 20k new I can’t find anything I would prefer to my Civic 1.5T
In fact for 20k new I can’t find anything I would prefer to my Civic 1.5T
Glosphil said:
Comparing my current 2018 Leon 1.4TSi (150) with an earlier 2005 Civic 2.0 VTECi (160). Both cars weigh about the same. The Leon has more torque, slightly better 0-60, pulls a more than 50% higher top gear & returns 12mpg overall more.
I much prefer the smaller engine.
In no way whatsoever is a turbocharged engine comparable to an old Honda n/a engine though.I much prefer the smaller engine.
Gassing Station | Engines & Drivetrain | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff