The factory doesn’t have brown paint, and adding diesel requires pumping out its fuel system, but Ford’s Fiesta SFE is actually built for the internet.While sales forecasts for the turbocharged direct-injection three-cylinder subcompact aren’t high, it’s at least proving popular.TTAC has tripled the basics with capsule reviews—it’s more poised than sport, more mature than it is, and the selling proposition is a bit cryptic.Ford also sent me this car for a week of evaluation.What else is there to say?
It’s pretty much the same, as long as you’re interested in FoMoCo’s smallest mass-produced engine.This isn’t the paint vibrator you’ve experienced in the Mitsubishi Mirage or any other trio.If anything, it’s a sign of what’s to come.
Most North Americans associate a three-cylinder engine with improved fuel economy, lower power, and increased vibration.Still, Ford boldly recommends that you spend the extra $995 for a three-cylinder engine instead of the standard inline-four.Horsepower (123) is only 3 more than the 1.6 Sigma 4, but the 148 lb. ft. of torque (up 36) will catch the driver’s attention.Fuel economy, at 31 city/43 highway/36 combined, is 3/7/5 better than Sigma.While arranging the loan, Ford also insisted that the 1.0L EcoBoost is also a qualitative improvement.It’s a bold claim, but 450 miles of driving leads me to believe that Ford succeeded.
Vibration is inherent to a three-cylinder engine – an odd number of cylinders means there is no “equal but opposite” action happening on the engine block to calm things down.Left to their own devices, the trio tended to move around on their mounts and often struck a chord.OEMs usually respond by adding counter-rotating balance shafts.This minimizes vibration at the expense of fuel economy and power output, which is not a sales pitch.
Ford chose a different path.As shown in the video below, fore and aft motion is handled by deliberately unbalancing the flywheel and accessory pulley.The increased lateral movement is then handled by carefully adjusting the engine mounts and their positions.They’re not active mounts as some publications report, but they usually do the job.Start-up is a little rougher than a well-tuned inline-four, with a hum at times through the steering wheel at idle, but my passenger suspects nothing out of the ordinary in front of the firewall.So far so good.
Iron blocks allow compact overall dimensions and cylinder walls of only 6mm.Thin walls and dual cooling circuits in the engine (one for the block and one for the aluminum head) both aid warm-up time and improve efficiency.The oil pump is a variable displacement unit that increases efficiency especially at higher rpm.The crankshaft is also offset to reduce friction along the pistons.Some early press reports suggest that the Fiesta SFE also has regenerative braking.Don’t go looking for any extra batteries or electric motors – this car only has a “smart” alternator that cycles during deceleration to avoid unnecessarily taxing the engine.Stop-start isn’t available in the US, but Ford says it’s just because of market acceptance (the option is available for this engine in Europe).
Interestingly, the exhaust manifold is water-cooled and integrated directly into the cylinder head.(The upcoming 2.7L EcoBoost engine also uses this structure).This water-cooled eliminates the need to dump extra fuel to cool the turbo at high revs.Speaking of turbos, this sample is small, low inertia, and revs up to 248,000 rpm.A vacuum-actuated wastegate keeps the turbo spiraling at idle to reduce lag.On paper at least, both power and efficiency are taken into account.
During my driving, both power and efficiency were considered.The gearing makes it less of a Fiesta ST-fast, but if you’re not writing for Car & Driver, 125 lb. ft. of torque at 2,500 rpm is more than enough for city maneuvering.Interstate performance is also one of the best I’ve encountered in a subcompact — 70 mph equates to a smooth 2,500 rpm, but the passing force is intact.My daily driving is a 40/40/20 split of highway/country/city driving.The overall result after 450 miles is 42.8 mpg (I did my last interstate drive before taking the picture above).Drive like I own it, and I’m sure the Fiesta will produce at least a few mpg.
