Ford’s Flex crossover saw an uptick in sales towards the end of 2008, and the Blue Oval is hoping to keep that momentum going with a new model for the 2010 model year. Following Ford’s plan to offer 90 percent of its model with EcoBoost technology by 2013, Ford will be launching an EcoBoost version of the Flex for 2010.
The new model is intended to offer V8 performance with V6 fuel economy, thanks to a twin-turbocharged and direct-injected 3.5L V6. As with Ford’s other EcoBoost applications, the turbocharged unit under the Flex’s hood will produce 355 horsepower and 350 lb-ft of torque. Ford says the EcoBoost Flex boasts the best fuel economy for a “full-size performance crossover vehicle”, returning 22 mpg on the highway and 18 mpg combined. No performance numbers were released for the EcoBoost Flex, but we’re expecting 0-60 figures in the 6 to 7 second range.
The EcoBoost engine option will be positioned as a premium option, with the twin-turbo V6 only being available on up-level SEL and Limited models. The EcoBoost Flex will be offered exclusively with all-wheel drive.
“People who drive the Flex want to make a statement, and the new twin-turbocharged 3.5-liter EcoBoost V-6 is very much in keeping with that attitude,” said Ron Heiser, chief engineer of the Ford Flex. “We’re proud and excited to add Ford’s most advanced engine, which is the first V-6 direct-injection twin turbocharged engine produced in North America, to the Flex line.”
Ford has yet to announce a release date or pricing for the 2010 EcoBoost Flex, but expect the option to command a slight premium over the standard CUV, with sales starting in the second half of 2009.
01/12, 11:54 AM
posted by:
Borat
Out of all people who purchased this barn on wheels, which one complained about lack of propulsion?
01/12, 12:01 PM
posted by:
neptronix
Seems kind of overpowered for what it is.
They should offer a smaller motor, like a 3.2 or 3.0 turbo DI.
But i guess when you’re hauling all 5 of your fat ass american family members around, that
extra power is needed.
good thinking, ford ;D
01/12, 12:17 PM
posted by:
Bankruptcy2009
This is not the direction Ford needs to go in. Crossover are Butt Ugly. I said your doing better Ford not Great. Need to get rid of **** Boxes like this not come out with more of em like this. This is something only a mother could love; then you drop a major motor in it.You have to be careful otherwise you’lll canabalize your lineup.
01/12, 1:14 PM
posted by:
Robert
They have a 2.0 Ecoboost set for the 2011MY, I believe. That should deliver closer to 30 mpg highway. In fact, it may deliver the same or better mileage than the Highlander’s 4-cyl with 260hp. Ford knows where it’s heading and the plan isn’t bad at all.
01/12, 2:39 PM
posted by:
ltbullitt
Bankruptcy this car is a love it or hate it car, you obviously hate it, but it offers something fresh compared to the rest of all the look alike crossovers. This car has helped Ford get noticed. This car was showcased at SEMA and there where many amazing examples. My only problem is fuel economy. Ford only told us combined and highway…..wonder why? Cause it only gets city in the high teens. The thing weighs 2 tons so the car is heavy and I guess you cant ask much more from a car of this weight.
01/12, 3:40 PM
posted by:
hummah
Must have twin turbo F150…
01/12, 4:16 PM
posted by:
planet_drive
This term eco boost is so lame. Its a turbo charger, not some flower emitting magic power booster that will save the world. Does Ford think people will be stupid enough to think that eco boost is something new and wonderful? Its just a turbo charger, an 80 year old German invention.
01/12, 4:33 PM
posted by:
Robert
Ecoboost is more than just a couple turbochargers stuck on the engine. A lot of time has gone into tuning the torque curve so that an optimal axle ratio can be put in place to optimize fuel economy. My point is that Ford did more than slap some turbos on the 3.5 and call it a day. And while VW has a similar program in place, they suck at optimizing the fuel economy on those vehicles. VW’s 2.0T in a Jetta will land you with 29 mpg hwy. Ford’s 2.0T in a Fusion will probably land you around 34-35. You’ll get 29 out of a CUV with that engine. And that’s for 40-60 more horses than VW provides. Step down to the 1.6 in a car the size of the Fusion or Jetta, and you’ll end up 40+ on the highway at 180/180.
The technology itself has been around for a while. The technology to optimize if the way Ford is aiming to hasn’t. That’s all computers and new direct injection technology.
01/12, 5:17 PM
posted by:
Lionwithoutpride
To those who don’t see a purpose to the Flex I can only say look at your average college student. They drive aging SUVs and wagons (lots of them Volvos). What is so great about SUVs and wagons? You can haul your entire life to school and home every nine months. You can carry a lot of friends around. You will be popular when it is time to get the kegs or return them. You don’t see as many of the SUVs that are rounded off. Why? My friends and I actually did use to talk about this. If you round off the tail end you lose utility. You might get better fuel economy, but you aren’t going to fit a chair and bureau in there sitting up.
There are a lot of families that want the same type of utility. The Flex offers utility and, like the article says, if you want to be a little different . . . man are you going to be different. The Flex really is love-it-or-leave-it, but that’s okay! We don’t all want to drive utilitarian vehicles (e.g. the Camry) that make no statement other than that we like to wear a suit to bed (e.g. the Camry . . . of course, this is just my subjective view of the Camry and I happen to like the Flex’s styling . . . yeah . . . I’ll leave it at that . . . and Holy Ellipses Batman! . . .)
. . .
01/13, 3:03 PM
posted by:
aesir
Lionwithoutpride hit the nail on the head. If I had three kids I would drive one of these over a minivan any day.