New Mustang

[sjordan2]

Go for it. Beautiful car that carries on the Mustang tradition in spades once it became a muscle car.

[mademan]

Why on earth would I spend $60,000 on a car with 700 HP to use as my everyday car to drive around town in? That makes as much sense as the people who commute to work in their gigantic crew-cab pickups... driving the thing all alone every day, dragging that huge empty cargo box behind them everywhere they go.

Is a 700 HP car impressive? Sure. Does it make sense to actually own one? Not to me.

I drive back and fourth to work in a ext cab '13 Silverado, Mind you its an 8 hour drive to the airport and parked for 2 weeks while I work..... For me if its not enjoyable , why own it? would I enjoy driving a 4 or 6 cyl? no.... do I care about the fuel mileage or cost of fuel... no. I want to enjoy it and everytime I drive it, I want to remember why I bought it.

[Harry P.]

do I care about the fuel mileage or cost of fuel... no.

That's fine. For you.

I do care about it. I'd rather spend less on gas and put that money towards other things.

[slusher]

Harry, is the turbo 4 new or has it been out a couple of years?? Sometimes new engines don't have all the bugs worked out. Then again the eco boost has been out for a couple years on v6 engines I don't know about the 4 cyl but I am not current on new cars..

[rusty85]

I've got an eco boost 2.0 4 cyl in my 2013 Escape. It has also been used in the Focus ST for a couple of years now, although I think the Mustang is getting a slighly larger 2.3 liter unit. Its a very good engine. I test drove a V6 escape and the turbo 4 back to back and there is no real comparison, the eco boost is just better in every respect.

[tim boyd]

Harry, is the turbo 4 new or has it been out a couple of years?? Sometimes new engines don't have all the bugs worked out. Then again the eco boost has been out for a couple years on v6 engines I don't know about the 4 cyl but I am not current on new cars..

The 2.3L EcoBoost is a new engine. It debuted (in a slightly different tune) in the Lincoln MKC earlier this year, making the Mustang its second application, albeit with a higher output and tuning specifically sorted for sports car applications. The engine will be sold across global markets in this Mustang application. It does build on what Ford has learned with its earlier I3, I4, and V6 EcoBoost engines domestically and globally.

My partner Michelle recently leased a '14 Escape with the 2.0L EcoBoost and although I've driven it only a couple of times, I agree exactly with Ross's (Rusty85) assessment. It rocks. TB

Edited October 20, 2014 by tim boyd

[1930fordpickup]

Mustang SVO horsepower and torque ratings by year Year Power Torque 1984 175 hp (130 kW) @ 4400 rpm 210 lb·ft (280 N·m) @ 3000 rpm 1985 175 hp (130 kW) @ 4400 rpm 210 lb·ft (280 N·m) @ 3000 rpm 1985.5 205 hp (153 kW) @ 5000 rpm 248 lb·ft (336 N·m) @ 3200 rpm 1986 200 hp (149 kW) @ 5000 rpm 240 lb·ft (330 N·m) @ 3200 rpm

Not new to the Mustang but todays tech is 30 years better . Enjoy the ride and the fuel savings Harry.

These engines were also put in the Thunderbird Turbo Coupe.

[johnbuzzed]

Why on earth would I spend $60,000 on a car with 700 HP to use as my everyday car to drive around town in? That makes as much sense as the people who commute to work in their gigantic crew-cab pickups... driving the thing all alone every day, dragging that huge empty cargo box behind them everywhere they go.

Is a 700 HP car impressive? Sure. Does it make sense to actually own one? Not to me.

It's relative; and combines with personal preference. Those who can, will. If I had the $$$, I would buy a Hellcat Challenger- and I would enjoy every friggin' ride to and from work, even on a bad work day- maybe even more so on a bad work day. But, I don't, so I won't. I guess one could also think : "Why don't we all just buy little commuter-type cars like Smart cars to drive to work everyday?" My answer to that would be: "No, thanks, I just don't want one".

