Jump to content
Do Not Sell My Personal Information


1.0 Ecoboost, Mk7 or Mk8?


MonkeyMiles
聽Share

Recommended Posts

So for my next car I'm looking to buy a 1.0 Ecoboost Fiesta. I've seen that the Mk8 ST has a nice raspy engine compared to the Mk7 ST but what about the 1.0 version of the engines? Is there any difference in performance?

I am aware that the new 1.5 out performs the old 1.6 so is this new technology applicable to the 1.0 models too? Going off Autotrader stats (not the best way ik), the Mk8 is slower, is this accurate?

I am also weary of keyless entry since all Mk8s seem to have this system. Is this something I should really be worried about? Do any of you have recommendations for an aftermarket security system? Are there other differences that I should consider? Any advice would be appreciated, thanks 馃檪

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Hi Miles, similar question came up recently covering many of your points:

Most Mk 8s have keyless start, not all have keyless entry though (mine doesn't).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have 2 X Mk8 St Line X 140's and neither are keyless entry (an option we wouldn't want) but both are keyless start.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, MonkeyMiles said:

I am aware that the new 1.5 out performs the old 1.6 so is this new technology applicable to the 1.0 models too?

The 1.0 Litre Ecoboost engines are not comparable to the normally aspirated 1 Litre Ford Engines.

They have much more power and torque and are more akin聽to a normally aspirated 1.6 engine, certainly in 123 BHP and 138 BHP models..

I have a 2019 (MK8) St-Line X 140PS model having owned a 2106 (MK7.5) St-Line 140 before that. Acceleration is around 8.7 secs to 60mph and I'm getting about 47mpg from mine. So decent performance and economy.聽

Test drive one, I'm sure you be pleasantly聽surprised at the performance for a 1.0 Litre engine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a 2017 Mk 7.5 Ecoboost 100 and I agree with Blatto that it's more like a 1.6.聽 聽Mines auto and I'm getting around the 40mpg mark at the moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


7 minutes ago, Bobr said:

I have a 2017 Mk 7.5 Ecoboost 100 and I agree with Blatto that it's more like a 1.6.

Wasn't dismissing the 100BHP variant there Bob, just not tried one so I can't comment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got the impression the OP was comparing Mk 7.5 to Mk 8, ie Mk 8 1.5 ST vs Mk 7.5 1.6 ST, and he was wondering if there was any difference between the respective 1.0 versions?聽

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Eric Bloodaxe said:

I got the impression the OP was comparing Mk 7.5 to Mk 8, ie Mk 8 1.5 ST vs Mk 7.5 1.6 ST, and he was wondering if there was any difference between the respective 1.0 versions?聽

Maybe, it wasn't that clear what he was asking about the 1 Litres.

But if it was the difference in the three聽1 litre ecoboost variants then obviously the fact they have different power outputs would mean they perform differently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only engine that has impressed me more than the 1 litre Ecoboost was the 3 litre engine in the Granada Scorpio 4x4.聽 聽Mind you, it used nearly three times the amount of fuel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have the 1.1 85hp as having test drove that and the 1.0 100 it was the better of the two. It鈥檚 naturally aspirated so no turbo to worry about,聽great engine sounds and I鈥檓 getting better MPG than the 1.0 (mid 40s). I regularly drive on 70mph dual carriageway and can keep up with the 140 st-lines. Having gone from the 1.25 mk7 to this, it doesn鈥檛 feel any slower even though the specs say it鈥檚 nearly a second slower to 62mph.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't agree, sorry.聽 We have a Mk8聽ecoboost 1.0 100 and the torque of the turbo makes all the difference in regular driving.聽 Coming from a 1.33 n/a engine, also with 100bhp.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, tend to agree with Guy there. The 100 ecoboost has about 55% more torque than the n/a聽version (170Nm vs 110). My Mrs had a 1.25 82ps and it was a great little car, but any 1.0 ecoboost copes聽much better with gradients in my experience.

We averaged 43.6mpg over 3 years with the 1.25, the 140 ecoboost has averaged just over 45 over nearly 2 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, DanE98 said:

聽I regularly drive on 70mph dual carriageway and can keep up with the 140 st-lines.

