24Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 58 Old 01-30-2015, 11:54 AM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 299
Long term reliability of 1.6 L EcoBoost engine

I have low mileage on my 2014 Escape with the 1.6 L engine.


Are there any 1.6 L owners that have high mileage on their Escapes?

If so have you had to have any major work done on the engine?

It seems coolant usage on the 1.6 L can be an issue not just for 2013 model years, but 2014 as well.

2014 Ingot Silver Escape SE FWD

201A, Charcoal Black Leather Interior

K&N E-9289 air filter, Ceramic tint
Build date: June 17, 2014
CND_Escape is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 58 Old 01-30-2015, 12:49 PM
Senior Member
 
topbliss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: south Jersey USA
Posts: 859
Garage
The only thing I would be weary of is the timing belt. The 2.0 has a chain.

--------------
2014 SE AWD
build date 8/6/14
sunset metallic
equipment group 201A
2.0 ecoboost
power liftgate
panoramic vista roof
MyFord touch
SE chrome package (Rare)
Ford remote start
topbliss is offline  
post #3 of 58 Old 01-30-2015, 03:34 PM
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 145
mine started loosing coolant at a slow rate about 18.000 by 35.000 they were waiting for a new motor which supersedes to a 2015, the 2013 to some time in july of 14 cylinder head is a discontinued part replaced by a service engine.
35073 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 58 Old 02-01-2015, 08:40 PM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 19
50k miles on my 2013 Escape with 1.6L and not one problem.
mariog7 is offline  
post #5 of 58 Old 02-01-2015, 09:31 PM
Super Moderator
 
Hitokiri's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,540
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by CND_Escape View Post
If so have you had to have any major work done on the engine?

It seems coolant usage on the 1.6 L can be an issue not just for 2013 model years, but 2014 as well.
Is this a frequent issue with the 1.6 Ecoboost motors found in the Fiesta ST as well? I would try maybe asking some of the Fiesta ST forums and see what their experiences are.

I know this might be off topic but from what I'm aware the Escape with the most miles on here has 107,000 miles and has no issues. The only thing is that it's a 2.0.

http://www.fordescape.org/forum/new-...-escape-3.html

2013 Deep Impact Blue Ford Escape SE: 2.0 Liter Ecoboost AWD| Exterior: Replica Ford Kuga Rear Wing, Ford Mud Flaps, 18" Factory Ford Focus ST Rims| Interior: Custom Engine Cover by Carsonfire45, Weathertech Floor Liner| Engine: Steeda "Cold Air" Intake, CX Racing Front Mount Intercooler, Denso Iridium ITV22 "One Step Colder" Sparkplugs, Turbosmart Kompact Plumb Blowoff Valve, SCTX3 tune by Torrie From Unleashed Tuning| Future Plans: Magnaflow Exhaust System| Power Goals: 280 HP/340 Torque
Hitokiri is offline  
post #6 of 58 Old 02-01-2015, 10:00 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 220
Personal opinion on the 1.6L

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hitokiri View Post
Is this a frequent issue with the 1.6 Ecoboost motors found in the Fiesta ST as well? I would try maybe asking some of the Fiesta ST forums and see what their experiences are.

I know this might be off topic but from what I'm aware the Escape with the most miles on here has 107,000 miles and has no issues. The only thing is that it's a 2.0.

http://www.fordescape.org/forum/new-...-escape-3.html
Is that the Escape is too heavy for it.

Think about it, the 2.5L specs are very close and it doesn't require the almost constant use of the turbo like the 1.6L does just for normal day to day driving. This means that if your driving is a 50/50 hwy city mix the 1.6L engine has to be run close to it's maximum output over half of it's life.

And if you use the specs for the non-Ecoboost version of the 2.0L used in the Focus you'll notice that it's very close to the 2.5L without the use of a turbo.