So far, we’ve established that this is a powerful engine that happens to be small.So does it require high-end maintenance?Not in line with Ford’s published schedule.Some competing small-displacement turbocharged engines require unusual oil weights, but Ford’s requested 5W-20 should be easy to find at your local auto parts store.The side mounted oil filter will be dirty, but at least the entire bottom of the engine bay isn’t completely covered in plastic (I’m looking at you, Ford ESCAPE 1.6!).The top of the engine looks like a spaghetti monster at first glance, but accessory straps, spark plugs, and other DIY maintenance items all work.Shade tree mechanics aren’t out yet…depending on how you feel about the timing belt.Like some of the other small engines Ford has introduced recently, the belts are sealed and immersed in oil to reduce friction, reduce noise and increase service intervals.It needs to be checked at 150,000 miles, but Ford wants the belt to extend the life of the engine.If they’re right, that’s great, but if they’re wrong, the replacement is incredibly complicated.
Arguments aside, 450 miles is enough to convince me that the 1.0L EcoBoost is a qualitative and quantitative improvement over the 1.6 Sigma.Those who think Fiesta is too small may be more interested in the upcoming apps in Focus.Ford is currently mum on whether the Focus will be tweaked in North America to boost production, but those variants already exist in Europe — the 1.0L EcoBoost hits 160 hp with software tuning alone and 200 hp with hardware upgrades.Whether this particular engine sells well in North America may depend on the ability to pair the engine with an automatic transmission in the upcoming Focus, but the 1.0L Ecoboost is certainly a sign of the times.I know of at least 42.8 reasons why this isn’t a bad thing.
I don’t mind driving it like I stole it, just for fun.But my cognitive dissonance still struggles with the idea of being a daily three-cylinder driver.
I’m skeptical, too, but Interstate performance is better than most last-generation compacts, let alone today’s small cars.Day in and day out, the package absolutely works.Long term reliability is the only open issue in my opinion, but no more important than any other EcoBoost engine
This thing has more than twice the horsepower, more than three times the torque, and barely twice the weight…
Completely correct.It elegantly eliminates balance issues, enabling a “cleaner” engine design.
Great review.I’m pretty sure the Fiesta ST is my next car, but as a former R50 MINI Cooper owner, this car speaks to me.There’s something to be said for being light, efficient, and throwable.
Well, integrating the exhaust manifold into the head, I guess there is no possibility of an aftermarket head?
It’s hard for me to get excited about the title, knowing that software alone could unleash 37 more horses.Upgrading to the premium version might be a good start.
Honestly, if I owned this car, I’d focus on adding chassis bracing and improving the shifter before messing with the powertrain.
“Ford chose a different path. As shown in the video below, fore and aft motion was handled by deliberately unbalancing the flywheel and accessory pulley. The increased lateral motion was then handled by careful adjustment of the engine mounts and their placement.”
Good luck to everyone who drives/owns this car under warranty as it’s a one liter grenade.
Once something as basic as their motor mounts has the slightest problem, I can’t wait to see the owners sobbing, let alone having their motor mounts fail, let alone something to do with this being a bad idea Cooling problem.
But hey – if a 3 liter 1 liter (worse fuel economy in a Fiesta and cost more than some cars with twice as much horsepower, utility and refinement) floats up, then lease, turn in Do your experimental tendencies throughout the day in a , release, and agitation cycle.
Ok.I’ll bite because it’s ridiculous.For $16,400 (current price includes $1,500 in Ford cash), can you buy something that has at least 246 horsepower and is more refined and practical than the Fiesta?
(yes, motor mounts? spare me. I have a 300D with a *damaged* motor mount that I know from a cursory [and boy, did it get better at idle when I replaced them! ].
It must be insane to think this is a future nightmare because…the motor mounts may need to be replaced with more “necessities” than other cars.Motor mounts are no big deal.
Again, the “cooling issue” is rather vague and doesn’t seem to be at all supported by the information available; hell, I *love* the idea of a water-cooled turbo in the head, as it’s more likely not to cause oil leaks or cooking lubrication… …)
“As shown in the video below, fore and aft motion is handled by deliberately unbalancing the flywheel and accessory pulley.”