When both are doing 70mph yes...big difference on the slip road and any overtakes though! :smile:

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, TomsFocus said:

When both are doing 70mph yes...big difference on the slip road and any overtakes though! :smile:

Yes, I have to drop down to 4th to overtake and stay in 3rd up to 60 mph. For slip roads I usually back off the car in front then floor it to be able to pull out. I鈥檝e only ever had the 85bhp though so am used to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, DanE98 said:

I have the 1.1 85hp as having test drove that and the 1.0 100 it was the better of the two. It鈥檚 naturally aspirated so no turbo to worry about,聽great engine sounds and I鈥檓 getting better MPG than the 1.0 (mid 40s). I regularly drive on 70mph dual carriageway and can keep up with the 140 st-lines. Having gone from the 1.25 mk7 to this, it doesn鈥檛 feel any slower even though the specs say it鈥檚 nearly a second slower to 62mph.

Can't grasp the comparison you are trying to make. The Mrs a few years back had an 85hp fiesta titanium, this had absolutely no acceleration or pull away power whatsoever.

The 140hp 1 litre fiestas would leave that car way behind, no doubt about it. Both cars will be able to drive on a motorway atb70mph, that I am sure of but when pulling up sliproads, inclines or from standing start, the ecoboost engines are not comparable to the 1.3 engine I think she had in hers. Even the 100hp version of the engine could manage better.... 馃槅馃槅

Link to comment
Share on other sites


11 minutes ago, Mavroz said:

Can't grasp the comparison you are trying to make. The Mrs a few years back had an 85hp fiesta titanium, this had absolutely no acceleration or pull away power whatsoever.

The 140hp 1 litre fiestas would leave that car way behind, no doubt about it. Both cars will be able to drive on a motorway atb70mph, that I am sure of but when pulling up sliproads, inclines or from standing start, the ecoboost engines are not comparable to the 1.3 engine I think she had in hers. Even the 100hp version of the engine could manage better.... 馃槅馃槅

I think the 1.0 and 1.1 require different driving styles. With the 1.1 you have to put your foot to the floor and leave it in lower gears whereas the 1.0 I imagine聽you would accelerate gently and change up often. All I meant is that reviews say don鈥檛 get the 1.1 as it can鈥檛 cope with motorways but everyday I聽drive on 70mph roads and it copes fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DanE98 said:

All I meant is that reviews say don鈥檛 get the 1.1 as it can鈥檛 cope with motorways but everyday I聽drive on 70mph roads and it copes fine.

But what you actually said is that the 1.1 can keep up with a 140 Ecoboost, which I think is where all the confusion has come from.聽 My 100 Ecoboost can keep up with a Bugatti Chiron when we're both doing the speed limit on UK roads too!聽聽馃槈

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Daggerit said:

But what you actually said is that the 1.1 can keep up with a 140 Ecoboost, which I think is where all the confusion has come from.聽 My 100 Ecoboost can keep up with a Bugatti Chiron when we're both doing the speed limit on UK roads too!聽聽馃槈

What I meant is that with my foot down I can keep up with a 140 that鈥檚 not trying and it doesn鈥檛 accelerate away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, DanE98 said:

I have the 1.1 85hp as having test drove that and the 1.0 100 it was the better of the two. It鈥檚 naturally aspirated so no turbo to worry about,聽great engine sounds and I鈥檓 getting better MPG than the 1.0 (mid 40s).

Not putting down your choice of car but I had a 1.1 Fiesta as a courtesy car for the聽day when my 2016 ST-Line 140 was in for a service. last July.

Driving it out of the service garage聽and into town I was initially quite impressed for an NA 1.1 felt quite nippy. But once I got it out on the A road to home and put my foot down I realised it had no torque to speak of. Off the line and up to 50mph through the gears it was not bad but Motorways/ sliproads were hard work, as you say foot to the floor and wait until about 6000 rpm to change up.

I've not driven a 100 BHP variant of the ecoboost but I've been a passenger in a friends one and it has way more midrange pulling power. I also don't think there's that much lag on the ecoboost turbos certainly not on the 125/140 PS versions I've driven.

And "better than an ecoboost with mid 40's mpg", not in my experience, mid 40's to low 50's is the norm for those. I was getting 52mpg from my 2016 ST-Line 140 and I wasn't dawdling along.

I didn't take any notice of what mpg I was getting in the 1.1 courtesy car, but to make聽reasonable progress along the road I聽聽was pretty much foot to the floor most of the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I meant is that with my foot down I can keep up with a 140 that鈥檚 not trying and it doesn鈥檛 accelerate away.


Again, I鈥檓 sure if a 911 was only using 5% throttle and not trying, I could keep up if I was thrashing the hell out of my car. [emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the replies guys, will look more into the keyless entry system since I had previously seen a push to start button and assumed it wasn't worth having but since keyless start and keyless entry are different systems I might be considering the Mk8.