Edited October 20, 2014 by johnbuzzed

[freakshow12]

A couple of the mustang tuners have already picked up their 15 stangs. One has already been tinkering with the 2.3 and expect a reliable 500rwhp once it's dialed in fully. I have been watching and the little guy will carve up the corners with ease and scare most people on the freeway! Same shop is also slapping a 3.6 kenne bell on the 5.0. This has been done forever but they have to develop a kit for the new car. I myself will wait for the svt variant to park next to the others

[Chuck Most]

I'm just glad the Mustang styling team finally pulled their heads out of 1967's hiney and designed something that looks consistent with the century in which it's being built. Sure, the '15 still has some ghosts of Mustangs past in it's styling, but this is leaps and bounds better than the last two styles. Not saying I didn't like the S197, I'm just saying the whole "retro" thing was past its prime. The new car has a European, exotic kind of look going- just like the original Mustang. I know some people hate it. I say it's about flippin' time the Mustang's styling caused a ruckus.

[jbwelda]

I think you can expect that a turbo charger on a 4 to bring it up to normally aspirated V6 power is going to negatively affect the longevity of the motor. that is pretty much how it always plays out especially considering most who buy a "turbo" are going to be lead footing it a lot. the V6 strains way less and probably puts out more HP on a consistent basis than does the turbo 4. and with a better spread of power range. my guess would be that the 4 really strains up to about 3k rpm and then the turbo kicks in to pretty instantly bring you to red line. the V6 is probably smooth power all the way from idle to redline.

looks like a nice car harry, "arrest me" red and all. I had no idea ford was even offering a four cylinder in a car like this. I assumed they were all V8s or at least V6s.

jb

Edited October 21, 2014 by jbwelda

[horsepower]

Mustang SVO horsepower and Not new to the Mustang but todays tech is 30 years better . Enjoy the ride and the fuel savings Harry.

These engines were also put in the Thunderbird Turbo Coupe.

Actually the Eco Tec.four shares nothing with the 2.3that was in the turbo coupes, other than the same approximate displacement, and that is even slightly different.

[Chuck Most]

Actually the Eco Tec.four shares nothing with the 2.3that was in the turbo coupes, other than the same approximate displacement, and that is even slightly different.

Uhhhhhhhhh....

Ecotec is a GM engine. I think you mean EcoBoost. He never said it was the same engine used in the SVO and Turbo Coupe, just that this isn't the first time a Mustang has been sold with a turbo four.

[Aaronw]

I think you can expect that a turbo charger on a 4 to bring it up to normally aspirated V6 power is going to negatively affect the longevity of the motor. that is pretty much how it always plays out especially considering most who buy a "turbo" are going to be lead footing it a lot. the V6 strains way less and probably puts out more HP on a consistent basis than does the turbo 4. and with a better spread of power range. my guess would be that the 4 really strains up to about 3k rpm and then the turbo kicks in to pretty instantly bring you to red line. the V6 is probably smooth power all the way from idle to redline.

looks like a nice car harry, "arrest me" red and all. I had no idea ford was even offering a four cylinder in a car like this. I assumed they were all V8s or at least V6s.

jb

I think there is some truth to that in the past, but when the engines are designed from the start to be turbo charged I don't think longevity is an issue. More stuff to break obviously, but not particularly trouble prone if maintained. Many European cars have been running turbos for decades, without gaining a reputation for being short lived.

Kind of a different beast, but most diesels are turbo charged and they are very durable engines.

[Quick GMC]

I think you can expect that a turbo charger on a 4 to bring it up to normally aspirated V6 power is going to negatively affect the longevity of the motor. that is pretty much how it always plays out especially considering most who buy a "turbo" are going to be lead footing it a lot. the V6 strains way less and probably puts out more HP on a consistent basis than does the turbo 4. and with a better spread of power range. my guess would be that the 4 really strains up to about 3k rpm and then the turbo kicks in to pretty instantly bring you to red line. the V6 is probably smooth power all the way from idle to redline.

looks like a nice car harry, "arrest me" red and all. I had no idea ford was even offering a four cylinder in a car like this. I assumed they were all V8s or at least V6s.

jb

This would be the case with any engine, and adding forced induction, but I doubt it affects the longevity when the engine is designed to be turbocharged. Lower compression pistons, different injector duty cycles, etc. Time will tell.

[Sixx]

Alright Harry, did ya get one yet????????? Lol !!! What color are ya thinking of? :-)

[Harry P.]

Alright Harry, did ya get one yet????????? Lol !!! What color are ya thinking of? :-)

Haven't bought yet, but I will. I'm still deciding if I want to do a straight-up dealer trade-in with my '07 GT and get less for it, or go through the hassle of letting perfect strangers "test drive" my car and try to sell it privately for a few more bucks.

