Ecoboost 1.0 3 Cylinder - 2015 Ford Focus
 

Hi Everyone,

I used to own a 1992 Civic VX, and my best ever tank was 58 mpg. My goal is to beat that with my new car.

I spent a while away from this site playing with Mustangs while my commute was short the past few years. Recently I moved and my commute went to 60 miles/day. I considered a Prius, but my commute is mostly highway, and Wisconsin has a $75/year additional registration fee on hybrid vehicles. This additional fee would cut into the fuel savings on that car vs a non-hybrid. Besides these factors, I prefer a manual transmission and better handling than a Prius would provide (without modifications at least).


https://ecomodder.com/forum/attachme...p;d=1575304337

As such, I picked up a new (to me) car. It's a 2015 Focus 1.0 Ecoboost 6 speed manual. The same engine was available in the Fiesta, but with a 5 speed manual transmission (and 300lb lighter curb weight). From what I have found, the 1.0 ecoboost Focus weighs in around 2850 lb. Some highlights on the FE tech on the Focus:

-999cc displacement
-3 cylinder
-123 hp @ 6000 rpm/148 lb ft between 1400-4500 rpm
-Iron block/aluminum head
-Direct injection
-Turbocharged (manifold cast into cylinder head)
-Variable cam timing on both cams - configured for late intake closing under light load (approaching atkinson cycle)
-Low friction timing belt in oil for cams and oil pump (150k claimed maintenance interval
-Variable displacement oil pump
-Split engine cooling system for faster warm up
-Engine block heater
-Auto engine stop/start
-Active grill shutters
-Front wheel skirts
-Front aero underbody panel
-6th gear @ 60 mph = 2250 rpm

So far, it has been cold outside but I have seen mid-40 mpg tank averages. So far all I've done is keep near the speed limit, and coast when possible. No pulse and glide and the engine has been keep on during coasting. The car is rated 30 city/40 highway.

Sounds like a fun car. It'll be interesting to see what kind of mileage you get out of it after really getting used to it and over time. Thanks for sharing and keep us in the loop!

P&G doesn't work with these small engines.

Why not? It seems like the same principles would apply to any IC engine vehicle.

P&G didn't work well on my original Insight engine. I could gain some average MPG when engine-off costing down hills, but for normal driving on flat roads the gains were virtually zero. My assumption is that with the tall gearing and low displacement, normal cruising was basically already near the perfect BSFC zone for the engine already. That engine didn't have turbo enrichment and timing retardation to deal with.

I like these cars--I thought about getting one when I bought my Prius, and sometimes I wish I did just to have a manual transmission again.

Just a terminology note: "wheel skirt" usually refers to a covering over the outside of the wheel arch; what you're referring to are usually called wheel strakes or wheel air dams or similar.

I looked back through my pictures and remembered that I had inspected the underside of the Focus at the 2018 Indianapolis Auto Show. It uses the same wheel strake design as the Fusion and C-Max Hybrid of the same year, which is larger than most cars', made of flexible material rather than rigid, and segmented:

https://ecomodder.com/forum/member-v...-underside.jpg

The C-Max has additional fairings on the front and back that would be an easy retrofit to your car:

https://ecomodder.com/forum/member-v...derside-01.jpg]

https://ecomodder.com/forum/member-v...derside-02.jpg

They're cheap, too--$12 for the front and $18 for the rear. Ford introduced these in the second year of C-Max production in an attempt to improve the C-Max Hybrid's actual MPG compared to its EPA rating (which owners complained about when the car was introduced--the EPA investigated and the ratings were subsequently lowered from 47mpg combined to 40mpg).

Thanks for the post, Vman455! You are right that "skirt" not the correct term. I have attached a couple of photos from my car. It looks like the front wheel air dams are larger on the cmax, but similar enough that they could be retrofitted (maybe even a direct bolt on). Also, the additional deflector holes look like they may already be present in the front. I'd guess you are correct that it would be pretty easy to add those cmax parts to my car. I will have to look around to see who has the best price on those parts.

