Search results

While there is always some delay, it’s been engineered basically out of the equation ever since the Nano EcoBoost. The cylinder head is designed to make sure the turbo operates nearly seamlessly with the engine output. There’s basically no real lag anymore. Torque Management is a computer aid to...

This is the best I have to offer right now

That’s my favorite irony about this whole thing. The GPF is designed to catch particulates not burned off during engine combustion that travel out the exhaust. However when a certain point of buildup is reached the system regens the GPF and turns the particulate into “harmless gases”. Ridiculous

For optimum efficiency of the GPF it would be best placed closest to the engine. Mounted immediately after the turbo output would be the best place

The numbers go up if your fuel economy is exceeding the current estimated range. There are 9 bars that represent the the fuel level. I’ve attached some pictures for reference of a full tank and an approximately quarter tank. I agree it is very confusing looking at first take. Also it appears...

I’m looking into the new Garmin units myself. They seem decent for the money. I am trying to maximize some of my use with a dash cam and it’s the first one that seems easy enough to swap between multiple vehicles. Different use case for sure but that’s where I’ve ended up

“Thank god I don’t have to hand crank my horse anymore”

Apologies ignore me lol. I didn’t see the tag. Efficiency still stands with premium fueling though

It’s definitely split but I find EcoBoost are generally more responsive to higher octane than naturally aspirated engines. An obvious thing of course given the nature of a turbocharged vehicle. You should be good either way but personally on my Escape I’ve noticed about a 3 mpg difference...

If there’s not a “Windows” section in Sync 4 screen under “Settings” -> “Vehicle” then you will have to enable this feature via forscan.

S&B has been delayed in getting to it despite my attempts to let them document development using my vehicle. They’re going to have one available in about two to three months

Yes the supplier is still working on delivery dates but that’s accurate. As far as I know numbers aren’t supposed to be changing but don’t quote me as I’m not a numbers person

There shouldn’t be anyone with them yet… in the US anyway. Here’s a reference picture for the basic principal of how I understand it’ll be implemented. And a video of a similar design

My experience is a little different as I have an Escape however it’s been smooth and fun to drive. It isn’t much different driving than the prior ones but it does seem to be better at the same time. I am averaging 34 MPG with mine. It’s very responsive to higher octane and I’m eagerly awaiting...

The supplier hasn’t been shipping them yet as far as I know. I haven’t seen one yet either but basically they’re going to look like a much larger catalytic converter, at least if they’re anything like ones I have seen before the cat and GPF will share one shell and will be in series: turbo ->...

Yes this new motor has been excellent!

It used to be. The 2.0 for 2025 is entirely redesigned and brand new. Both the 2.0 and 2.3 are now made in Dearborn

To be honest, Ford can’t keep most of their information straight between their own departments. As far as I am aware the Dearborn built 2.0 EcoBoost is going into the Maverick/Bronco Sport Badlands and the power figures have remained what they were for the last two years in the Escape

Well don’t hold me to it lol. I don’t have any real data with them to know for certain. The principles of their operation would dictate the chance of power loss however it seems like that could be recovered with crafty calibrations. It may still be up in the air so we will all be finding out...

I do not do SAE ratings so I can’t confirm any losses due to the GPF however I don’t believe it should impact anything.