Just to clear up a little confusion,I was mainly just asking about the Mk7 vs Mk8 models in general, performance isn't something I'm too fussed about since any 1.0 Ecoboost with 125bhp is going to be better than my 67bhp 1.4TDCI that I currently drive, I was just wondering if there was any performance difference between the new and old 1.0 Ecoboosts聽馃槈

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, MonkeyMiles said:

Thanks for the replies guys, will look more into the keyless entry system since I had previously seen a push to start button and assumed it wasn't worth having but since keyless start and keyless entry are different systems I might be considering the Mk8.

Just to clear up a little confusion,I was mainly just asking about the Mk7 vs Mk8 models in general, performance isn't something I'm too fussed about since any 1.0 Ecoboost with 125bhp is going to be better than my 67bhp 1.4TDCI that I currently drive, I was just wondering if there was any performance difference between the new and old 1.0 Ecoboosts聽馃槈

Biggest difference for me is (depending on the model you buy) 6 speed gearbox and disk brakes on the rears instead of drums, the Sync screen is much better on the Mk8 it is a little bigger/heavier, in my Mk7 on a long run I was getting 60mpg now its 55mpg (same route).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, MonkeyMiles said:

Just to clear up a little confusion,I was mainly just asking about the Mk7 vs Mk8 models in general, performance isn't something I'm too fussed about since any 1.0 Ecoboost with 125bhp is going to be better than my 67bhp 1.4TDCI that I currently drive, I was just wondering if there was any performance difference between the new and old 1.0 Ecoboosts聽馃槈

I thought that's what you were driving at. The Mk 8 is a little bit heavier with the same power, so logically is going to be a shade less nippy than the 7.5, as some of the guys have reported on the thread I linked to, though Ford's quoted figures are much the same. It's a more "grown up" feeling car.聽Some like that, some don't, but the extra refinement can make you think you're going slower than you really are! But yes, I should expect any ecoboost will be an improvement on the 1.4 diesel except, perhaps, on economy.

As Tiexen says, the rear brakes and gearbox are improvements, the old box on 125 and 140's in particular was prone to problems.聽

I still feel the Mk 7/7.5 has got a little more "fun" factor - almost every version I've driven seems to say "C'mon, let's have some fun" when you first jump in. The Mk 8 is more subtle, but it is still more than capable of a fun drive when you are in the mood. I have found it seems to "grow on you" the more you drive it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tiexen said:

Biggest difference for me is (depending on the model you buy) 6 speed gearbox and disk brakes on the rears instead of drums, the Sync screen is much better on the Mk8 it is a little bigger/heavier, in my Mk7 on a long run I was getting 60mpg now its 55mpg (same route).

Wow, 55mpg is pretty good. I only get about 50 in my diesel lol. I was expecting to be downgrading mpg when I switch from my current car but perhaps not, providing that your cycle is fairly combined聽like mine. Out of interest, which version of the engine do you have currently? I would imagine that these mpg figures are massively effected by the version of the engine you get.

50 minutes ago, Eric Bloodaxe said:

As Tiexen says, the rear brakes and gearbox are improvements, the old box on 125 and 140's in particular was prone to problems.聽

I still feel the Mk 7/7.5 has got a little more "fun" factor - almost every version I've driven seems to say "C'mon, let's have some fun" when you first jump in. The Mk 8 is more subtle, but it is still more than capable of a fun drive when you are in the mood. I have found it seems to "grow on you" the more you drive it.

Yeah, the new infotainment system and the 6-speed gearbox are the 2 main factors pulling me towards a Mk8 atm, the gearbox in my Mk6 has a ***** reverse, about a 60% success rate for going in first try and the occasional crunching (same story with the other 2 Mk6 fiestas I know about). Heard a few stories from friends that the Mk7 gearbox is a little flimsy too.聽If the Mk8 gearbox solves these problems then that might just be the decision made 馃檪

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, MonkeyMiles said:

聽the gearbox in my Mk6 has a ***** reverse,

On my car at least, going into reverse is much better than the early version which didn't have synchromesh on reverse. 100% success at obtaining reverse over nearly 2 years, with no crunches!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

聽 Pasted as rich text. 聽聽Paste as plain text instead

聽 Only 75 emoji are allowed.

聽 Your link has been automatically embedded. 聽聽Display as a link instead

聽 Your previous content has been restored. 聽聽Clear editor

聽 You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

聽Share




  • Create New...

Forums


News


Membership