ford

ukmike

Thousands an hour? Is that a minimum 17.5 million per year?


2000x24x365=17,520,000


Happy to be corrected, is that 1.75 billion in 10 years?

No,it's 170.5 million.

System

Arklight wrote: »

Yes, and the one's which are almost a decade old are starting to demonstrate catastrophic engine failure, and occasionally bursting into flames.

Probably are given that after year 5 people tend not to service cars properly.

Reviews of cars in the motoring press are fundamentally paid for adverts, although they can be quite interesting if you want to know about cup holders.

What about HonestJohn?

The 1,0 Ecoboost is nothing like as lively or as economical as is made out. Nor is it even especially fun to drive in the variant I tried it in.

The clue is in the name, ECO BOOST so you can either have economy or power. Nobody has invented an engine that gives you both. And because its a turbocharged engine its likely to only have the most power over 4000 RPM where the majority of the population seem scared to take an engine. Drive it like a normally aspirated engine and it wouldn't feel particularly powerful. Also the 1.0L comes in several power ranges so it depends on whether you had the lacklustre 99BHP one or the 140BHP one. The 1.5L Ecoboost does 200BHP so I find it hard to believe that wasn't fun to drive.

If you like Fords than good for you but not everyone has had great experiences with them. Ford's response to the growing number of Ecoboost problems is shockingly dismissive.

Again given there are 11 variants from 1.0L to 3.5L, the high numbers in use especially in the USA where they do starship mileage compared to the UK and the fact there's nothing anywhere in any credible source about there being the problem you claim then I'm inclined to believe its not as bad as you make out.