Isn't it a misnomer calling the 2.3l 133hp Duratec engine of the 2007 Ford Escape an "Atkinson Cycle" engine? It doesn't have some exotic linkage of the piston rods to the crankshaft, but rather some modifications of the camshaft. So far, impossible to find on the internet cutaways of the engine.

 

I guess whether we call it a "misnomer" depends on how strictly you follow the original Atkinson patent. Is it a misnomer to call aluminum aluminum? I mean, it's not pure aluminum, just some sort of alloy with other metals. Seems trivial.

I think Atkinson is a practical and convenient term (but opinions can differ I'm sure). The FEH engine doesn't have exotic (costly) linkages. The FEH engine uses electronics and variable valve timing to achieve what Atkinson described as a more fuel efficient combustion cycle. Back in the 1800's, Atkinson didn't have today's fancy electronics to do his bidding, so he used more mechanical parts to achieve the same end. Essentially, the intake/compression portion of the cycle is shorter than the combustion/exhaust portion of the cycle which leads to more drive-shaft rotation per unit of fuel burnt which leads to better fuel economy...at the expense of power.

So, maybe in the strictest sense of the the Atkinson definition, today's FEH engine isn't actually an Atkinson engine since it doesn't use those extra mechanical parts prescribed in his original patent. However, modern technology has enabled the engineers to still achieve the Atkinson cycle by modifying the electronics and valve timing in a regular Otto cycle engine. I don't really consider it a misnomer, but whatever you want to call this new age contraption is up to you.

I'm kinda curious about something else now that this topic has been brought up. Maybe if a Ford engineer (or someone who can play one on TV) is lurking on this site, you can help us with the answer. Can the engine be programmed to run in 2 modes: Atkinson and Regular. For everyday low-power usage, keep the FEH engine in Atkinson mode. For climbing hills, on-ramps, or just whenever I mash down on the pedal, switch to Otto mode. Is that possible? For an extra couple thousand dollars in cost, I wouldn't mind having that extra power when I really need it.

 

I was going to try and answer the OP's question, but glad I waited, as deprotinator explained it better than I could have.

There's an interesting experiment to try regarding the Atkinson cycle engine (thanks to GaryG). If you run the SoC below 39% by leaving the headlights on, and then start the ICE, there will be no boost from the electric motor. Try accelerating now and see how totally gutless the Atkinson cycle engine is at low rpm's without that electric boost. It's really an eye opener.

 

The Toyota literature, as far as I can tell, doesn't refer to Atkinson, but rather to VVT-i (Variable Valve Timing with Intelligence). I came across somewhere a reference to Ford Duratec Ti-VCT (Twin Independent Variable Camshaft Timing). I hereby propose i-RCP (intelligent Reduced Compression Phase). Don't you just love acronyms?

"Can the engine be programmed to run in 2 modes"

I picture 16 camshafts (one for each valve) or at least 2 extra camshafts just for the two rows of intake valves. Or how about i-tappets and/or i-lobes. More sensors, more mini-solenoids. The things are terrifyingly complicated already, at least from the point of view of a miser like me.

 

I don't think it is quite as bad as that. When the SOC is that low, the engine is also charging the battery while accelerating - which is worse power than if the engine were not having to charge the battery at the same time. It is still not great, but an actual Atkinson engine would be a bit better than the FEH in the situation you describe.