I hate to bring up a ghost from the past, but the pre-1974 Pinto's came with both 1.6L and a 2.0L, the 1.6L were known for short lives (strangely enough they were also a Brit designed engine) while the 2.0L were known for having very few problems because they had enough torque to move the vehicle without constantly hitting 4000 RPM.
Hitokiri likes this.
jpohlman is offline  
post #7 of 58 Old 02-01-2015, 10:37 PM
Super Moderator
 
Hitokiri's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 1,540
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpohlman View Post
Is that the Escape is too heavy for it.
I agree. I'm not making fun of looking down on Escape owners with the 1.6 Ecoboost but a 1.6 four banger powering a a 3500 lbs car like the Escape does sound a bit much. That same 1.6 engine in something like the Fiesta makes sense but it's a bit small for the Escape. As you said @jpohlman , in order for the 1.6 liter to gave the same power as a 2.0 or even the 2.5 liter engine means that it has to work harder since it is a smaller engine.

It seems Ford wants to keep the 1.6 liter engine for a little while more since the new 2017 Ford Fiesta RS is supposedly also powered by the same motor.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see and what happens though. Never know. I'm not a engine maker .

2013 Deep Impact Blue Ford Escape SE: 2.0 Liter Ecoboost AWD| Exterior: Replica Ford Kuga Rear Wing, Ford Mud Flaps, 18" Factory Ford Focus ST Rims| Interior: Custom Engine Cover by Carsonfire45, Weathertech Floor Liner| Engine: Steeda "Cold Air" Intake, CX Racing Front Mount Intercooler, Denso Iridium ITV22 "One Step Colder" Sparkplugs, Turbosmart Kompact Plumb Blowoff Valve, SCTX3 tune by Torrie From Unleashed Tuning| Future Plans: Magnaflow Exhaust System| Power Goals: 280 HP/340 Torque
Hitokiri is offline  
post #8 of 58 Old 02-02-2015, 12:32 AM
Senior Member
 
centex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Central TX
Posts: 2,635
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpohlman View Post
.... I hate to bring up a ghost from the past, but the pre-1974 Pinto's came with both 1.6L and a 2.0L, the 1.6L were known for short lives (strangely enough they were also a Brit designed engine) while the 2.0L were known for having very few problems because they had enough torque to move the vehicle without constantly hitting 4000 RPM.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hitokiri View Post
I agree. I'm not making fun of looking down on Escape owners with the 1.6 Ecoboost but a 1.6 four banger powering a a 3500 lbs car like the Escape does sound a bit much. That same 1.6 engine in something like the Fiesta makes sense but it's a bit small for the Escape. As you said @jpohlman , in order for the 1.6 liter to gave the same power as a 2.0 or even the 2.5 liter engine means that it has to work harder since it is a smaller engine.....
IMHO it is rather silly to allude to a 40-year old design in reference to current technology (and disingenuous to grossly oversimplify the comparative problems of '74 vintage 1.6 and 2.0 as being solely a function of displacement and torque). There is simply no meaningful basis for comparing '74 era engines and current designs in a discussion about 'longevity' of the latter.

I predict that the future of internal combustion vehicles will in large part evolve toward using engines in a way that they are almost constantly 'working hard'. That is, the engines will run at peak power and efficiency almost constantly, either delivering motive power directly to the drivetrain or delivering that power to energy storage strategies, either kinetic, potential or a combination of the two.

The point is, old notions of engines 'working too hard' are rapidly losing credence and applicability, and to a very great extent are inapplicable already. Smaller engines working 'harder' are ultimately more efficient in terms of converting fuel energy into motive force. Advances on many fronts from metallurgy (and non-metal materials science) to cooling strategies to lubricant properties and even production techniques have rendered old notions about 'working hard' vs 'longevity' completely outdated.

