New Ford Fiesta ECOnetic van offers 71 mpg US
27 December 2012
|
|
| New Fiesta Van. Click to enlarge. |
Ford is introducing a new version of its Fiesta Van in Europe. All diesel engines in the new Fiesta Van achieve sub-100 g/km CO2 emissions and 3.7 l/100 km (63.6 mpg US) or better (measured according to the technical requirements and specifications of the European Regulation (EC) 715/2007 as last amended).
The 1.6L diesel Fiesta ECOnetic Van variant, featuring enhanced fuel-saving technologies, delivers fuel consumption of 3.3 l/100 km (71 mpg US), equivalent to 87 gCO2/km.
Fiesta Van powertrain choice now includes the new 75 PS (74 hp, 55 kW) 1.5-liter Duratorq TDCi diesel, alongside the 95 PS (94 hp,70 kW) 1.6-liter Duratorq TDCi diesel and 82 PS (80 hp, 60 kW) 1.25-liter Duratec gasoline units. The ultra-efficient ECOnetic Van variant offers the specially developed 95 PS 1.6-liter Duratorq TDCi diesel ECOnetic powertrain with standard Auto-Start-Stop, along with lowered suspension, aerodynamic rear under-tray and wheel trims, and low rolling resistance tires.
The Fiesta Van offers a 1.0 cubic meter load space. The load compartment features a secure steel bulkhead and four cargo tie-down hooks, both developed in accordance with the international DIN standard for load restraints, plus a tough rubber floor mat and durable sidewall trim. Load length is 1.3 meters and gross payload ranges from 485-508 kg (1,069 to 1,120 lbs).
The new Fiesta Van offers a number of Ford driver assistance and safety features including segment-first technologies. Ford MyKey allows businesses to encourage safer driving and limit the driver’s exposure to risk at the wheel as well as providing fleets with ownership information. Following on from the new Transit Custom, Fiesta Van also offers the in-car connectivity system Ford SYNC.
Ford SYNC with Emergency Assistance directly connects the vehicle occupants to local emergency services operators after an accident, in the correct language for the region. Also introduced to new Fiesta is class-first technology Active City Stop, a system designed to help drivers avoid low speed collisions, alongside Hill Launch Assist, Easy Fuel and Rear View Camera.
Customer deliveries begin in January.
That is not a "Van"...it's just a hatchback without rear side windows.
Posted by: ejj | 27 December 2012 at 10:39 AM
Id call it a microvan... if you look at the specs its disigned around its cargo ability... so it IS a van just a very tiny one.
Posted by: wintermane2000 | 27 December 2012 at 10:58 AM
"1.0 cubic meter load space. The load compartment features a secure steel bulkhead and four cargo tie-down hooks"
Urban delivery van. Pizza truck. Looks promising.
Posted by: Bob Wallace | 27 December 2012 at 12:57 PM
Way to go Ford, 71 mpg and 82 g/CO2/Km for an ICEV (even a small one) is a real step forward.
Not everybody has to carry (8 ft x 4 ft) plywood pieces.
Posted by: HarveyD | 27 December 2012 at 03:24 PM
The important part is the cargo can weigh half a ton plus... thats dang high for such a tiny car.
Posted by: wintermane2000 | 27 December 2012 at 04:45 PM
That's not a van, mate.
Just the packaging for a self delivering 3"x3'x3' steel plate (unless you expect prompt delivery).
That's 71 MPG (US gallons); not MPG (US EPA cycle) I presume?
Posted by: ToppaTom | 27 December 2012 at 06:42 PM
Could be a very good mail delivery vehicle. Letters do not weight that much?
Posted by: HarveyD | 28 December 2012 at 08:24 AM
ToppaTom, you are correct. GCC should not convert European figures (which nobody in the EU believes) into US figures.
The same van with the same engine would not even break 50mpg highway on the EPA test, and would do even worse if modified to meet stricter US clean-air and safety standards.
It would be best if GCC used the g/km CO2 numbers in headlines instead converting to something that looks like an EPA number but isn't.
I wonder who really needs this van. "Lowered suspension, aerodynamic rear under-tray and wheel trims" are counter-productive in an urban delivery vehicle (less load capacity, more damage-prone). How many business models are based upon shipping low-value, low-weight items over medium-long distances that rarely involve rough or unpaved roads?
Posted by: Bernard | 29 December 2012 at 07:09 AM
Lowered suspensions are not so good for the crumbling infrastructure of the US. My '05 VW Golf scraped bottom more than once and my oil pan received a few scratches. I ended up putting stiffer springs on it as well as 10mm lift spacers on the front. The car is about 50mm higher than stock and now sports an 4mm thick aluminum crash plate. Give me better engines and drive trains, more aerodynamic bodies and low-rolling resistance tires, but keep the low rider cars, please.
Posted by: wesmontage | 05 January 2013 at 07:07 PM