Another thing I noticed when my wife was following me in the focus last weekend is the rearview mirrors are huge. I think some gains could be found by replacing them with either smaller external mirrors or internal units. Research into that idea is ongoing. I'd prefer to keep the car looking like a "normal" focus, so I'd like to keep any aero changes low key. The C-max parts are very interesting to me from this standpoint.

In other news, my last fill up (half tank) average calculated to 46.1 mpg, which was somewhat close to the computer readout of 45.1. My first fillup came in at 40.1, with an indicated 44.5 on the computer. I'm not sure what is going on there, but I will use the same pump every time in the future when possible.

I also tried the block heater this morning, as it was ~10 F this morning. I put it on a timer for 3 hours before i left this morning. I would estimate the engine was up to temp in about half the time of usual. I am going to experiment with the timer to see if it needs the full 3 hrs. The trip computer said 44 mpg over 30 miles on my way in to work.

Mrs Lemmy has this engine in her new Ecosport, albeit in 140hp form. 44ish imperial MPG, feels and goes much like a NA 2 litre of 10 or 15 years ago. I love it.

Also to add when not in boost the turbo is in bypass mode avoiding the around 25% efficiency loss through it. When in boost, you have to spin the turbine on top of fuel enrichment so you're probably getting the 75% efficiency multiplier off the turbo plus the reduction from fuel enrichment going from 35% efficiency ish (?) outside of boost to 26.25% spinning the turbo, then to maybe a 10% enrichment going to 23.625%.

For full effect you could go crazy and delete the turbo and get someone to retune your car for lean burn. lol
Add in a super long final gear and you'll now have the Ford Focus VX :P

8 banger 6.0L SUV 379HP still get 25mpg highway
3 banger 1.0L sub-compact barely gets 46mpg


for having 1/6 the amount of displacement it still only get less then 40% more fuel mileage?

also the best MPG i have gotten was 31MPG in the city with the 6.0L

this battery only has like 15 or 20% capacity left too 11 years old

What is your mpg WITHOUT hybrid stuff? This is just stupid to compare a hybrid and a regular car this way.

And the 1.0 manages about a third of the CO2 emission and currently reduced nitrous oxides. Its diminishing returns, friction is friction. You'll got less but itll never be proportional with the capacity reduction. But when you consider the 1.0 is delivering the volumetric efficiency of a 2 litre commonly 15 or so years ago the numbers start to make sense.

On the other hand, 379 from 6 litres would be considered laughable here in Europe, where 6 or 700 extremely reliable horsepower for the same volume or volumetric efficiency is the norm. 379 would be considered decent, but not top flight, from a performance 2 litre over here, so it's all a matter of perspective.

The real trick Ford have pulled off with the 1.0 is how normal and docile it is. The boost isn't massive but is very linear, so minimal lag. It's well behaved, docile, reliable...in the eighties Daihatsu were making some hugely fun 1.0 three pot turbos that made 100bhp, but they were shagged inside of 50,000 miles or less. Best of all, the Ford unit is very civilised - it recalls to mind the feel and performance of my 2.0 N/A Kia of only 12 years ago, but with getting on for arely half the fuel consumption. Respect to Ford for taking g engine design I a new direction, and doing so with such success.

P&G doesn't work in my fusion energi either. The computer inside gets confused with what your trying to do. You get about 3 P&G's before the gas engine kicks on, and stays on until it has enough charge, then you can p&g 3 more times. System monitor says, normal operation. I think it assumes your following someone ahead of you with inconsistent speed and standby's in "ZOOM" mode so you could pass them at full power, but I dont have enough knowledge on how the Energi system works in the fusion tho.

Doesnt work in the truck either, but on that thing even down hill you need to press on the gas to coast. Its got the aerodynamic cd of a pig sideways.

So what is the point of this post? That displacement and mpg should expected to be a linear relationship?

Those are some pretty decent numbers for something that weighs double what a Focus weighs. What are your average tank mpgs with it?

