I have just been reading about this in Autocar and looks like a little gem. A 1.0 litre turbocharged triple with over 120 bhp and 200 NM of torque from only 1400 rpm. Those are similar figures to the 1.4 TSI and sound really impressive especially when Ford says there will be no durability issues with the engine. Only trouble is the psychological trouble of getting your head around the fact that you have a 1000 cc in what is a fairly big car. It's like my not being able to get my headf around the fact that you can get a 1.4 in a Supurb estate.

However Steve Cropley says this little motor is the pick of the range, can't wait to try it but what a cracking car the Fiesta or even the KA would be with this motor in it.The Fiesta is ruined in my opinion by its dated and lacklustre engines.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z5D4wBfDOcA

Having used the current focus 1.6 petrol setup, it can't be any worse. I'd be willing to try anything so a 1.0 turbo sounds great.

That'd be great fun in a fiesta! probably very efficient too.

I'd think the next fiesta ST will see one of those.

I'd think the next fiesta ST will see one of those.

With a supercharger too?

Even without a any other mods on this engine then 120hp is a pretty decent figure for a fiesta.

Phil

With a supercharger too?

Even without a any other mods on this engine then 120hp is a pretty decent figure for a fiesta.

Phil

Why bother?

120bhp and I'd guess a reasonable weight saving, would be a good amount in a fiesta.

I'm sure there is room for stronger rods and a bit more boost if they want to get more out of it.

120bhp in the Ka!

This looks quite alot like the Diahatsu gti engine from the 80s , that also was a 998cc turbocharged triple cylinder that gave 120hp and was capable of giving over 200hp per litre , so the Japs were showing the way forwards that long ago .

I remember the Charade Gtri indeed: i think it was only 100 hp standard but was a rapid little thing: revved to about 8 grand too. I know Rotax make a 1.5 litre 3 cylinder snow mobile engine with 260 bhp so that puts the Ford engine into perspective too I guess.

This was bound to happen as all the car makers are looking to make more and more efficient engines.

Small engines with big power have been arounf for a long time.

In the 60s Ferrari were building 1300cc V8 race engines that put out 300bhp and more.

Also look at Motorbike engines a modern 600cc engine is puting out 100-120 bhp from the crate and more is easy to get.

It's a very impressive engine, but as Autocar have said you do need to work at it to get the best economy, but compared to the N/A 1.6 (which isn't a bad engine, all things considered) it should give savings, especially if they can keep the cost of the car down.

Can a small engine with lots of power be reliable in the longer term?

I know some bike engines can last for a long time ,but not all of them, and they're not having to accellerate a ton+ of metal to 70mph or more.

Can a small engine with lots of power be reliable in the longer term?

I know some bike engines can last for a long time ,but not all of them, and they're not having to accellerate a ton+ of metal to 70mph or more.

Any engine will last if it looked after. I have seen BMW bikes with over 200k on them and look at the bikes the couriers in london use they do a lot of miles.

Most bikes only do a few thousdand miles a year and after a few years dont get serviced properly.

I know they are light compared to a car but the weight dosnt affect power, But not may cars can do 0-60 in around 3 seconds.

My last big bike was very powerful for what it was. Kawasaki ZRX1100 which is not a sports bike but an allrounder.

That after a bit of derestricting was putting out 129 bhp at the wheel and that was just a stage 1 tune.

I rode it hard and it would do 40+ mpg but when i took it easy 50 +

The more powerful sports bikes in the 1000cc range areoutting out 160-190 bhp.

Think about it most bikes are ahead of cars in technology stakes and have been for years,

Most 4 cylinder bike engines where DOHC from the late 70s/early 80s.

Then not long after most where electronic ignition.

Edited 21 February, 201214 yr by ruffday

Can a small engine with lots of power be reliable in the longer term?

I know some bike engines can last for a long time ,but not all of them, and they're not having to accellerate a ton+ of metal to 70mph or more.

If you speak the those in the US, your 2.0L turbo petrol is a small engine that'll die soon, compared to their big old 5L V8.

It's all relative.

If you speak the those in the US, your 2.0L turbo petrol is a small engine that'll die soon, compared to their big old 5L V8.

It's all relative.

I keep meaning to post about yank who's done 750,000 miles in a petrol civic in about 5 years. Will find it again.

I keep meaning to post about yank who's done 750,000 miles in a petrol civic in about 5 years. Will find it again.

This one? Epic!:

http://jalopnik.com/5885287/how-i-put-750000-miles-on-my-honda-civic-in-just-five-years

Tis true, engine downsizing is going to come to bigger and bigger cars too. Mahle have a 1.2L 200bhp engine on test at the moment.

Chris

In this weeks Auto Express they said it is a great engine but when you need to over take you need to drop a couple of gears.

In this weeks Auto Express they said it is a great engine but when you need to over take you need to drop a couple of gears.

And? You say it like that's a bad thing.

Well it's no TDI and a small capacity engine so I suspect the low down pull is pretty minimal!

Just like any other small petrol then really.

Even on a TDI you need a drop at least one gear normally.

Phil

And? You say it like that's a bad thing.

Well to me it is as when you want to know that when you are going to do an overtake manouver you would like to be confident that your car can do it easily and safely, but if the Ford struggles it's no good.

Having to drop a couple of gears doesn't mean you will struggle to overtake... just means you are getting the engine into it's power-band to get the most power to perform the overtake.

Like I say not unlike any other small/smaller petrol engine car. It doesn't have the CC to produce the required grunt so you have to get it revving and use the turbo to give you the "go" you need.

Phil

Having to drop a couple of gears doesn't mean you will struggle to overtake... just means you are getting the engine into it's power-band to get the most power to perform the overtake.

I'd agree that changing to a better gear for acceleration doesn't necessarily mean the car is struggling (unless that gear is 1st ), but what's surprising about the comment is that the advertising blurb above states that the engine is producing a decent amount of torque (160 ft/lb) from just 1400rpm which would suggest it would give a fairly usable power band (for people who don't like changing gear ). However, Wikipedia seems to have lower stats for the engine which may explain why the journalists felt there was a benefit in "needing" lower gears.

Sounds interesting though and I'm looking forward to having a drive in one.

Chris

Oh how lazy we have become with the advent of the tractable TD car. Overtaking should be accomplished in a gear suitably responsive, no matter what you drive. Back to the Ecoboost, that would make a cracking little kit car engine for something light weight.

Chris

looks a good engine but the bit where the exhaust manifold is integrated into the cylinder head is a bit expensive if anything goes wrong if its out of warranty