According to an interesting article from Green Car Reports’ Antony Ingram, it turns out that small turbocharged engines such as Ford’s much touted EcoBoost simply don’t make the grade in the real world.
The article goes on that say that Consumer Reports tested such small displacement motors in the real world and compared them with their on-paper economy claims with bad-for-PR results. Consumer Reports revealed that Ford’s Ecoboost-powered Ford Fusions which use a turbocharged, four-cylinder engine actually achieved worse mileage and worse performance than larger, naturally-aspirated counterparts.
Not only that, the four-cylinder engine in the 2.0 Ecoboost also loses even more on the grounds of engine refinement to the typical V-6 units in the class. Adding insult to injury in the case of the EcoBoost engine, there’s now a Facebook page where regretful owners of new EcoBoost engines can complain about how apparently bad they are to live with.
What struck Green Car Reports (and me as well) as the most alarming failure from Consumer Reports’ testing is the Ford Escape powered by a 2.0 Ecoboost engine. It was slower in a 0-60 mph test by 1.5 seconds, compared to a standard 3.5-liter V-6-engine Toyota RAV4, but here’s the kicker: It achieves the exact same 22 mpg economy.
So why by a small displacement turbo engine if apparently it’s clunkier, slower, and with no economy gain? Beats me.
As always, if you want real power and breathtakingly high economy in one motor, get an electric car instead.