Are they any good and comparable to the older bigger engines?

Currently have a 1.6ltr 155BHP petrol, I can’t really get a diesel due to low mileage day to day. Looking at Fords Ecoboost and Citroen Puretech engines one is a 1ltr and the other a 1.2ltr varying BHP from 86 upto 110.

Anyone got one and any good? will they get up at climb on the way to CYB with no trouble? the reason I have the current car is it will go up without even thinking about it, previous car was a 1.2 old school and I ended up having a queue of traffic behind me.

I have a friend who raves about his skoda with it tiny 1ltr engine but I can’t afford to spend that sort of cash on a car.

I believe the current crop of small turbo petrol engines have a surprising amount of real-world power but the fuel consumption suffers badly when you inevitably work them hard. Explanation here:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/cars/news/age-engine-downsizing-says-volkswagen/

The little Fiesta Ecoboost goes really well… But… it’s still a Fiesta, so still a little cheap and road-noisy.

I believe the current crop of small turbo petrol engines have a surprising amount of real-world power but the fuel consumption suffers badly when you inevitably work them hard. Explanation here:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/cars/news/age-engine-downsizing-says-volkswagen/

I wouldn’t rely on a Volkswagen press release as an authoritative source on emissions 😀

I have a big car with a 1l turbo petrol engine. I drive it up Ripponden Bank every morning, and it’s never struggled to keep up with anything in front of it.

I believe the current crop of small turbo petrol engines have a surprising amount of real-world power but the fuel consumption suffers badly when you inevitably work them hard.

Without reading the link below, when you’re flat out most engines are pretty efficient, so you won’t make much difference to that state. But most engines spend most of their time far from flat out, which is where downsizing and reducing internal friction, having direct injection etc. give bigger benefits. The same sort of thing applies to diesel engines.
I had a 1.0 (I think) ecoboost petrol focus hire car a few years ago, it went OK (miles better than a 1.2 Grande Punto I once hired!)

I recently hired a 1l Focus ecoboost. Despite not driving it like a rental, I was not that impressed with the reported MPG.

I’ve had a 1.0 ecoboost Focus for a year now (6 speed 125bhp). Absolutely brilliant engine. It’ll do 55-60 on the motorway fully loaded with a bike on the roof, more if you’re really drivin’ Miss Daisy. In horrible slow crawl city traffic it’ll get 30-35.

Driving it like I stole it across country B roads I can’t get it to go below 30mpg really. The engine is very clever about when it’s on and off boost. I would buy another, and would love the 140ps Fiesta version as a second car if they did a 5 door version (and maybe more sedate looking).

Without reading the link below, when you’re flat out most engines are pretty efficient, so you won’t make much difference to that state.

LOL. It says that they get hot, so the computer makes them run richer to cool down which sends fuel consumption and emissions where you don’t want them. An emission admission from VAG.

I’ve driven 2 Ecoboost Car, a Fiesta and a Focus, they were pretty good actually.

I think the jury is still out on the long-term ownership deal, some people point to all the bits and bobs they need to make a 1ltr go like a 1.6 or even more and compare them to modern Turbo Diesels, lots to go wrong etc, but really that sort of thing is for the 4th or 5th owner at 10 years and 100k miles to worry about.

Oddly, I also know that whilst they’re more efficient than their forbearers, they’re much heavier – forced induction meant an iron block rather than Alu, added to the turbo and pipework needed means a heavier engine – but that was droned to me by a guy into kit cars, not really all that important to most people, but a pain shared and all that.

P-Jay

Oddly, I also know that whilst they’re more efficient than their forbearers, they’re much heavier – forced induction meant an iron block rather than Alu, added to the turbo and pipework needed means a heavier engine – but that was droned to me by a guy into kit cars, not really all that important to most people, but a pain shared and all that.

That’s not correct though. The 1.0 ecoboost engine weighs 75kg iirc, about the same as 1.0 4cyl alloy engine. The 1.6 which it’s comparable to is something like 120kg. It’s also very small so it sits further back in the car improving the steering.

My daughters Fiesta has the 125bhp version of the 1 litre Ecoboost. It’s very impressive to drive – reminds me of the hot hatchbacks I had in the 90’s in fact. It’s capable of pretty impressive fuel consumption but because it’s reasonably quick it tends to get booted somewhat, although still returns 40+mpg even like that.

I have a Fiesta 1.0 125… good little engine, performs way beyond what you’d expect of a 1.0, but if you have a heavy right foot you won’t see even 40mpg. It’s fine in the Fiesta, but doesn’t have enough oomph to pull the bigger Fords around though – it doesn’t cope in a Focus.

