Motor Trend Ignition: 2015 Ford Mustang EcoBoost: SVO Reborn?

[Tascam]

Wow 279hp/295lb-ft those hp/tq dyno numbers are pretty impressive. Same with the track times compared to the '14 trackpack....I don't know how anyone could be disappointed with that. Can't wait to see Randy's take on the GT.

Sponsored

 

[Papaya]

How to place the EcoBoost

The EcoBoost is the 1966 Secretary's Mustang, the original point of a Pony Car.


Edit: Were those Hp/TQ numbers impressively high or did I interpret them wrong?

Looking at the average age of an Mustang buyer of 48 years, the EcoBoost Mustang is placed into the Inline4-TURBO range like the Evolution and other fun-toy-cars of younger people like our son. (Evolution 4 with 400HP after some upgrades). Ford like to pull in more younger Mustang buyers. And yes. Mustang was always a "lady-car" too. Our son said right away that he will check out my EcoBoost with his friends.

I mean younger people still like to get hand on cars to get more HP and speed - but still have to look that it gets not too pricy! So a GT is for the most of the younger drivers out of the price range. On the other site, a sports car like the EcoBoost can still get some cheap HP with a tune or two instead of pure "expensive" muscles like the GT is offering.

For Europe is the EcoBoost the right Mustang - if Ford isn't going too crazy with the pricing. 7.4 liters/100 km on HWY (Canadian test results) isn't that bad either. Ford has to look into the future placement of the Mustang now world wide and the V6 isn't that clean that he could pass emission tests like in Germany. So yes. The V6 will be history if the engine is not getting redesigned. Maybe that's the whole point for FORD to push the I4. The earth is spinning and will not stand still for old engines. The test was ok but did not say much more in the moment.

 

[e30og]

Exactly....all of this.



I've been saying this from the beginning, but people continue to be delusional with the EB into thinking it's intent is to be a "performance" car. No it's intent is as Tim said, it's the every person's car just like the Mustang when it was first released.

In intent, the EB is actually more Mustang than the V8 due to how much less affordable the V8 is becoming. Very unfortunate I might add, as I believe they should have a stripper model with a much less quality interior, features and limited colors (Say Red, Silver, Black, White, Blue, and maybe yellow) for those that don't care for all models. Could you imagine a 22k EB or a 28-29k GT? I think those prices could be attained, I'm just not sure how they should, or could package the car to attain those lower numbers.

By stripper I mean, AC, radio/cd player, maybe a couple less airbags, and maybe a dreaded open diff (if it could keep costs at a lower price point) any other suggestions that would reduce the price? Also, just to clarify my point in calling it a stripper is not to intend stripped for race use, only price.

Its the same price difference as the S197 and on top of that the performance bargain of the century. What else (other than a camaro/challenger) gives you a modern V8 with over 400hp for 33k?!

Personally since I was deciding between a base GT or a loaded EB, I wouldn't have even considered the Base GT if it didnt have the options/features it does have. I consider it to be minimal as it is. 33k is still a bargain.

You are right though, the bigger bargain is still a base EB+PP @28k

 

[DivineStrike]

Better bargain or not does not make it more affordable to the average consumer or kid who just graduated college earning 35k a year. My dad bought his fox body 5.0 new and he was just a few years into being a police officer. I think he was making about 25k or so. Maybe a little more, Not entirely sure but it definitely wasn't a bunch.

Affordability of the Mustang V8 has dwindled a lot in the past decade, moreso in the past 5 years or so. This increase isn't just due to an increase in features and quality, but also due to CAFE as artificially making the less economical model, less affordable helps with that a bunch. Also fattens the wallets of businesses. Don't get me wrong I'm not solely picking on the Mustang as all cars have increased a lot in price. Average income just isn't keeping up with the constant increase in the price of a new vehicle, at least anything performance oriented.

 

[RussTKD]

Better bargain or not does not make it more affordable to the average consumer or kid who just graduated college earning 35k a year. My dad bought his fox body 5.0 new and he was just a few years into being a police officer. I think he was making about 25k or so. Maybe a little more, Not entirely sure but it definitely wasn't a bunch.

Affordability of the Mustang V8 has dwindled a lot in the past decade, moreso in the past 5 years or so. This increase isn't just due to an increase in features and quality, but also due to CAFE as artificially making the less economical model, less affordable helps with that a bunch. Also fattens the wallets of businesses. Don't get me wrong I'm not solely picking on the Mustang as all cars have increased a lot in price. Average income just isn't keeping up with the constant increase in the price of a new vehicle, at least anything performance oriented.

LX 5.0 Notchbacks were downright cheap at the end of the 80's. But there was nothing to them. Just an econobox chassis with a 25 year old V8 and an 8.8 rear stuffed in them and minimal engine controls.

 

[DivineStrike]

LX 5.0 Notchbacks were downright cheap at the end of the 80's. But there was nothing to them. Just an econobox chassis with a 25 year old V8 and an 8.8 rear stuffed in them and minimal engine controls.