Like I said, Godspeed’s early 1.0-liter Ecoboost adopters, especially out-of-warranty and long-term holders.
Well, the eight-year 100k extended factory warranty, including running gear, AC (including motor mounts) is $915.http://www.floodfordesp.com/esp_plan_options.php?AWD=0&Surcharge1=&Surcharge2=&Surcharge3=&Surcharge4=&PlanDetailID=16&ModelID=13&VehicleYear=2015&VehicleMileage=35&StateID=26&PlanID=6435&PlanOptionPriceID=1825&Price=925
Ford’s extended warranties are on the rise, but it’s probably 50-50 for five years after the warranty expires, whether you exceed the warranty amount or not.
I saw a total of two for sale in LA on Ford.com.So I think it’s doing a good job in terms of sales.
Maybe it should be expressed as indexing the damper and accessory pulley to better balance the rotating components.”Unbalanced” is intentional and in my opinion an elegant solution as it removes the need for a balance shaft.On some vehicles, the torque converter is indexed with the flywheel to ensure the balance of the rotating components.On some vehicles, the nuts and bolts on the driveshaft flange actually have different weights (less than an ounce) to eliminate driveline vibration and must be removed during service to replace them in the same location, which is very important for Lincoln LS/Ford T-Bird.Did someone run over your dog at Ford?
A conventional balance shaft is almost suspected to be an unwieldy extra component compared to balancing already existing rotating parts that have not been used for this purpose before.
I was wondering if this approach would also smooth out an i4 using dual axes.Or twins or single.
If by “elegant” engineering you mean everything is ready to break down once the motor has the first major problem (like one of the Harbour Freight Chinese minibikes), then yes.
I’m absolutely right.How often do you see the flywheel wear out?This little engine might surprise people, running like an old Honda.
Never mind, at $16,400 what else can you get better than 42mpg in normal driving?
Well, DW, I bought over 10,00 shares of (F)ord for $2.00 and had some spare change.When did the Blue Oval Gloom and Doom prophets say I should short them?I say call or just be seen as a more cultured Z-71 Silvy.PS BTSR is more fun.
It should be obvious why this engine exists.It doesn’t hurt to try and see if some Americans are willing to buy them too (though I doubt they will.)
Ford was marketing and selling the 1.0-liter 3-cylinder Fiesta in the U.S. when they had a more appropriate and proper U.S. powerplant available.
“It should be obvious why this engine exists. ****It’s okay to try and see if some Americans are willing to buy them**** (though I doubt they will.)”
When companies spend hundreds of millions of dollars on projects, they rush to figure out how to get that money back.You do grasp the concept, right?
It’s very rewarding to test the waters to see which new customers you can catch, but they also need to have a clear understanding of where to go.It increases the cost and requires only manual operation.This is going to be a tough sell in the US, and I personally expect Ford to decide it’s not worth it to sell here.
It doesn’t cost much to offer it as an option in vehicles already sold in the US.
Not that the American version of the car has it as the only engine option, or that they’re counting on this engine to determine the car’s fate.
Presumably it takes U.S. emissions into account from the start, so that shouldn’t be an issue either.
There are marketing costs, and they do supply parts for it and help dealers sell and repair it.These may be worth the risk.
It’s a low-stakes experiment, and the worst-case scenario isn’t particularly bad.I doubt it will move the needle, but it’s worth a shot.
C&D’s Fiesta SFE score is 8.3 0-60 and the new Fit score is 7.7.http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2014-ford-fiesta-10l-ecoboost-test-review http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2015-honda-fit-ex-manual-long-term -test-intro-review Cars are not tested the same, but in typical C&D fashion.Ford spends $500 more and has significantly less space.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but wouldn’t the unbalanced flywheel and attachments put more load on the bearing surfaces of the crankshaft?A little wear and tear becomes game, then boom: catastrophic failure.
Post time: May-17-2022
