Would this be accepted?
Wouldn't it get good MPG since it is a four?
I think a 2.5 liter would give power like a 5.0 liter

 

If anything, a single turbo...

Definately not 5L territory

 

Upon further research, the Fusion's 2.5L Duratec 16V I4 engine with twin turbos should give 350HP. If the mustang is lighter than the Fusion then it should get over 30MPG.

 

Twin turbos on a four banger might be one turbo too many, though I imagine the spin-up (lag free) benefits of two teensy, weensy turbos might be there as on a bigger motor.

However, I think the cost and complexity might argue against it.

Also, four bangers, never the smoothest motors to begin with, get downright raucous (in an irritating, grating way) when you get much above 2 liters. Balance shafts (read: more weight and complexity) can quell some of the notorious second order imbalances that make 4 bangers so buzzy, but you still have a rather not-very-finely-pureed power pulses resulting in a lot of torque fluctuations -- something only a multitude of cylinders can solve (or a rotary or two). And no blatty 4 banger will ever belt out the sounds of a roaring V8.

I can see a single turbo of perhaps 2-2.3 liters shoring up the bottom end of the lineup, either as a base motor or one notch up, but hardly as a replacement for 3.7 V6 much less the 5.0 V8.

 

I really like fords forced induction hitting the streets. Developing and supplying more efficient types of engines that have more power. Pushrods are stone age. 32v heads+turbo= kicking ***. I was a chev guy. Still kind am but for nostalgia reason, but ford is leading the way in design and tech......bravo. Built for tough means something again

 

Did someone say Twin Turbo?

As has been said, I can't see a TT 4-banger. Besides, the fuel savings aren't always there. Sure, off-boost on the highway wouldn't be too bad, but put your foot down and I reckon it'd have similar economy to the Coyote.

And I know which I'd rather be driving

 

I agree the only affordable sporty turbo 4s on the market are the WRX and Lancer Ralliart, STI and EVO are both $40,000+ range these days and they all get MPG numbers closer to a V8 and they also require premium

 

I'd toss a few more into that bowl:

• VW/Audi 2.0 -- 200-225hp, though with the TTS coming up to some 265 or something
• MazdaSpeed 3's 2.3 -- 260 some hp, IIRC, and pretty torquey too.

All these are single turbo, DI motors, the former available with DCT to keep the shifts short and thus boost up. The GTi and MS3 are around $25K base, so not too steep. As mentioned, turbo motors tend to be more efficient off boost, being essentially small four bangers, but once the pressure is on, it basically takes X amount of fuel to be converted into Y amount of ponies, however that happens. In some ways, on-boost turbos can be less efficient as they often need richer mixtures to keep combustion temperatures down and they typically do need higher octane fuel to make peak power.

I would as/more likely expect to see some turbo fours in some hotted up versions of the Fiesta and Focus, but hey, share and share alike with a low/mid grade Stang.

 

it wouldnt be twin turbo, its called Sequential turbo... twin on a 4 banger is stupid, but sequential turbos would benifit, one small one to start up and a larger one to take over..

 

They should do a blower for low end & turbo for high end.

 

no, they just just put the 2.3l DISI that they codeveloped with mazda.. make it a bit bigger, it can easily put down 300hp/300trq.

 

I could see Ford using an EcoBoost 2.5 as the engine in the base Mustang, if the numbers work out. It would be a more expensive engine to build than the 3.7 V6 but the fuel economy and weight savings might be good enough to justify it.

But as a competitor to the 5.0 V8? No way. I could happily accept a well-tuned, smooth, high-revving EcoBoost V6 in a next-gen Mustang GT, but many (perhaps most) Mustang fans wouldn't. And a four cylinder would just be out of the question. That's like telling a cowboy that he'll be riding a burro from now on.

 

Single turboing the 3.7 now would be pretty cool. Like the Australian Falcon with the turbo straight six then the Boss V8. Which should be brought here. But, meh. Maybe

 

SVT , Cobra, Shelby, whichever they go with - 650hp 5.8l (as the rumors are going)
GT - V8, same as boss, 450hp.. 400 trq
Pony Car - V6 - Ecoboost, 365hp, 350trq Fuel efficient - still has power, only 50 more than current v6..

And across all models, IRS and around 3000lbs..


one can dream right? Id actually rock the Ecoboost car over the GT as a daily driver.

 

keep in mind if the car does drop the weight like the rumors suggest it doesn't even need to gain much extra power since the weight savings will free up power. My experience with turbo 4s is that when pushed they are just as bad on gas as a V8.

A 260HP Turbo 4 WRX gets the same MPGs as a 5.0 412HP GT

 

Hardly, **** poor air flow is stone age. GM's LSx cylinderheads aren't lagging behind Ford's 4v effort when it comes to total airflow - Although 4v's do shine over thier 2v counterparts when it comes to low and mid lift flow which is due to the much greater valve curtain area of the 4v.

The OHV layout does get in the way of revving the engine (pushrods, big valves and roller lifters are heavy) but GM just trades engine speed for displacement. 426hp out of a 6.3 is just as valid as 412hp out of a 5.0.

Now the drawback of a DOHC 4v engine is obviously its size, the engine has a higher center of gravity and requires a wider engine bay (in most cases - one exception being the V8 Lotus put in the Esprit) and if such things are important to you OHC engines have a lower "power density" compared to thier OHV counterparts.

 

Amen brother!

Every time I praise GM's LS motors I'm called a GM fan boy but at the end of the day 426 HP gets the job done. A ford guy bashing on push rods is just as bad as GM guys bashing on solid rear axles.

 

The reason for my initial post was because of several items. F1 is going to 4 cyl twin turbo and BMW has or is coming out with same.
I was thinking of lighter weight and better MPG.
Also Carroll Shelby made a comment about future pocket rockets.
Wonder if a big supercharger would be better.

 

turbo will always be better for a 4banger.. this is the background i come from.. most of your 4bangers cant afford the leach on the drive train already. thats what makes the turbos so much better.

 

One of my all time favorites:

1800cc, supercharged & turbo = 480HP

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lancia_Delta_S4