Focus 1.0 Ecoboost
Discussion
I've been using a Focus 1.0 100ps Ecoboost.
Very smooth (especially for a 3 cylinder), excellent driveability, with a broad torque curve (and long, but useful gears) and much less turbo lag than I'd expected.
Obviously, it's not going to win any drag races and runs out of puff at higher speeds, but it's not particularly slow on the open road or across country. With 4 people it did need a down shift into 4th occasionally, but less so than I'd expected. I think I'd prefer this engine to a n/a 1.6 16V in a medium-sized family car -presuming that it doesn't blow its turbo every year.
On the motorway at ~70mph carrying 4 people for a couple of hundred miles, it was showing average of ~47mpg. Re-setting the trip computer and drive across-country with a bit more, er, "verve", it was down to ~30mpg. (Full throttle in 1st and 2nd showed an instantaneous 7mpg!, which is a lot of fuel/air mix being squeezed through the engine, and similar to much more powerful engines. Obviously gearing could make a difference)
Overall, more pleasant, flexible and rev-happy than diesels I've driven. I've been quite impressed. I'd like to try the higher powered, larger and 6 speed (or shorter geared) versions.
I quite like this Focus. This base model has 16" wheels and, presumably, standard suspension. It doesn't turn-in or corner as flat as the Insignia (-quite impressively for its size) I had last week, but it rides better, copes well with bumps, the handling response is good and the car is more enjoyable to drive.
As with other modern cars, though, the steering feels a bit lighter/vaguer than I'd prefer and the interior is a bit like a games console/early 90s AIWA stereo.
ps. In a lightweight, 'Rallye'-style Fiesta this engine could be really good.
Very smooth (especially for a 3 cylinder), excellent driveability, with a broad torque curve (and long, but useful gears) and much less turbo lag than I'd expected.
Obviously, it's not going to win any drag races and runs out of puff at higher speeds, but it's not particularly slow on the open road or across country. With 4 people it did need a down shift into 4th occasionally, but less so than I'd expected. I think I'd prefer this engine to a n/a 1.6 16V in a medium-sized family car -presuming that it doesn't blow its turbo every year.
On the motorway at ~70mph carrying 4 people for a couple of hundred miles, it was showing average of ~47mpg. Re-setting the trip computer and drive across-country with a bit more, er, "verve", it was down to ~30mpg. (Full throttle in 1st and 2nd showed an instantaneous 7mpg!, which is a lot of fuel/air mix being squeezed through the engine, and similar to much more powerful engines. Obviously gearing could make a difference)
Overall, more pleasant, flexible and rev-happy than diesels I've driven. I've been quite impressed. I'd like to try the higher powered, larger and 6 speed (or shorter geared) versions.
I quite like this Focus. This base model has 16" wheels and, presumably, standard suspension. It doesn't turn-in or corner as flat as the Insignia (-quite impressively for its size) I had last week, but it rides better, copes well with bumps, the handling response is good and the car is more enjoyable to drive.
As with other modern cars, though, the steering feels a bit lighter/vaguer than I'd prefer and the interior is a bit like a games console/early 90s AIWA stereo.
ps. In a lightweight, 'Rallye'-style Fiesta this engine could be really good.
Edited by MC Bodge on Thursday 12th December 23:56
My parents drive a similar car (the 100bhp version) and I've driven it several times. It's pretty good, very quiet and a nice 3 pot sound on full throttle. Not as good on economy as you would expect, but better than a similarly powered 1.6 engine. Great car to get from a to b in comfort. The things I don't like are the throttle response, it's very sloowwwww. But I guess most people who buy cars like this don't care about that. It's also flat as a pancake before the boost comes in. That should just be a case of keeping the revs up, but the gears are incredibly long and it's not hard to be in the wrong gear.
ali4390 said:
I've been very impressed with the engine in that car as well, although the 125PS is a nicer drive as you would probably expect.
More of the same, presumably?What are the 125ps (6 speed?) gear ratios like? The 100ps did about 40 in first, 60 in second. Top gear was very high.
Someone in my office has just picked up a new 125ps Focus, still not entirely sold on the looks but seems to drive reasonably for what it is! They've done a good job on the acoustics as it doesn't sound like a 3 pot.
Will see what it's like reliability wise! He's used it to replace his old diesel hack, and uses it for a 50 mile commute each day.
Will see what it's like reliability wise! He's used it to replace his old diesel hack, and uses it for a 50 mile commute each day.
Jurgen said:
My parents drive a similar car (the 100bhp version)
...I don't like are the throttle response, it's very sloowwwww.
...I don't like are the throttle response, it's very sloowwwww.
It's not noticeably bad compared with other turbo cars.
Jurgen said:
It's also flat as a pancake before the boost comes in. That should just be a case of keeping the revs up, but the gears are incredibly long and it's not hard to be in the wrong gear.
The boost was always there almost immediately, and only really noticeably flat when setting off with a heavy load.The gears are fairly long, but the engine didn't have a problem pulling the car with them. The engine was nice and flexible. Driving in second along tight, winding country lanes wasn't a problem as the broad power band gave a good range of speed.
I would like to try one with shorter gears though.
I wonder what the real world 1.6 Ecoboost mpg is?
Edited by MC Bodge on Thursday 22 August 19:18
GuyWMD said:
Someone in my office has just picked up a new 125ps Focus, still not entirely sold on the looks but seems to drive reasonably for what it is! They've done a good job on the acoustics as it doesn't sound like a 3 pot.