I'm pretty sure all mustangs prior to 2000 were down right cheap in comparison. Also, I'm not knocking any of the improvements as they are gladly welcomed. However there are things that increase cost that could be optionally left out, so more people can afford and enjoy the V8. I would have ordered my mustang the way I ordered it regardless of stripper options offered as that is what I want out of my car. I would just like more people to be able to get the V8 like they used to be able to.

 

[neodark]

So, this "launch" he mentions with the auto with both the brake/gas pressed to build boost, isn't that just a brake stand? There's no LC on the EcoBoost that I know of.

 

[Andy]

[ame]

The old V6 is 1.24 sec slower. I wonder how much of that is due to upgraded suspension and body, not the engine.

I think if they run a similarly equipped V6 and EB both on 87 gas, the V6 might be faster.

 

[erne75]

You are right though, the bigger bargain is still a base EB+PP @28k

Nope, I still dont see it. For $5k more you get the Brembos, 3.73 rear end, two extra cylinders producing 120HP and 80ft-lbs more...No, if you are shooting for a performance bargain you want a base GT w/ PP. Then there is the question of why would I get a Mustang EB when I can get a faster WRX...The EB goes back to the "meh" column...

 

[68fbjjz109]

Better bargain or not does not make it more affordable to the average consumer or kid who just graduated college earning 35k a year. My dad bought his fox body 5.0 new and he was just a few years into being a police officer. I think he was making about 25k or so. Maybe a little more, Not entirely sure but it definitely wasn't a bunch.

Affordability of the Mustang V8 has dwindled a lot in the past decade, moreso in the past 5 years or so. This increase isn't just due to an increase in features and quality, but also due to CAFE as artificially making the less economical model, less affordable helps with that a bunch. Also fattens the wallets of businesses. Don't get me wrong I'm not solely picking on the Mustang as all cars have increased a lot in price. Average income just isn't keeping up with the constant increase in the price of a new vehicle, at least anything performance oriented.

Unfortunately this has more to do with the lack of wage increases over the last 30 years than the rising cost of vehicles. Vehicles are one of the few major expenses that has stayed relatively constant in comparison to inflated education costs and house values. OEM's generally dont just don't throw content into vehicles unless it's affordable which is why you are just seeing more integration of electronics into vehicles because the cost per unit has decreased drastically.

 

[Arthonon]

Unfortunately this has more to do with the lack of wage increases over the last 30 years than the rising cost of vehicles. Vehicles are one of the few major expenses that has stayed relatively constant in comparison to inflated education costs and house values. OEM's generally dont just don't throw content into vehicles unless it's affordable which is why you are just seeing more integration of electronics into vehicles because the cost per unit has decreased drastically.

I'm not sure that bolded statement is correct. When I looked up a couple of inflation calculators, and put the roughly $2500.00 price of the 1965 Mustang in, it says it would cost $18,877.14, less than the cheapest Mustang by over $5,000.00, which is 30% more than the original selling price.

I think a lot of it is that they do have more equipment than before, and probably some other factors too, but the price is definitely higher in comparison when adjusted for inflation. Housing and education may have gone up more, but a 30% increase is not negligible.

 

[DivineStrike]

I'm not sure that bolded statement is correct. When I looked up a couple of inflation calculators, and put the roughly $2500.00 price of the 1965 Mustang in, it says it would cost $18,877.14, less than the cheapest Mustang by over $5,000.00, which is 30% more than the original selling price.

I think a lot of it is that they do have more equipment than before, and probably some other factors too, but the price is definitely higher in comparison when adjusted for inflation. Housing and education may have gone up more, but a 30% increase is not negligible.

Thanks Arthonon for doing the math, I've totally lost my patience trying to get this point across. All cars have grown exponentially in price due to manufacturers being greedy and catering to those who have money vs those that don't. Not everyone wants a cheap little econobox when it is entirely possible to make something like the Mustang GT or Camaro SS even, a lot less expensive and more affordable. Same could be said for every other non luxury manufacturer that has a sporty car. Especially subaru. Would they be high volume sellers with high profit margins? No because everyone wants a Mercedes Benz that performs like a Ferrari for $20k, but those with less would be much more appreciative later in life when they want to buy a much more upscale vehicle and might stick with that brand who gave them a chance.

 

[badhac]

nice. however.....where da GT at?

They posted a comparo with the Gt, but its not pretty. They put a GT PP against the Camaro SS 1LE and well it didnt go well for the Stang :(

 

[Robinson02]

They posted a comparo with the Gt, but its not pretty. They put a GT PP against the Camaro SS 1LE and well it didnt go well for the Stang :(

link?

 

[badhac]

link?

Sorry here ya go
http://www.motortrend.com/multimedia/videos/#ooid=s1MG4zcTqTOgAkB6gL2nAXJ4uNJ13eT4

http://www.mustang6g.com/forums/showthread.php/1le-vs-gt-3701.html

Sponsored