EcoModder.com

EcoModder.com (https://ecomodder.com/forum/)
-   EcoModding Central (https://ecomodder.com/forum/ecomodding-central.html)
-   -   Ford testing cylinder deactivation with 1.0L turbo 3-cyl Ecoboost engine: 6% gain (https://ecomodder.com/forum/showthread.php/ford-testing-cylinder-deactivation-1-0l-turbo-3-a-31945.html)

MetroMPG 05-13-2015 03:44 PM

Ford testing cylinder deactivation with 1.0L turbo 3-cyl Ecoboost engine: 6% gain
 
1 Attachment(s)
http://ecomodder.com/forum/attachmen...1&d=1431545920

OK, you know things are getting serious when they start investigating cylinder deactivation in a triple.

Ford says they've been doing on-road testing of rolling cylinder deactivation in their 1.0L turbo, with a series of countermeasures to manage NVH:

Quote:

They fitted the prototype (Ford Focus) with a newly developed system that combined a dual mass flywheel, a pendulum absorber, and a tuned clutch disc; and is particularly effective at low revs. As well as enabling a wider operating range of cylinder deactivation, this system helped counteract any effect that the cylinder deactivation had on levels of noise, vibration and harshness.

Fuel efficiency improvements were recorded in homologated conditions and during test drives of the first prototype vehicle, for a typical commuter distance of 55 km on a combination of motorway, city roads and rural roads, in and around Cologne, Germany. The development is a collaboration with Ford’s engineering partners at the Schaeffler Group.
The results: Fuel efficiency improvements of up to 6 per cent

The "rolling" deactivation approach means each cylinder takes turns being the deactivated one.

Quote:

The benefit is a more well-balanced temperature level inside the combustion chambers and consistent firing intervals for three-cylinder engines operating in deactivation mode.
Source: Green Car Congress: Ford exploring cylinder deactivation for 1.0L EcoBoost; testing shows up to 6% fuel efficiency improvement

And Ford: https://media.ford.com/content/fordm...enhancing.html

rmay635703 05-13-2015 03:48 PM

hmm a modern hit and miss engine. :)

MetroMPG 05-13-2015 03:54 PM

Put a big enough flywheel and muffler on it, and nobody'll be any the wiser!

Daox 05-13-2015 03:58 PM

I must say I'm surprised by the 6% figure. Seems high to me considering that 1.0L engine still wants higher engine load on a Focus even...

Frank Lee 05-13-2015 05:44 PM

Every time I drive the T-Racer with it's 2.0L I think, "This car has waaaay too much engine"!

MetroMPG 05-13-2015 06:18 PM

The 1.8L Civic gave me the same reaction. I have never said the same thing about the Firefly/Metro though!

Frank Lee 05-13-2015 06:37 PM

With Metros I drop the "waaaay" but I think a 2-cyl Metro would suit me just fine; that is, if it gives me enough fe improvement.

rmay635703 05-14-2015 01:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daox (Post 479180)
I must say I'm surprised by the 6% figure. Seems high to me considering that 1.0L engine still wants higher engine load on a Focus even...

Direct water injection on off cycles could recover even more free FE

Baltothewolf 05-14-2015 04:54 PM

Instead of making these damn cars harder to work on/diagnose, how about just more aerodynamic? That 6% will never pay for itself when it takes me an extra 2 hours to diagnose an engine misfire problem and I charge you 90$ an hour for labor.

kafer65 06-23-2015 04:50 PM

Looks like greencarcongress has a comparison of fixed cylinder deactivation versus rolling deactivation on Fords 1 liter triple. NVH, complexity and cost balanced in the comparison. Looks like fixed is winning out in the cost and complexity without loosing too much gains in mpg. I'm not a fan of using dual mass flywheels because they fail often and at great cost in the used car market. They use them to help overcome the shakes.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:40 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com