The 140 version is apparently the most powerful 1.0 ever fitted to a stock production car, but there weren’t many on the 2nd had market when I got it last year.

LOL. It says that they get hot, so the computer makes them run richer to cool down which sends fuel consumption and emissions where you don’t want them. An emission admission from VAG.

[/quote]

That bit didn’t quite ring true (and it’s not a VAG quote, it’s from Reuters). The direct injection engines work on the principle that you can have part of the combustion chamber with a stochiometric mix and part just air, so as the mix burns it pushes down on the air, which pushes on the piston. Which is more efficient than running the engine with less air like a conventional engine. It also avoids NOx because the excess air (where NOx comes from) isn’t heated. When you floor it, it reverts back to normal and just fills the combustion chamber with a stochiometric mix (i.e. it’s richer, but not necessarily over fueled?

Oddly, I also know that whilst they’re more efficient than their forbearers, they’re much heavier – forced induction meant an iron block rather than Alu, added to the turbo and pipework needed means a heavier engine – but that was droned to me by a guy into kit cars, not really all that important to most people, but a pain shared and all that.

Remember that anything related to kit cars is basically dealing with 10+ year old engine technology though. And the boost needed to get 60% more air into an engine (i.e. 1.6 performance form a 1.0) isn’t anywhere near as extreme as what kit car builders would do.

previous car was a 1.2 old school and I ended up having a queue of traffic behind me.

Ignore the engine size. 110bhp is 110bhp, regardless. And it’s plenty to drive around in. Old 1.2s had like 55bhp.

I think that the loss of efficiency under different driving conditions comes from the fact that when it opens up the turbo vanes to give you more power it impedes the exhuast flow. So accelerate slowly, you don’t use the turbo and it’s efficient.

I think, anyway.

But remember the other thing about having a turbo is that you can control when in the rev range it gets extra boost. My dad’s Golf is only 85bhp yet it has plenty of useful torque – much more than a NA 1.4 engine.

mike_p

It’s fine in the Fiesta, but doesn’t have enough oomph to pull the bigger Fords around though – it doesn’t cope in a Focus.

It’s absolutely fine in a Focus. As Molgrips says, 125bhp is 125bhp. And 150lbs ft is still 150lbs ft whether it’s naturally aspirated or forced induction. More is always better but I’m coming from a 300bhp Subaru to the 1.0 Focus and to be honest there aren’t many times I miss the Subaru.

Well having driven both I don’t agree, so there 🙄

We’ve got a 1.0 ecoboost Fiesta. The little 3 cylinder engine is a bizarre beast, it shakes around all over the place if you run it with the bonnet open. It’s light enough to zoom around town fairly comfortably and when you rev it enough to get the little turbo to kick in, it has a decent zoom.

We had a Mini Cooper S previously, with 180ish bhp. It had tons of zoom when you got going but I curiously found it a real drag at slow speeds, hill starts and things were a pain in the arse. 180bhp is 180 peak bhp, it doesn’t mean it’s great throughout the range.

Same as jimjam, we have a 1.0l Ecoboost Focus (the 125bhp version). Very impressed with the performance. The engine was designed to replace the Zetec 1.6 petrol but it drives more like a 1.8 turbodiesel (slightly more responsive though).

If you do lots of motorway driving and keep it at a sensible speed (70mph) you can get 45mpg easily. I’ve had it over 50 a few times on longer trips.

Around town and on country roads I get about 40mpg. The Mrs gets 35 but she’s heavy footed.

We’ve noticed that the engine prefers higher octane fuel (Shell V-Power / Tesco Momentum) and pulls noticeably better using these types of fuels.

If you want better mpg then get a diesel.

The 140 version is apparently the most powerful 1.0 ever fitted to a stock production car, but there weren’t many on the 2nd had market when I got it last year.

Apparently the 140 version is exactly the same engine as the 125, just remapped. You can buy aftermarket tuning for the 125 for a couple of hundred quid.

Oh that’s one thing to note about the smaller Fiesta as well. Ours merrily sits at just over 50 mpg at about 50-60, if you head up to 70 this tails back off to mid 40s or so. Still impressive, it just feels like it’s not really designed for lots of long motorway journeys.

As for the weight thing, I truly don’t care but…

1.6 Sigma Duratec ti-vct is 90kgs dry

1.0 EcoBoost is 97kgs dry

Wether than qualifies as “much” heavier I don’t know, but it does weigh more it seems.