The features of engine design and build that bear on longevity are changing very rapidly these days. Fortunately, the process of engine development has also become much more efficient by virtue of very sophisticated computer modeling, prototyping and production techniques. That means that old notions about the 'longevity' of designs necessary to realize pay-back are also becoming dated .... no one should be surprised to find manufacturers more and more willing and able to 'abandon' designs more quickly than in the past in order to take advantage of rapid advances in technology, particularly as it relates to end-product operating efficiency.

I'm not suggesting that the current 1.6 EcoBoost is a miracle engine or a be-all-end-all. Nor am I suggesting that any specific implementation or model-run is without problems. I am suggesting that it is a significantly advanced engine design in comparison to many of the other current production engines, even those offered by Ford (2.5 non-EcoBoost) and certainly more advanced than even recent earlier engines. IMHO there is no basis for drawing conclusions or making predictions about it's "longevity" based on comparison to those 'old' technologies and notions tied to those technologies .... it is different enough that it will have to prove its own record, and in so doing will likely shatter more of the entrenched ideas about 'small engines working harder'.

When I was born Ford was still producing the long-lived flathead V8 and those confounded complex OHV engines were still earning 'credibility'. IMHO we are now in an era of more rapid and radical positive advances in vehicle internal combustion gasoline engines than ever in my life. We 'olde skoolers' are going to have to let go of a lot of 'olde notions' lest we be left behind in a could of dust ('cause these newfangled engines sure aren't gonna bury us in a cloud of smoke ;-)
tbudjobs, DAC17, atlcarl69 and 5 others like this.

'14 Escape SE 2.0 FWD (25 Sep 13 build); 201A SE Convenience Package; Power Liftgate; Leather Comfort Package; Oxford White on Med Light Stone Leather (SYNC 2 w/8" MFT screen)
I love my hard-working '05 F-150 XLT 5.4 V8 trailer-towing truck, too !

Help us help you - what is your year, engine, drivetrain, trim and SYNC version?
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
centex is offline  
post #9 of 58 Old 02-02-2015, 11:21 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Northern Maine
Posts: 129
My little 1.6 has some impressive performance for such a small motor. I've noticed that I never, I mean never run at 4000 rpm and I live in a rural, rather hilly area. I just drive it 21 miles to work every morning and it hardly downshifts, and does not run inefficiently at all. I'm averaging 22 mpg and it been in the - f degrees for the past few weeks. I'm hoping that I get great life out of the 1.6 and I really love this escape. If it does go bad early Maine has a law called the Attorney Generals Implies Warrantee Law, which strictly protect owners of NEW automobiles from items or vehicles that wear out prematurely or prior to it's expected usable life expectancy. Basically it functions as an automatic extended warrantee without consumers needing to buy it and without deductibles. I breath easy knowing that I bought a NEW car versus a used one for this reason alone.
tbudjobs, atlcarl69 and uptownrick like this.
strykerlover is offline  
post #10 of 58 Old 02-02-2015, 12:44 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Visalia, Ca.
Posts: 1,224
The early 2013 1.6Ls in the Escape had a cooling system design flaw that's been corrected on the later models. Their is no reason to think that the newer model with the cooling system correction will not last as long as the 2.0Ls. Providing you change the trimming belt at the scheduled time.
Mark

2014 Sunset Titanium FWD 2.0L FE
Panno sunroof, Tow Package
Build Date 2/3/14 Day after my Hawks won!
Go Hawks!
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
leadmic is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



  Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Does waiting too long to fill up damage engine? Zenman Ford Escape Fuel Economy Discussion 10 11-17-2014 08:54 AM
2013, takes too long to shift when the engine is cold Ben Young Engine and Technical Discussion 14 05-11-2014 07:57 AM
Ford Ecoboost Engine Torture pilotattitude Off Topic Discussion 5 03-06-2014 06:23 PM
Unspecific Ecoboost engine badges JMR Ford Escape General Discussion 29 10-12-2013 08:42 PM
2.0 Ecoboost engine camshaft operation wamara Engine and Technical Discussion 6 03-23-2013 12:08 PM

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On