Ford Inside News banner

1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,401 Posts
The 2.3EB in the Mustang makes 310/320, this 2.7EB V6 sounds a bit underpowered, or at least not reaching for all of it's potential.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
175 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
27mpg in an AWD performance CUV is nothing to sneeze at. Impressive.
Yes, it's impressive, but you will probably have to drive it like an old lady to get those numbers. I don't drive fast all the time, but I know I could never get those numbers on a regular basis.
 

·
Mercury C557
Joined
·
22,734 Posts
The 2.3EB in the Mustang makes 310/320, this 2.7EB V6 sounds a bit underpowered, or at least not reaching for all of it's potential.
just-imho, they're just starting out low'n'slow and eventually (I still expect) EBgen2's to come in 120-125hp-per-liter
and 140-150-hp-per-liter variants
( wondering IF they do EB-Hybrids, IF they'll bring out variants below 120per that are specific for better MPG? )
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
175 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
The 2.3EB in the Mustang makes 310/320, this 2.7EB V6 sounds a bit underpowered, or at least not reaching for all of it's potential.
I heard they are keeping the hp and tq low because the transmission might not be able to handle the power. Remember the Taraus SHO torque is also limited to 350, and I think it shares same 6 speed transmission.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
175 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Does anyone think the MKX will have more horsepower and torque? Lincoln did mention more than one time that the MKX will have more than 330hp and more than 370lb.ft torque.

"More power, greater agility
Leading the engine choices for the new Lincoln MKX is the available advanced 2.7-liter twin-turbocharged Ti-VCT EcoBoost V6. It is projected to deliver more than 330 horsepower and more than 370 lb.-ft. of torque, based on preliminary test data."

https://media.lincoln.com/content/l...new-lincoln-mkx-delivers-personal-luxury.html
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,961 Posts
Even at 350ftlbs, that is a lot of torque moving this CUV that is delivered quickly with lots of low end thrust, will make it feel powerful. Current Sport is what, about 280ftlbs at about twice the RPM's. Remember, this engine powers the F-150 easily. So that should say plenty. It may not be SHO level of performance, but it is enough to have fun when called upon, and yet driven as a family vehicle that is efficient when needed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
50 Posts
27 mpg is for the FWD Sport. The AWD is rated at 24 mpg Highway.

Ford/Lincoln started differentiation with the 2015 Expedition & Navigator. 365hp/420lb-ft for the Expedition & 380hp/460lb-ft for the Navigator.

Note that Lincoln advertises the 380hp/460lb-ft rating using 93 octane fuel.http://www.lincoln.com/suvs/navigator/features/Feature1/

Going through the media.ford article, there is no mention of premium fuel requirement for the 2.7 while it is clearly stated for the 2.0. So it might really be just a marketing thing & using regular vs. premium fuel. Also, the media.ford article stated 10% increase in power & 25% increase in torque compared to current 3.7. This works out to 335HP & 350 lb-ft of torque.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,118 Posts
27mpg in an AWD performance CUV is nothing to sneeze at. Impressive.
Well, I guess these numbers shouldn't be too much off of what to expect from the 2.7 EB on the Lincoln...

My current 4x4 Grand Cherokee is rated at 19 MPG overall. Granted, it is probably heavier than the MKX is expected to be BUT it 'only' makes 290 HP and 260 lb.-ft. and needs its 8-speed tranny to achieve this.

If the MKX AWD can get 19 MPG as well while delivering about 320 HP and 350 lb.-ft. on the old 6-speed tranny (I adjusted those numbers a bit because the Jeep runs on regular and the high ratings on the MKX are probably on premium), I'd be quite happy.

What I would LOVE to see is a bigger gas-tank on the MKX which would increase the range. My Jeep has a 24.6 Gal. tank-capacity and running 400 miles on a single tank is very convenient...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,961 Posts
Well, I guess these numbers shouldn't be too much off of what to expect from the 2.7 EB on the Lincoln...

My current 4x4 Grand Cherokee is rated at 19 MPG overall. Granted, it is probably heavier than the MKX is expected to be BUT it 'only' makes 290 HP and 260 lb.-ft. and needs its 8-speed tranny to achieve this.

If the MKX AWD can get 19 MPG as well while delivering about 320 HP and 350 lb.-ft. on the old 6-speed tranny (I adjusted those numbers a bit because the Jeep runs on regular and the high ratings on the MKX are probably on premium), I'd be quite happy.

What I would LOVE to see is a bigger gas-tank on the MKX which would increase the range. My Jeep has a 24.6 Gal. tank-capacity and running 400 miles on a single tank is very convenient...
I love huge tanks because I hate pumping gas. I would rather get another 200 mile range and pay an extra $5-10 every time I do it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,118 Posts
I love huge tanks because I hate pumping gas. I would rather get another 200 mile range and pay an extra $5-10 every time I do it.
Absolutely!:thumb:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,470 Posts
in the media report of the MKX said more than 330hp but in a intrview Scott Tobin Lincoln Product Chief said 335hp maybe that is the final number
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
127 Posts
Ford is detuning this engine for use in the sport because of the MKX.

The 9-speed transmission can't come soon enough, Ford is no longer "leading" in fuel economy. For $39k+ for the base model of this engine and AWD, the new AWD system from the Focus RS really needs to be used in this "sport" trim. I hope it makes its way when the 9-speed is put in.

Also, this engine needs to be in the Fusion ASAP. Camry V6 wrecks the Fusion in 0-60. :(
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,893 Posts
With this engine in the New $40k MKX, at 315hp and 350 lb ft torque, it will out power the $58k Porsche Cayenne at 300hp and 295 lb ft torque.
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top