<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Ford Introduces Smallest Engine Ever</title>
	<atom:link href="http://cleantechnica.com/2011/06/06/ford-introduces-smallest-engine-ever/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2011/06/06/ford-introduces-smallest-engine-ever/</link>
	<description>Clean Tech News &#38; Views: Solar Energy News. Wind Energy News. EV News. &#38; More.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Dec 2014 08:38:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=4.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: rahul</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2011/06/06/ford-introduces-smallest-engine-ever/#comment-176682</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[rahul]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Aug 2013 09:37:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=27998#comment-176682</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It is already used in Ford EcoSport car launched in India recently.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is already used in Ford EcoSport car launched in India recently.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sky Doctor</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2011/06/06/ford-introduces-smallest-engine-ever/#comment-102089</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Sky Doctor]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Jul 2011 17:19:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=27998#comment-102089</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Agreed, it isn&#039;t anywhere near the smallest engine ever. And wow, its almost as powerful as a super wimpy engine! Does that make it ultra wimpy? They should call it the Ford Neutered. ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Agreed, it isn&#8217;t anywhere near the smallest engine ever. And wow, its almost as powerful as a super wimpy engine! Does that make it ultra wimpy? They should call it the Ford Neutered. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dennis McCarthy</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2011/06/06/ford-introduces-smallest-engine-ever/#comment-101866</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dennis McCarthy]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Jul 2011 22:16:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=27998#comment-101866</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[great, but smallest engine ever? 
FM, I had a three cylinder suzuki that displaced 550 cc, just over half the size of this.  And I had a Honda 70cc that was less than a 10th the size of this.

Look for a 2cycle smoker that displaces about 25cc at the end of a weed eater in any home improvement store.  That would be 0.025 liters for the math impaired.

What about them little Cox glowplug engines in model cars, planes and boats - they&#039;re just little tiny diesel engines.

It&#039;s not even the smallest engine in a production motorcar, I had a fiat convertible with .85 liter engine back in the 70s]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>great, but smallest engine ever?<br />
FM, I had a three cylinder suzuki that displaced 550 cc, just over half the size of this.  And I had a Honda 70cc that was less than a 10th the size of this.</p>
<p>Look for a 2cycle smoker that displaces about 25cc at the end of a weed eater in any home improvement store.  That would be 0.025 liters for the math impaired.</p>
<p>What about them little Cox glowplug engines in model cars, planes and boats &#8211; they&#8217;re just little tiny diesel engines.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s not even the smallest engine in a production motorcar, I had a fiat convertible with .85 liter engine back in the 70s</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ghangstalked Poisonradiationto</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2011/06/06/ford-introduces-smallest-engine-ever/#comment-101609</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ghangstalked Poisonradiationto]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 Jul 2011 14:15:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=27998#comment-101609</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Why does the Ford E series use engines that were obsolete 20 years ago? 

Why does Ford not bring the full size Transit van to the USA? ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why does the Ford E series use engines that were obsolete 20 years ago? </p>
<p>Why does Ford not bring the full size Transit van to the USA? </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dougnearn</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2011/06/06/ford-introduces-smallest-engine-ever/#comment-100654</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dougnearn]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Jun 2011 15:54:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=27998#comment-100654</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Honda used the offset crankshaft on their 2000-2006 Insight for 70 MPG]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Honda used the offset crankshaft on their 2000-2006 Insight for 70 MPG</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Corina&#124;EV</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2011/06/06/ford-introduces-smallest-engine-ever/#comment-100581</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Corina&#124;EV]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jun 2011 07:21:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=27998#comment-100581</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Wow! Up to 30% better fuel economy! That&#039;s amazing.  ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow! Up to 30% better fuel economy! That&#8217;s amazing.  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://cleantechnica.com/2011/06/06/ford-introduces-smallest-engine-ever/#comment-100553</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Anonymous]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Jun 2011 18:11:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cleantechnica.com/?p=27998#comment-100553</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Sounds like a great PHEV power plant.   If it&#039;s got enough power to push a reasonable sized car with ~50 miles of batteries on board.

The Volt has a 1.4 liter engine, smaller than the 1.6 liters that this engine supposedly equals.  And I&#039;m guessing that the Ford engine weighs less per horsepower than the Volt.  Given better mpg that would also mean the need to carry less gas for the same range.

Volt drivers report using about 9 gallons of fuel per 1,000 miles driven.  Increase efficiency and decrease engine/fuel weight and we might be able to get close to 5 gallons per one thousand miles.

Put half the drivers into EVs and half into PHEVs and we would use less than 10% of the gas that we now use.  Save us a billion dollars a day importing oil and give our CO2 levels a serious whack.

Could be a winner.  ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sounds like a great PHEV power plant.   If it&#8217;s got enough power to push a reasonable sized car with ~50 miles of batteries on board.</p>
<p>The Volt has a 1.4 liter engine, smaller than the 1.6 liters that this engine supposedly equals.  And I&#8217;m guessing that the Ford engine weighs less per horsepower than the Volt.  Given better mpg that would also mean the need to carry less gas for the same range.</p>
<p>Volt drivers report using about 9 gallons of fuel per 1,000 miles driven.  Increase efficiency and decrease engine/fuel weight and we might be able to get close to 5 gallons per one thousand miles.</p>
<p>Put half the drivers into EVs and half into PHEVs and we would use less than 10% of the gas that we now use.  Save us a billion dollars a day importing oil and give our CO2 levels a serious whack.</p>
<p>Could be a winner.  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