A fun fact: if the hybrid Tahoe had the same hp/l displacement as the 1.0 Focus, it would make 738 hp. I'd be interested in what mpg it would get in that state of tune.

12/24/19 Update:

Latest tank avg was 45.7 mpg. We have had some unseasonably warm weather the past few days in WI. Some days in the afternoon into the 40s. Efficiency appears to decrease pretty sharply once below 32F. Yesterday on my way home I saw over 54 MPG over 27 miles with no tailwind in low 40s temps. Photo attached. My wife has been driving the car for errands because she likes the heated seats. She generally averages around 40 MPG, which lowers my tank averages.

The key to efficiency with this car seems to be to keep the engine out of boost as much as possible while keeping the revs low. This takes some discipline since the turbo can spool at any engine speed over 1200 rpm and provide a nice wave of torque. The temptation to tap into the boost is reduced somewhat since the car is pretty slow. There isn't much power to play even if you really thrash it.

I also ordered the front and rear wheel deflectors from a 2015 Ford C-Max new from Ford. The holes in the front of the Focus for the deflectors are not correct for the C-Max parts. A couple of the holes line up, but some modification will be required. The rears will be more involved as it appears the contour of the rocker panel is quite a bit more rounded on the focus than the C-Max. There may be one hole that can be used. The rocker covers on the Focus ST look to be flatter in that area, and might make installation easier. I am hopeful I can find a good way to attach them and looks decent. The part numbers for the C-Max deflectors I got are as follows:

RF: DM5Z-16B074-A
LF: DM5Z-16B075-A
RR: DM5Z-5811398-A
LR: DM5Z-5811398-B

I spent around $70 shipped for these parts. That would buy a lot of fuel, so it really is more about learning and seeing what can be done with the car than cost savings. I plan to keep the car for a long time, so maybe I will someday come close to breaking even... or at least that is what I will tell myself. More to come when I get some of the deflectors installed.

I've always liked the idea of this engine, I'm looking forward to where you go with it. I had a focus ST for awhile, it was a lot of fun on the road and track too but good mileage was tough with the bigger engine and low low gearing.

Congrats on the new ride … 1.0L manual Focus hatchbacks are rare!

I've been driving a 1.0L Fiesta manual for the past 12 months. Knock wood, it's been great. Averaging near 40 MPG combined over 30K miles, doing delivery work. This little critter is remarkably efficient on the highway. Cold weather (and winter tires) bring a mileage drop, for sure.

I'm going run E15 (and possibly E30) tests soon.

I drove Volvo turbos 2.1L and 2.3L from 81 through 2009 and found that the two biggest factors to fuel mileage is what you've already realized, keep her out of boost and keep the rpms down.

This is a fun scenario to consider, but only as a hypothetical concept.
From a practical point of view it would be absolutely terrible (even dangerous) to drive a 2,800 lb car with a 1.0 liter 3 cylinder NA engine in the US.

It would have a 0-60 mph time of 60 seconds, going downhill with a tailwind.

:turtle:

Welcome to the eco focus fam! I did change my engine just last week with https://www.levittownfordparts.com/sku/m-6007-20t.html. Sharing it to you wishing this is a good option for me. crossing fingers!

It's easy to "remove" the turbo from the car, simply unhook the wastegate actuator arm from the wastegate.
The wastegate will remain open and create zero boost.

I really don't think it would be "dangerous". I mean people drive Mitsubishi mirages...

It's worse than that. Car & Driver reported that their 2015 Focus Ecoboost sedan weighed 2,972 lbs!

I do know the civic before I sold it would misfire over 70-75% load and I kept it between 1750 and 2300 so I honestly think the math would probably work out to I had maybe 30 horsepower. From the memories, I had yeah that's probably correct. lol
A lot of momentum driving. Could maintain everything except those semi passing lanes up hill, and torrential downpour interstate at 70 mph. But it also weighed 2400lb and had a better drag area than the focus. So probably compare it to a 50bhp Focus.
Fun fact the focus makes 1.6 bar of boost. If you divide that down that is 78bhp naturally aspirated ish. I don't think thats dangerous.