The engine was very quiet, with a nice noise at full throttle at higher revs. I'm sure that the noise volume could easily be increased if the owner so desired it.MC Bodge said:
The engine was very quiet, with a nice noise at full throttle at higher revs. I'm sure that the noise volume could easily be increased if the owner so desired it.
Well it's an improvement over the Renault Megane Scenic 1.9 Dci that it replaced 
Will be keeping an eye out to see what sort of MPG it's doing when it's loosened up a bit.
. nipsips said:
I had a Fiesta Ecoboost 125 - it was nice however did nowhere near the economy qouted. 70mph run you could see 40-42 but then on 50-60mph A roads you could see 60-65. However very laggy when you get caught out it in the wrong gear and it never let you forget it was a 3 cylinder.
As above, the 100ps Focus gave an indicated 47mpg on the motorway. That may have been inaccurate though.I didn't think it was particular '3-cylinder' and the 100ps didn't seem particularly laggy compared with a turbo diesel.
Compared with an n/a 1.8 Insignia SRI I was driving last week it was far better to drive in normal use and not much slower (if at all) when pressing on through the gears at legal speeds, even with a 38 peak horsepower disadvantage (albeit with a weight advantage)
Edited by MC Bodge on Thursday 22 August 21:44
I had the 1.6 (160ps) ecoboost in a mondeo. It was much nicer than the diesels due to the lower weight at the front. Turn in was much more positive and it took an awful lot to push through to understeer.. It was a very rev happy engine however I was only getting high 30's mpg on my commute (mainly motorway for 50miles each way). I did drive it very hard though! Being sensible I could see low 40's which the 2.0 diesels (140ps) only dropped to when thrashed (used to see high 40's/low 50's being sensible)
Slightly off topic - I think the 1.6 was a 4 cylinder and based upon the sigma engine as opposed to the brand new 3 cyl design used by the 1.0 - happy to be corrected though!
Slightly off topic - I think the 1.6 was a 4 cylinder and based upon the sigma engine as opposed to the brand new 3 cyl design used by the 1.0 - happy to be corrected though!
a7x88 said:
I had the 1.6 (160ps) ecoboost in a mondeo. It was much nicer than the diesels due to the lower weight at the front. Turn in was much more positive and it took an awful lot to push through to understeer.. It was a very rev happy engine however I was only getting high 30's mpg on my commute (mainly motorway for 50miles each way). I did drive it very hard though! Being sensible I could see low 40's which the 2.0 diesels (140ps) only dropped to when thrashed (used to see high 40's/low 50's being sensible)
Slightly off topic - I think the 1.6 was a 4 cylinder and based upon the sigma engine as opposed to the brand new 3 cyl design used by the 1.0 - happy to be corrected though!
Yes the 1.6GTDI is a Sigma engine. The 1.0 is a unique family of engines.Slightly off topic - I think the 1.6 was a 4 cylinder and based upon the sigma engine as opposed to the brand new 3 cyl design used by the 1.0 - happy to be corrected though!
Jurgen said:
but the gears are incredibly long and it's not hard to be in the wrong gear.
Yes, I find this in the Fiesta, there is a big hole between second and third, quite annoying round town, the way it vibrates in third, so you end up using second in the Fiesta when I'd be in third in a car with a proper engine.MC Bodge said:
But does that matter?
.
In theory it shouldn't matter, drive by selecting the most appropriate gear for the speed etc etc,.
But it does a couple of things: (1) uses more fuel than it could, and
(2) it feels un-natural.
It vibrates up to about 2,000 revs, which I find annoying. Some cars I can switch off from the operational bits and just do it. Not in the 1.0.
Not sure what the appropriate word is - intrinsic? intuitive? ergonomic? something like that.
M4cruiser said:
In theory it shouldn't matter, drive by selecting the most appropriate gear for the speed etc etc,
But it does a couple of things: (1) uses more fuel than it could, and
(2) it feels un-natural.
Open your mind....But it does a couple of things: (1) uses more fuel than it could, and
(2) it feels un-natural.
If 2nd gear is very long then how is that different to a very short 3rd gear?
You seem to be defending everything about it 
But I don't think it's a bad engine at all, in a family car I much prefer it to a 1.6 4 cylinder. I don't agree with you that you can hardly hear it's a 3 cylinder. When cruising around you won't, but on full throttle it's very clear. However that's not a bad thing at all, sounds much better than a regular 1.6
I do think the gears are too long, a 6 speed box would have been better (the 125ps version does have one?) but you'll get used to it. And the trottle response (not lag) is slow, but that's the thing with most engines these days, it's an economy thing. If you're quick you can put your foot fully down on the throttle and lift back up without the engine doing anything.
But I don't think it's a bad engine at all, in a family car I much prefer it to a 1.6 4 cylinder. I don't agree with you that you can hardly hear it's a 3 cylinder. When cruising around you won't, but on full throttle it's very clear. However that's not a bad thing at all, sounds much better than a regular 1.6I do think the gears are too long, a 6 speed box would have been better (the 125ps version does have one?) but you'll get used to it. And the trottle response (not lag) is slow, but that's the thing with most engines these days, it's an economy thing. If you're quick you can put your foot fully down on the throttle and lift back up without the engine doing anything.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff