Does 2.0L engine use cylinder deactivation like the 1.5?

[Mark S.]

How so? The video you linked to was one I found on Road and Track's web page talking about this very topic, and they say, "A study by the Society of Automotive Engineers found that using start-stop can see a car's fuel economy improve by over eight percent in heavy traffic."

"Heavy traffic" is the operative term. If you drive often in heavy stop-and-go traffic you might get close to the claimed 8% improvement. For my typical use pattern I drive 12 miles on the highway, exit, then drive 2 miles through city traffic. I get two or three engine shut downs lasting 60 seconds or less on each trip. There is no way this system is decreasing my fuel use by 8%.

Sponsored

 

[TravisPNW]

Test drive complete. In Colorado, definitely the 2.0 is needed! Under powered vehicles feel strained going to the mountains, not too mention if you need to accelerate in a hurry to pass a slower rv/semi/other under powered vehicles, it can be dangerous with faster vehicles gliding up the road.

For a 2 year old thread to still be on page 1 must mean this forum doesn't see much activity... but I'll chime in and say that this is also true in western Washington state.

There are enough hills and mountains around here that the thought of trying to climb them in a 1.5L 3cyl is absolutely terrifying.

The 2.0L is a must around here. I don't care about fuel mileage.

 

[Osco]

For a 2 year old thread to still be on page 1 must mean this forum doesn't see much activity... but I'll chime in and say that this is also true in western Washington state.

There are enough hills and mountains around here that the thought of trying to climb them in a 1.5L 3cyl is absolutely terrifying.

The 2.0L is a must around here. I don't care about fuel mileage.

I climb every day in my BASE model. For your information I can climb just fine.
My transmission selects the appropriate gear and the turbo scoots me right up.

 

[TravisPNW]

I climb every day in my BASE model. For your information I can climb just fine.
My transmission selects the appropriate gear and the turbo scoots me right up.

For my information? You mad? Defensive much?

Nobody here said the 1.5L couldn't make it up a hill. The 2.0L will do it better though... and it's not even a debate.

 

[fourthgear]

For my information? You mad? Defensive much?

Nobody here said the 1.5L couldn't make it up a hill. The 2.0L will do it better though... and it's not even a debate.

Then what makes it so terrifying ?

 

[TravisPNW]

Then what makes it so terrifying ?

Have you seen some of the hills around here in the Pacific Northwest? I’ll put it to you like this with one example. There’s one a few miles away that I take every day to work. I can start at the top… not touch the gas at all… and coast all the way down and be going 80 mph when I hit the bottom…

… without touching the gas.

Now picture yourself trying to go up the same hill and you’ll see my point. I want as much power as I can get…

… and there’s also the fact that every review I saw said the 2.0L is the only way to go.

Honestly though… if I lived some place flat like Florida I may have went with the 1.5L… but around here I wouldn’t even consider it.

 

[Osco]

I do a few 13-14% climbs daily.
I’m skinny. If I put four chunky people in and a load of luggage I might have to throttle up to 3-4,000 rpm’s.
I climb my grades at mostly 1700 rpm’s, ats just a tad of turbo.
The 2.0 is nice but still I don’t need to be first.
Did not mean to offend just defending the smaller engine.

 

[TravisPNW]

The 2.0 is nice but still I don’t need to be first.

Yeah... and if I cared about being in first I'd have kept my Challenger 392 I traded in on this Bronco Sport.

That car could hit 100+ mph barely 1/4 the way up the previously mentioned hill.

It wasn't very good in the snow though.

In the end being spoiled by that car was another reason I went with the 2.0L... it is what it is.

Regarding the topic of the thread... I'm glad there is no cylinder deactivation on the 2.0. I can totally see it on a V8... and I had it... but don't see the need here.

 

[Adam CW]

I do a few 13-14% climbs daily.
I’m skinny. If I put four chunky people in and a load of luggage I might have to throttle up to 3-4,000 rpm’s.
I climb my grades at mostly 1700 rpm’s, ats just a tad of turbo.
The 2.0 is nice but still I don’t need to be first.

How is the vibration with your 1.5?

The 1.5 we test drove had a lot of vibration when idling, in drive (but at a stop) and during initial acceleration.

The 2.0 in our Badlands is smooth. No vibration at all.

 

[TravisPNW]

The 2.0 in our Badlands is smooth. No vibration at all.

None here either. No complaints after 250 miles and I think the sport mode is really sporty.

 

[Osco]

How is the vibration with your 1.5?

