http://www.autoblog.com/2013/02/22/f...ction-in-ohio/

 

Love it!

 

I'm still wondering when Ford's gonna put this engine in the F150.

With the proper transmission and gearing, it should be a no-brainer, at least in reg-cab 2wd models

 

I think If they did it it would have to be with the new F150 in a couple years. Hopefully by that time the F150 has dropped 400-700 pounds. But I'd rather see a lower displacement V6 with a turbo.

The nano engines?

I say that because its being proven time and time again that even if you get the numbers out of a super small displacement turbo engine, you have to wind it out so much in average driving that it negates the mpg increase it was supposed to make.

 

F-150 will probably get the same EB4 that Mustang gets and at around the same time.

 

I'm looking forward to the 2.7 EcoBoost V6 and I think it'd be a great engine for the Mustang, fitting in nicely between the 4 and 8.

I agree about the small capacity turbo engines don't always prove economic.......look at the MPG for Subarus and Evos. They are popular over here though as the turbos reduce C02 emissions and that's what we're taxed on here.

 

So this engine could possibly be the one mentioned in TGUK for the S550, even though a 2.3L version is mentioned in the article. If this engine sees RWD applications, it could be entertaining to see these swapped into various older RWD chassis. Fox Mustang, 240/260/280Z, 240SX, NA/NB Miata, AE86 Corolla...

 

Depends...........in theory the 2.0 EcoBoost could find its way into the Mustang, but would Ford develop TWO four cylinders for RWD configuration? I doubt it. I think Top Gear were just mis-informed by calling the engine destined for the Mustang a 2.0

 

I think Clarkson was mostly just wagging a finger at Ford, warning them to bring more than the EB-4 to Europe. I really doubt anyone would give him such a firm commitment this far ahead especially given his.....lack of ability to shut it.