Color will be red, with the "parchment" interior option.

[Harry P.]

As far as the engine goes, my buddy Tim Boyd tells me the engine is a gem. If anyone would have solid information, Tim would, seeing as how he has worked at Ford all of his adult life. I have no reason to doubt Tim, and no reservations about getting the EcoBoost Mustang. In fact, I'm looking forward to the 30+ highway MPG vs. what my '07 GT can manage (22). And the IRS vs. my GT's Model T-era solid rear axle. And the new Mustang's 6 speed vs. my GT's 5 speed.

[Casey]

I can't wait 'til 2017 to bump his post and suggest you should black out the tail panel.

[Harry P.]

I can't wait 'til 2017 to bump his post and suggest you should black out the tail panel.

Hmmm... a wise guy!

[lordairgtar]

One thing that is true about red cars is they are more expensive to insure. My wife used to work for an insurance company (two actually) and she said no matter the make, if the color is red, it costs more. Red cars/trucks are the most stolen and the most involved in accidents. I don't know if that goes for every insurance company. But, it did for the two she worked for.

Mustang's are speeding ticket magnets as are Camaro's, Corvettes, Challengers and any other sports or muscle car. Cops know you have them for a reason. So they watch them closely.

If I were considering a new Mustang, I would have to try the four banger out first. It would have to be better balanced than a V-8. Hard to argue with 310 hp and 31 mpg too. Plus, what could it actually do with some tuning? Although, the V-8 Mustangs have always got surprisingly good gas mileage for what they are. Tough choice.

Nope, I have a red car and it cost the same to insure as my identical blue car was.

[horsepower]

Uhhhhhhhhh....

Ecotec is a GM engine. I think you mean EcoBoost. He never said it was the same engine used in the SVO and Turbo Coupe, just that this isn't the first time a Mustang has been sold with a turbo four.

Uhhhhhhhhh....

Ecotec is a GM engine. I think you mean EcoBoost. He never said it was the same engine used in the SVO and Turbo Coupe, just that this isn't the first time a Mustang has been sold with a turbo four.

Color me red, my mind was thinking. "High tech eco boost" and by the time it got to my fingers, something got lost in the translation, and it came out "eco tec". lol

And I really don't think he meant that it isn't just the first time turbo engines have been used in Mustangs, If so why say THESE engines were also used in the Thunderbird turbo coupes? But it's an easy mistake, when they switched to the new style engines in the Rangers, I was perplexed where they found all the new horsepower, until I finally got a chance to look under the hood of one.

Edited October 26, 2014 by horsepower

[1930fordpickup]

Harry I know what you are thinking about people driving your car. You will have to ride with them and that is not much better.

You could trade your car for someones stash of kits on here. LOL

[Tom Geiger]

Harry I know what you are thinking about people driv ing your car. You will have to ride with them and that is not much better.

Back when I was selling my 73 Barracuda the first time, I had a young guy and his mother show up to look at it. As they walked around the car, mother was asking stupid questions like if I was offering a warranty on the car (it was 13 years old and was $2000). Junior got behind the wheel and floored it. He grabbed all the gravel where the street met the grass and showered me, his mother and my other cars with rocks and gravel. He fish tailed about 50 feet and came within inches of hitting my neighbor's retaining wall. I literally pulled him out of the car by the back of his shirt, him squirming and flailing his limbs as I placed him down on the sidewalk. He looked at me and said, "I gotta try it out man!" like I did something wrong. It took a lot not to hit him. I advised Mommy that we were done and to get Junior the heck off my property. I wouldn't have sold my car to that clown... and mother thought I'd give him a warranty?

[Tom Geiger]

Why on earth would I spend $60,000 on a car with 700 HP to use as my everyday car to drive around town in? That makes as much sense as the people who commute to work in their gigantic crew-cab pickups... driving the thing all alone every day, dragging that huge empty cargo box behind them everywhere they go.

Is a 700 HP car impressive? Sure. Does it make sense to actually own one? Not to me.

I'm in the camp of "why on Earth would anyone spend $30k on a new car?" I'm hoping the new Mustang is such a success that the resale value of the current model falls drastically to the $10k I want to spend on a good used car. Note my last dance in this arena was buying a new 1979 Capri RS with V8 for $6500 out the door... and we got $1500 trade in for the '74 Mustang II!