1.5L Dragon Reliability

[Mark S.]

What I remember reading is that the Dragon engine is produced in many factories all over the world and there are multiple versions of it. Keep in mind some versions of this engine have the turbo and some don't - they make several flavors.

While Ford produces a number of different inline 3 cyl engines, I believe the "Dragon" designation refers to the 1.5L EcoBoost version (dragon=fire breathing?). The "boost" part of EcoBoost refers to turbocharging.

After thinking more about this I wonder if the difference between chain and belt driven cams has something to do with cylinder deactivation? The version of the engine used for the Bronco Sport uses cylinder deactivation to improve fuel efficiency.

Sponsored

 

[ZQ8]

I'll bet you $10000 it's a timing belt in oil.

I did not want to take your money when I knew you were wrong and I was correct.

 

[RSH]

This article says oil bathed belt.

https://dustrunnersauto.com/ford-1-5-ecoboost/

This article also says oil bathed belt.

https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/technical-stuff/191686-close-look-fords-new-1-5l-3-cylinder-dragon-petrol-engine-print.html

 

[scaryhours]

This article says oil bathed belt.

https://dustrunnersauto.com/ford-1-5-ecoboost/

This article also says oil bathed belt.

https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/technical-stuff/191686-close-look-fords-new-1-5l-3-cylinder-dragon-petrol-engine-print.html

It's a chain. I was wrong.

from my research, the belt was changed to a chain around 2018. Ford parts catalog doesn't have a belt listed for the 1.5, only a chain.

 

[Mark S.]

Wow. There is so much confusion out there on this topic. What I've found so far is that the original 1.0L 3cyl engine has evolved into an entire family of engines, some turbocharged, some normally aspirated. My assumption that "Dragon" referred to turbocharging is incorrect; according to this post at Team-BHP, Ford uses the Dragon designation for the naturally aspirated version as well. (Note the engine described features a wet belt to drive the camshafts.)

From what I can find, the original 1.0L engine and all the normally aspirated variants that evolved from it appear to use a wet belt to drive the camshafts. It also appears some of the earlier turbocharged variants, such as the one described in this video, used a belt.

That said, based on the video below detailing the interior components of the latest 1.5L Dragon engine, it appears that Ford is now using a timing chain.



My guess is Ford is being cagy about its switch to a timing chain for its own reasons—likely having to do with an unwillingness to cast doubts on the durability of belt-equipped engines—and the automotive press hasn't caught up yet.

 

[scaryhours]

I did not want to take your money when I knew you were wrong and I was correct.

I owe you something. My bad man.

 

[scaryhours]

Wow. There is so much confusion out there on this topic. What I've found so far is that the original 1.0L 3cyl engine has evolved into an entire family of engines, some turbocharged, some normally aspirated. My assumption that "Dragon" referred to turbocharging is incorrect; according to this post at Team-BHP, Ford uses the Dragon designation for the naturally aspirated version as well. (Note the engine described features a wet belt to drive the camshafts.)

From what I can find, the original 1.0L engine and all the normally aspirated variants that evolved from it appear to use a wet belt to drive the camshafts. It also appears some of the earlier turbocharged variants, such as the one described in this video, used a belt.

That said, based on the video below detailing the interior components of the latest 1.5L Dragon engine, it appears that Ford is now using a timing chain.



My guess is Ford is being cagy about its switch to a timing chain for its own reasons—likely having to do with an unwillingness to cast doubts on the durability of belt-equipped engines—and the automotive press hasn't caught up yet.

I'm actually very happy I was wrong. Glad there's a chain on this engine.

 

[MikeF]

We have a BS Outer Banks on order. I convinced myself the dragon was gonna be fine. Saw this video last night and am now a bit bothered. It does appear they now have a timing chain, but still a wet belt driven oil pump. That is what killed the engine the 1L turbo in this video (belt chunks clogged the oil pick up).

 

[Mark S.]

We have a BS Outer Banks on order. I convinced myself the dragon was gonna be fine. Saw this video last night and am now a bit bothered. It does appear they now have a timing chain, but still a wet belt driven oil pump. That is what killed the engine the 1L turbo in this video (belt chunks clogged the oil pick up).

This doesn't apply to the 1.5L. See the video in my post above. There are and have been for a few years now literally millions of these engines in operation around the world. If there were a widespread problem with reliability I think we know by now.

There's a telling clue in this video at the very beginning (approx 0:55). The presenter notes the difficulty in obtaining one of these engines; he said there are places ordering hundreds at a time. You might argue this is evidence of a lot of engines requiring replacement, but it seems to me if these engines were failing left and right owners would be cutting their losses and moving on to a different vehicle. I view the shortage as evidence of popularity combined with supply chain shortages, and I don't think it would be a popular choice if it had a major design flaw.

 

[MikeF]

This doesn't apply to the 1.5L. See the video in my post above. There are and have been for a few years now literally millions of these engines in operation around the world. If there were a widespread problem with reliability I think we know by now.

There's a telling clue in this video at the very beginning (approx 0:55). The presenter notes the difficulty in obtaining one of these engines; he said there are places ordering hundreds at a time. You might argue this is evidence of a lot of engines requiring replacement, but it seems to me if these engines were failing left and right owners would be cutting their losses and moving on to a different vehicle. I view the shortage as evidence of popularity combined with supply chain shortages, and I don't think it would be a popular choice if it had a major design flaw.

How does it not apply? Does the Dragon in the BS not use a belt to drive the oil pump? Teeth from the oil pump drive went into the oil pan and clogged the oil pick up.

 

[Mark S.]

Does the Dragon in the BS not use a belt to drive the oil pump?

No, I don’t think so. Did you watch the video in my earlier post on this thread?

 

[MikeF]

No, I don’t think so. Did you watch the video in my earlier post on this thread?

I did not, but I did look up the parts. It has a timing chain and a separate wet belt that drives the oil pump. There a number of videos of people finding belt teeth clogging the oil pick up of dead 1L engines. This is concerning.

 

[MikeF]

This shows both the timing chain and the oil pump belt. https://parts.lakelandford.com/p/ford__Bronco-Sport/DRIVE-BELT---OIL-PUMP-Engine-Timing-Chain-Engine-Timing-Chain-Oil-Pump/91021704/JX6Z6B651B.html

 

[Bucko]

While Ford produces a number of different inline 3 cyl engines, I believe the "Dragon" designation refers to the 1.5L EcoBoost version (dragon=fire breathing?). The "boost" part of EcoBoost refers to turbocharging.

After thinking more about this I wonder if the difference between chain and belt driven cams has something to do with cylinder deactivation? The version of the engine used for the Bronco Sport uses cylinder deactivation to improve fuel efficiency.

Are the belt driven versions also equipped with auto stop/start? Wondering if this places a "load" on using a belt for the cam?

 

[Mark S.]

This shows both the timing chain and the oil pump belt. https://parts.lakelandford.com/p/ford__Bronco-Sport/DRIVE-BELT---OIL-PUMP-Engine-Timing-Chain-Engine-Timing-Chain-Oil-Pump/91021704/JX6Z6B651B.html

We don't know how much commonality exists between the 1.0L and the 1.5L engines. The 1.5L is an evolution of the 1.0L, but there are clearly differences. For example, the use of a chain to drive the cams rather than a belt. Ford does not make technical details such as the composition and configuration of drive belts widely available to the public, so we don't know if the belt used for the 1.0L carried over to the 1.5L.

The best data we have is the in-service history of the 1.5L. So far, and despite some growing pains, it appears to be a solid engine. I am not swayed in that opinion by one or two complaints from owners of a different engine that MAY share some internal components.

Sponsored