If Ford can adapt all those new "TwinForce" engines to DFI then why not the FEH/MMH..?? And have the engine transition from Otto mode into Atkinson cycle mode as engine load/loading rises just as Toyota is doing with the new Prius/HH/RXh generation HSD.

Get a step, BIG step, ahead of Toyota for a change.

Static/native compression ratio of 15:1 for Otto mode effectively reduce, extended VVT-i, to 12:1 for Atkinson mode.

20-30% more HP/torque.... or reduce the engine displacement for 20-30% FE improvement.

So, which might it be, "TwinForce", HP rise, or EcoTech, FE rise..??

GO..FORD..!!!

 

I've wondered for a while now why Ford didn't make the valve timing variable so that it could incorporate both Atkinson and Otto cycles. Since variable valve timing has been around for years, it would seem simple enough to design it to accommodate both cycles. That way you could have all the compression/performance when you need it and economy when you don't.

 

But remember that even Toyota didn't do it prior to the 2010 model year. And I strongly suspect Toyota only "discovered" what needed to be done in response to the need to solve the V6 Atkinson "reverse" airflow problem. With a 4 cylinder Atkinson cycle engine just as one cylinder is forcing mixture back out, its "opposite" cylinder is intaking mixture in exacting angular synchronization. So with a 4 cylinder there is no reverse flow "pulse" in the intake manifold.

Such is not the case with a 6 cylinder. Having the V6 stay in Otto mode for low engine loading obviously helps, no problem with reverse flow. So the need for making the V6 Atkinson cycle compatible may have been a lucky break for Toyota.