I guess the EcoBoost and it’s various power outputs was the direct replacement for the smaller engines in the previous line too which would have been lighter than the 1.6 and it’s variable valve timing kit.

Jus sayin’

1.2vti Peugeot 208. Good cheap commuter. Pretty much 50mpg with a miserly 89bhp. Mostly country roads and a bit of round town.

Bit rattly but not as bad as some small cars.

Got a 2008 as a courtesy car last service and it had the same 1.2 engine, car didn’t feel much bigger but it was only getting around 44 mpg.

The 40ish mpg posts are interesting.

Mrs_oab has Seat Ibiza ST 1.4 16v – the old engine. Yes it lacks oomph (95ish bhp I think) – but does a long way over 40pmg on a run and 35ish all day long.

It’s a car that was much cheaper to buy than 1.2tsi, has no turbo, fancy pants sensors and more.

I think the financial or environmental ‘gains’ of newer engines don’t stack up, especially when extra purchase and maintainance costs are factored in.

We have the 1.6 150 version in a Tourneo Connect. It certainly nippy but not that economical.

So now I’m looking at the Superchips remap….£399 gets 151bhp and 184lbs ft. No need. No need. Pointless.

What are the extra service costs on an ecoboost engine?

Long term – all the sensors, dual mass clutch etc. much like the current crop of diesels.
Day to day servicing, no difference, more ongoing maintenance/wear out costs.

Most petrols have those don’t they?

Currently got Cactus (it’s a lease car and was cheap! ), It’s the 1.2 turbo, 3 cylinder 110hp one. On my run to work does around 53mpg, Infact it more or less stays at that. My previous car was a 1.6 diesel fiesta and it done 54 mpg on the same run. I do drive like Mrs Daisy though, as generally never in a rush to get to work.

It’s nippy enough and for general kicking about in its fine, it’s seems higher geared than the fiesta was and does a better job on longer motorway journeys too.

I will confess though, it’s just a tool to do a job in my eyes, so maybe my view is not the most informative view to take!

Agreed, but our engine is old enough not to have them.

The point being I wonder if all the new petrol ‘gains’ are not all they cracked up to be – just like the diesel gains, especially with extra costs later in car life.

The costs arne’t as bad as you think. Cars failing now are 10-15 years old. You won’t know how much better new cars are until 10-15 years time.

Mrs Inbred has a 110bhp 1.2 fabia dsg. It never struggles to keep up with any car. In fact it’s so good I thought about getting a fabia estate with the 1.2 110bhp engine.

What are the extra service costs on an ecoboost engine?

Newish engine so no idea how they will behave in 5-10 years time.

Apparently the turbocharger on the ecoboost spins at some ungodly RPM so that could possibly be the first thing to go on them.

Cars are a different kettle of fish nowadays. My grandfather always bought Ford and made them last 20+ years doing his own servicing. Can’t do that nowadays with all these sensors and gadgets. Throwaway society – PCP finance, car for 3 years, then get a new one before the proverbial poop hits the fan seems to be the approach.

Apparently the turbocharger on the ecoboost spins at some ungodly RPM so that could possibly be the first thing to go on them.

The one on my dad’s car is tiny. About 4″ across.

My grandfather always bought Ford and made them last 20+ years doing his own servicing. Can’t do that nowadays with all these sensors and gadgets. Throwaway society

That’s total bollocks. You CAN absolutely do all that nowadays, you just need to buy a code reader. The car actually tells you what is wrong, you don’t have to know a black art of carb adjustment or whatever. Just cos it’s different and not the same as it used to be, does NOT mean it’s rubbish!

And it’s not throwaway either. There’s no reason you can’t fix any of it. Sure, a control module might fail, but I can go online and buy another one from a scrappy if I don’t want to pay the dealer prices. It’s really not hard at all.

I with Molgrips on this one.

For the most part new car’s aren’t as scary as people like to make them out to be. And if you really wanted to keep a 20 year old ford Mondeo on the road for some reason there’s even plenty of aftermarket ECU’s that’ll do the job.

It’s still mechanical things that’ll kill most old cars. A set of tyres or a clutch still costs more than a lot of 15yr old’s are worth.

TINAS; owner/maintainer of 10, 12 and 41 year old cars.

matt_outandabout

Agreed, but our engine is old enough not to have them.

Are you sure? My 2001 2.0 normally aspirated legacy had four o2 sensors in the exhaust and two water temperature sensors.

And it’s not throwaway either. There’s no reason you can’t fix any of it.