The 1.5 we test drove had a lot of vibration when idling, in drive (but at a stop) and during initial acceleration.

The 2.0 in our Badlands is smooth. No vibration at all.

Mine had some for the first 500 miles. I had to think about it to feel it.
Now at 27,000 it’s sit a glass of water on top of the engine and it won’t move. No difference in neutral or drive.
Got mine off the lot in December 2020
It was perfect, missing nothing and everything worked, no rattles.
At 26,000 I got a new water pump, slow leak. No more leak now.
I think that early in the first production cycles Ford Corporate was looking over the Mexicans work force shoulders.
All these missing parts are nobody’s fault but it was not till the 2022’s rolled out that we started getting rattles and wind noises through back panels.
But the majority are well built.
The 1.5 L has its place. The little mill shines in city traffic with better than highway mpg’s and serves me well up here in the mountains.
Mostly because trying to be first off the light up here takes little effort. People are just not in a hurry. We pace ourselves. And hauling azz up, down and around our mountain roads will get someone hurt or killed.

 

[Osco]

FWIW as far as I know my 3 banger uses cylinder deactivation making it a 2 banger in Eco mode.
I find it odd the four banger does not use it. U sure ?
Anyways,
I gain nothing in mpg’s but I will say Eco makes my three banger run like it needs a tune up.
After extensive testing and retesting I have determined that Eco mode is about as useful as hen shit on a pump handle up here in the mountains.
:,P

 

[fourthgear]

Have you seen some of the hills around here in the Pacific Northwest? I’ll put it to you like this with one example. There’s one a few miles away that I take every day to work. I can start at the top… not touch the gas at all… and coast all the way down and be going 80 mph when I hit the bottom…

… without touching the gas.

Now picture yourself trying to go up the same hill and you’ll see my point. I want as much power as I can get…

… and there’s also the fact that every review I saw said the 2.0L is the only way to go.

Honestly though… if I lived some place flat like Florida I may have went with the 1.5L… but around here I wouldn’t even consider it.

That's what makes you "terrified " , you have to be joking ,having to give the vehicle some gas to go up a hill , that is about the strangest comparison I have ever read. If all the reviews say get the 2.0 , why are all the 1.5's even being sold ? They must all be sold in Florida & we , the owners are terrified of any hills & thats why we live in Florida .

 

[TravisPNW]

That's what makes you "terrified " , you have to be joking ,having to give the vehicle some gas to go up a hill , that is about the strangest comparison I have ever read. If all the reviews say get the 2.0 , why are all the 1.5's even being sold ? They must all be sold in Florida & we , the owners are terrified of any hills & thats why we live in Florida .

You just love to put words in other people's mouths eh? Let the butthurt flow through you! Tell me how you really feel!

You know what you should do? Drive the hell out of your 1.5 with a smile on your face. I prefer to have as much power available as possible and don't give 2 flips about saving $5 a tank on gas with 87... so I fill up with 93.

The reviews I watched DID say to get the 2.0L because the 1.5L felt underpowered.

You don't agree... nobody cares. It's nice to have choices. You got the Outer Banks because somebody told you that you'd save a few bucks and would get better gas mileage with the 1.5L...

I spent many years in Florida... it's flat as a board compared to Washington state. I meant exactly what I said... if I still lived there I'd probably have put more consideration into getting the 1.5L... here I prefer to have all the power I can get because nothing is flat here and everyone drives like they are 60... unlike Florida where they all run you over going 90 mph.

Get over yourself man. If you have anything else to say PM me and then I'll be glad to get into a pissing contest with you privately. Done responding to your hurt feelings in a public thread.

 

[TravisPNW]

FWIW as far as I know my 3 banger uses cylinder deactivation making it a 2 banger in Eco mode.
I find it odd the four banger does not use it. U sure ?
Anyways,
I gain nothing in mpg’s but I will say Eco makes my three banger run like it needs a tune up.
After extensive testing and retesting I have determined that Eco mode is about as useful as hen shit on a pump handle up here in the mountains.
:,P

I've only seen that engine stop thing happen a few times at stop lights... haven't used ECO mode yet and don't think I ever will. For me it's been sport mode and slippery mode... we are now entering the rainy season. Check the Seattle forecast and you'll see what I'm talking about... damp in the 50's for days on end.

I really like the sport mode on dry pavement.

As for the cylinder deactivation I'm not sure... just going on what I've read here. I haven't read the owner's manual yet but plan to soon. I hope the 2.0L doesn't have it.

Sponsored