Getting Good Gas Mileage Is Hard; Will Tinier Engines Really Help?

Follow Antony

2013 Ford Focus 1.0 EcoBoost live photos

2013 Ford Focus 1.0 EcoBoost live photos

Enlarge Photo

How small is too small, when it comes to engines?

Those of the "no replacement for displacement" school of thought might be thinking more about performance than they are gas mileage, but at what point does downsizing actually start to harm gas mileage, rather than help it?

As carmakers strive to attain better MPG figures, many are beginning to build smaller engines, often turbocharged to make up for the lack of displacement.

High tech, not-so-high MPG

Ford's eagerly-awaited 1.0-liter, 3-cylinder EcoBoost is one such example.

Designed to replace a naturally-aspirated 1.6 four-cylinder in terms of performance, yet improve on its economy, the EcoBoost is getting praised around the world by the motoring press.

It will come to the U.S. in the nose of the 2014 Ford Fiesta. In that format, with 123 horsepower and 148 lb-ft of torque at 1,400 rpm, Ford is claiming the highest gas mileage "of any non-hybrid" in the U.S. market.

In Europe, the 1.0 engine in a Ford Focus gets 47 mpg. Subtract the 15-20 percent difference between European and U.S. figures and you get an average of around 40 mpg--not bad at all, for a gasoline car.

2012 Ford Focus 1.0 EcoBoost

2012 Ford Focus 1.0 EcoBoost

Enlarge Photo

If only it were that simple.

UK site Honest John runs "real mpg" figures compiled from owner accounts. In the real world, Focus EcoBoost owners are only achieving 34 mpg--72 percent of the official claims.

Across the entire site, owners in the UK are averaging 88 percent of official figures, so 72 percent is hugely off-target. It's also barely above that of the 33 mpg 2012 Ford Focus SFE sold in the U.S.--with its 2.0-liter engine.

The story is similar for another award-winning engine, the Fiat TwinAir.

Under the stubby hood of a Fiat 500, it's said to achieve almost 59 mpg. In reality, owners are getting 40 mpg--70 percent of the official number, and no better than the regular (and much cheaper) four-cylinder 1.2-liter.

Quick drive: TwinAir engine in a Chrysler Ypsilon subcompact

Regular engines in each range, without the high-MPG fanfare, are comfortably achieving over 80 percent of the claimed figures--so why are the "eco" engines struggling?

Under-sized, over-stressed?

The average economy of downsized engines isn't just affecting cars at the bottom of the market--even larger vehicles are struggling to show any benefits.

On Fuelly, Ford F-150 drivers are averaging 17 mpg--both with the 3.5-liter V-6 EcoBoost engine, and the supposedly less efficient V-8. And Toyota has dropped the four-cylinder 2.7 from its Toyota Sienna minivan, since the larger 3.5-liter V-6 achieved the same 21 mpg.

It suggests that when it comes to gas mileage, there's simply a point where a smaller, less powerful and lower-torque engine has to be worked too hard in normal driving for its benefits to show.

Follow Us

Commenting is closed for this article

Take Us With You!


© 2017 Green Car Reports. All Rights Reserved. Green Car Reports is published by Internet Brands Automotive Group. Stock photography by izmostock. Read our Cookie Policy.