My old Touran had the dreaded ABS pump failure thing. New unit, with sensor that had failed, was £1200, or refurb was £600ish with a three month warranty.

On my old old Passat when similar happened, the mechanic reached under bonnet and swapped a sensor on the outside of the abs pump. Cost iirc was £30.

My Galaxy needed a new front bearing – only available pre installed into a hub. So a £20 bearing actually costs £150+

I’ve got an Octavia 1.4Tsi. Around 125bhp I think. Pulls better from 1500rpm than my old 1.8 non turbo petrol Mondeo though doesn’t go quite as quick at higher revs. Prefer the better low down pulling power of the 1.4Tsi for everyday driving.

My Mondeo used to get 32-38mpg. The Octavia gGets 42-52mpg. A 2012 model, 46k miles on it. No problems so far. At 10k miles per year I think I save about £500 a year in fuel compared to the Mondeo. Road tax was about £80 a year less as well. Though any road tax advanges the small turbo petrols have will vanish in April when it goes to a standard £140 for new registrations.

We are replacing Mrs IRC’s car at the end of the year and the B-Max 1.0, 125bhp is the favourite at the moment.

Matt OAB – you’re not really talking about the same thing. I could give you a list of simple failures that are an easy fix on a new car just as an old one. I could also remind you of the days when 100k miles was a lot on a car, and you’d have to watch for big ends and piston rings failing, people with tin foil in their radiators and having to carry a can of WD40 in case it rained too much.

I’ve got an intermittent fault on my ABS control module. I know this because the car told me it was there. In the old days I’d never have known until it was possibly too late and it failed in an emergency. If I even had ABS that is. I am looking at refurb pumps on ebay for £90, and I’m told you can simply replace the control module without taking the pump off.

Misplaced nostalgia really ticks me off.

My Galaxy needed a new front bearing – only available pre installed into a hub. So a £20 bearing actually costs £150+

£20 part, but you need an expenisve set of presses and a mechanic to replace it.

Had a 1.0 Ecoboost Fiesta for 2.5 years – due for replacement in August – a lease car – a car isn’t a thing to keep in my mind, it is a tool to do a job so ownership isn’t high on my priority list.

When I ordered the Fiesta it was ideal – bit bigger than previous car, bit more oomph and fuel economy was sounding great.

Real world saw me getting about 52mpg for the first year (with roof bars and 2 racks on the roof permanently); it has had 2 services since then and I appear to be getting about 43mpg now (same roof bars but with 3 racks on the roof) – I think I’m driving it the same way, but I might be being a bit heavier footed and not really realising.

However, it feel good performance with 2 adults and a child in it, but when you load it up (3 bikes, long weekend camping), you can really feel it working – it isn’t as quick (noticeably not as quick).

I sit with the speedo reading at 70mph on the clock, which is about 67mpg according to my 2 GPS devices) – over the last 6 months, the instant MPG is reading a lot of 20s and low 30s; previously it would be low 40s and some 50s – this isn’t my driving as the cruise control is switched on and the same stretch of road is being driven – so I suspect the engine and whatever parts aren’t quite as efficient as they were.

It is sitting on 30k, so I think average mileage and it gets between 15 and 40 miles a day on it.

It has been a great car, but I’m not needing something bigger – I would really like a Focus Estate – with the 125 Ecoboost engine – my concern there though is will I notice the lack of oomph even more as the car is slightly heavier (doesn’t appear to be massively heavier – just over 1 ton to about 1.2 ton (so 2×6 foot rugby players in the car – actually probably is noticeably heavier!)), it will have the 3 racks on the roof but there should be a bit more space for the camping/holiday/weekend gear where it isn’t crammed in.

So how much of a difference will I notice? I’m not a boy racer; I rarely drive in a spirited fashion, but I do prefer driving at the higher end of safely-permitted-to-do-so.

Needless to say, I’m impressed with the wee Ecoboost engine, it has been very good, however, it doesn’t seem to be as efficient as it was. I’m putting this down to a slight change in my driving behaviour but also as the engine is ageing and things aren’t quite as tight and new as before. (says me who is not mechanically minded when it comes to cars at all!)

however, it doesn’t seem to be as efficient as it was. I’m putting this down to a slight change in my driving behaviour but also as the engine is ageing and things aren’t quite as tight and new as before

It’s not old in the least. It should be just loosened up by this point so you should be getting the best MPG.

If my MPGs had dropped half that much I’d be down the garage immediately. It’s a huge drop.

says me who is not mechanically minded when it comes to cars at all!

When was the last time you checked tyre pressures? Check them cold.