You can't compare a Sonata to a Mustang. They are two very different vehicles. The Mustang does do a job, it's not a Daily Driver like the Sonata. It's a former Pony/New Muscle Car. Essentially what I've seen of the VCT is that it's an improvement over the Variable Intake Cam technology that was used almost mostly by Mazda and also on the Fusion and Taurus too. What this bit doesn't describe is that the VCT advances or retards the cam timing as necessary for best engine performance. In the Low RPM it Advances the timing and lowers the torque band for more usable torque whereas for higher RPM needs the cam timing is Retarded for more high end power. It's still just two cams and unlike the Honda VTEC and Toyota Quad Cam system, cam profile doesn't change just the cam timing advance/retard. I'm on the fence as to what is actually faster/efficient/cheaper. I'd prefer having two sets of cam profiles one for low rpm and one for high rpm and there is also the 3 cam systems in the newer Honda VTECs. But the VCT does automatically what many hotrodders have done by hand with single cams in their OHV V8's or Tuners with they're adjustable Cam gears.

The Honda mild hybrids are probably showing some of their disadvantages. For the Insight to get the same sales as the $30k Fusion hybrid is no small matter. The Prius is still the pillar of full hybridness with a $20k starting price and the more mainstream midsize market competition to boot. At least the Insight still looks like a hybrid :\. This hasn't spurred anything RWD and efficent just more FWD autoslushboxes and Honda with their sporty Hybrid is the biggest breakthrough because it is coming out with a 6spd! The Toyota/Subaru Hachi-Roku(86) is getting a big 4 cylinder boxer and is pretty much the only dedicated 4 cylinder RWD in the works and you can bet if it's NA and 200+BHP it'll be high revving and get only average FE. I'm hoping for something completely RWD(Engine behind the Front Axle), compact, Manual tranny with a Ford EcoBoost but they're still too attached to the Mustang. The RX-8 is the only thing remotely close to good and it weighs 3000lbs and has the gas guzzling Rotary with 9k RPM redlines. Yes, it would be fun to drive but the FE is comparable to the Dodge Challenger! There's got to be a better way maybe not easier but better.

Actually, wasn't it the "adjusted" temperature readings that was found to be skewed? I don't doubt it's warmer than usual but I don't believe in the El Nino/La Nina effects as singular weather patterns. I'm more inclined to believe it's the number and frequency of Sunspot activity than Global Climate patterns. There's actually nothing in here spouting the "Human Climate Change" doctrine so I don't know why you're so worried that the more Myopic readers are seeing this as a sign of "Human based Global Warming" as opposed to regular weather patterns. We still remember the Ice Storms and the Colder Winters where Myopic people ran amock with claims about," "Global Warming" is a farce"/"still not seeing the global warming", why is it anymore "Global Warming" to have Ocean temperatures rise more than usual for a few summers?

This is notable not just for it's high power per liter but because it uses DI through the second spark plug and 2 valves per cylinder with variable cam control. A turbo can mean an even higher HP per liter than displayed here but to a point the fuel can't be Regular grade and the amount of Boosted air pressure can't be too high as to give laggy response. This engine could be used in anything from a 2000lb Subcompact to a sporty Microcar if it made it past the design stage. While I'd debate the use of a two sparkplug configuration due to the efficiency of 2 spark plugs is well known and 4 is still the best design from an emissions standpoint. But for low RPM fuel efficient driving a 2 valve should provide plenty of breathing room although a 4 valve design will still prove to be superior for larger more performance oriented vehicles. I've always felt the ragging on 1.0liter motors was always due to a lack of development. The 3 cylinder 1.0liter Suzuki G10B could have been vastly better had it been built to include advances like DI, Turbo Charging, 4 plug design, and variable valve timing. The Geo Metro would have been considered "sporty" had it come with a lower revving 100+BHP engine. The FE was already pretty good it was just performance that was a problem. The 2000lb Suzuki/Geo Metro of the late 90's had gained so much weight that the 1.0l TBI Engine was upgraded to 4 valve and a higher profile cam profile but the FE was never what it used to be. Had it made the jump to MPFI it could have made up the difference it needed. But by then GM was trying to ax production. The Big American three just isn't disposed towards fuel efficient designs, it really has to come from somewhere else like Japan or even Europe to be even considered a good idea. From the Design of the Volt being a brick in the windtunnel which they just slapped a boring Sedan front and terrible Kammback tail together, to the Ford's first full hybrid being so similar to the Toyota design that they patent trade to make it legal for production and putting a big 4 cylinder in just to differentiate it from the Prius, to the attempts to reawaken the Muscle Car era when Gasoline was dirt cheap to now when Gasoline sells for almost $3 a gallon on average. I suppose it has something to do with being from a younger generation that didn't experience cheap gasoline for more than a summer or two. I'm not angry to pay $3 a gallon for Gasoline even when I was delivering newspapers and it directly affected my profit margin, but many of my elder family/relatives/friends have been outraged at one point because of it.

The 1.6L EcoBoost was announced to be a future option for the new Focus which will have a 2.0L base engine. So it's only natural that the Fiesta will get a 1.3L EcoBoost to complement it's 1.6L base engine. The 1.3L meets the 25% smaller displacement goals. The 1.6L EcoBoost is 25% smaller than the 2.0L and a 1.3L EcoBoost is just a hair shy of 25% smaller than the 1.6L. And if the 1.3L EcoBoost can spit out 145BHP then that would be plenty of power for the Fiesta over the base 100BHP engine. The EcoBoost power numbers are peak power numbers with the Turbo at Full Boost. You can't compare them 1:1 with NA engines because if you did the EcoBoost would be sluggards when off Turbo Boost. Ford doesn't build tiny, lightweight cars. The smallest Engine that Ford America has used in a badged vehicle was a 1.3L in the Festiva/Aspire and that was a rebadged model. The EcoBoost is really the first in house designed 4 cylinder since the Ironclad Pinto/Lima and those started at 2.3L/2.0L and grew with time. I doubt Ford would undersize the engine as much to go below 1.3L at least here in the US and especially at this time. They are Ford, it's not really inline with their goals to put tiny engines in practical cars. Practical Engines in Practical cars.

That is what Ford's Ecoboosting does but it's still possible to safely run Regular. Engine control units are pretty impressive in that they can usually make up for not only octane differences but turbochargers mean there is even more room for adjustment. It's been said in a couple publications, I believe, that the Ecoboost Engines were built to run better on E85 but still run albeit with reduced output and power on Regular. Although I do believe the advertised HP ratings are on Regular grade gasoline. It is my understanding that quite a few newer engines are built so that they run better with Premium fuel but the ignition timing is retarded a little bit which is more effective for better fuel economy than decreasing compression ratio or enrichment of the fuel:air mixture. So when these "Normal" gasoline engines are ran with Premium or in some cases E85 they "suddenly" gain more power. Ecoboost just takes this a couple steps farther and builds an engine that makes the most power on E85 but still runs acceptable on Regular or Premium. So technically a purely E85 Ecoboost engine could be smaller still than the Gasoline Ecoboost and make up for the fuel density differences between the two fuels. But Ecoboost is really the first of it's kind specifically because the main difference between the other Motor Companies applications is the E85 Design emphasis. It's hard to complain, Ford is the only Motor Company trying to give us so many options in regards to E85.