New Ford Mustang: Revealed
It's got a four-pot turbo and eyes on Europe (but you can still have your V8 too)
Half the cylinder count, half the car?
And yes, we're getting the car in right-hand drive with two of three engines. Only the base 3.7 V6 is staying Stateside. You did read that right, the turbocharged four-cylinder are higher in status that the six-cylinder. We'll also get the convertible.
We don't know how much it's going to cost. Competitive with the grey imports is all anyone would say, which would put a V8 GT coupe at around £34,000 given the usual dollar/pound parity plus-a-bit importer price. That would hopefully mean the 2.3 turbo starts at under £30K.
Touchy feely stuff to meet Euro expectations
That said, Ford bowed to the Europeans for the Mustang's dynamics, because, well, we know what we're doing. Ford development head Raj Nair said it'd had been benchmarked against the Porsche 911 and the BMW M3 and when quizzed by PistonHeads to how close they got, said "more than 80 per cent".
He also promised it'll happily and safely slide a bit on track.
Styling riffs all the familiar styling cues
It looks a whole lot more taut than the car it replaces. "Shrink-wrapped" is how head stylist Moray Callum (Ian at Jaguar's younger brother) described it to us, meaning the wheel arches bulge out, especially at the back. The whole car is around the same length, but lower by 38mm and much less wedgy with the boot lid now lower by 70mm. Wider too by 40mm, with the rear track wider than the front to the satisfaction both the dynamics guys and the designers, according to Callum.
In the same Mustang design studio in Ford HQ in Dearborn, near Detroit, as all this was taking place we also saw a styling buck for the convertible and can report it looked good - more elegant, with the hood better tidied away after lowering (a process that takes just seven seconds, we were told).
Can a true Mustang pack a turbo Focus engine?
So what about these engines? The 2.3 amazingly isn't the first 2.3 four-cylinder in a Mustang. The unloved second-gen eco 'stang from 1974 had the same displacement engine, and the Fox-body got the 2.3 plus a turbo. This one is based on the two-litre EcoBoost in the Focus ST. Like the hp figure, the exact torque hasn't been nailed down but Ford says "more than 300lb ft", up from 265lb ft for the ST. The larger displacement means max torque also comes in earlier, according to Nair. If it doesn't crack 60mph in less than six seconds, we'd be disappointed (the Focus ST manages 6.5 seconds for the sprint). Both cars get an updated version of the Getrag six-speed manual as well as the option of a six-speed auto with paddle shift and rev blips on the downshift.
Lower, wider but no smaller than outgoing car
The current V8 GT is pretty swift, with MotorTrend managing a 4.3-second 0-60 dash for the manual. Not bad for 1,641kg. There was no mention of weight for the new car and disappointingly no talk of making it lighter either. All they'd say was 'we've achieved weight targets', whatever that means. Still, it's not a big car and the turbo shouldn't miles away from the 1,484kg Focus ST.
We got to sit inside it, and can report the interior dash materials are massively improved from the current car. Everything that looks like metal, including an attractive aluminium strip running the length of the dash, is actually metal and not metal-look plastic.
Manual gearbox for those old-schoolers out there
Given then that Ford's marketing these days is all about tech, the Mustang is dragged into the infotainment age with a big dash screen, start button and driving modes that give four settings to adjust the stability control, steering and throttle, namely Normal, Sport, Track and Snow/Wet. We also spied an adaptive damper button, although these weren't specifically mentioned.
So would we buy one? Price of course is everything. North of £30,000 is a lot to spend on a Ford. Especially one that's built to a cost to get base models in as low as £14,000 (the converted price of the current one). But at £28,000 for a 310hp turbo with a nice chunk of kit and leather? Maybe.
IF (and it's a big if) the dynamics come pretty close to, say, a BMW M435i, then it might become even more tempting. Mostly it comes down to the question: how American do you feel? On first introduction, the Mustang is still far more drive-thru cola than sit-down cappuccino.
[Update: An early Mustang configurator is now live on the Ford US website. See it here]
FORD MUSTANG 2.3 ECOBOOST (caution, educated guesswork ahead..)
Engine: 2.3-litre 4-cyl, turbocharged
Transmission: 6-speed manual, rear-wheel drive
Power (hp): "more than 309"
Torque (lb ft): "more than 300"
0-62mph: 5.8 seconds (est)
Top speed: 155mph (est)
Weight: 1,530kg (est)
MPG: 37mpg (est)
CO2: 180g/km (est)
Price: £28,000 (est)
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
The 05-14 shape is far and away the best they have made. This could be a Korean imitator. Keep it American in styling and substance just give it some engines and suspension better suited to Europe then sell it here. People want it because it is so American, don't try and turn it into a something it's not!
Side profile reeks of 350/370z.
The 05-14 shape is far and away the best they have made. This could be a Korean imitator. Keep it American in styling and substance just give it some engines and suspension better suited to Europe then sell it here. People want it because it is so American, don't try and turn it into a something it's not!
Side profile reeks of 350/370z.
Ford are claiming a 200-300 lb weight reduction for this car over the outgoing model. I just wish it was a little closer to the '79-'87 Fox-bodied cars in terms of size. If it's the same size as my car, it's going to be a pretty tight fit on your B-roads, regardless of how well the handling's been improved. Other than that and the pointlessly stupid engine start/stop button, it looks really good to me!
The first shot in the gallery reminds me of a maserati.....
click on gallery at
http://www.ford.com/cars/mustang/2015/?hptid=bb-21...
not my cup of tea...
I don't mind the shape. I prefer the current, but the LHD combined with a cheap interior is a deal breaker for me. This would fix that. In my mind however, the car has slid down the credibility scale by adopting the generic 4-pot turbo answer as every other criminally boring car.
Some cars have 4-pots because they're the best match to the car. The car is great rather than the engine - e.g. Elise, MX-5, Caterham. 2 of those have had different engines fitted and nobody noticed. BHP goes up and down but power is pretty much irrelevant. The 4-pot was an anonymous lump which nobody noticed or cared about. You get faster and slower versions but the engine is coincidental. The last of that 3 is often spoken of as a great car with a crap engine. Nobody turns to look when they hear a 4-pot. This is fine for 99% of cars.
Big coupes born in the muscle car era though - well, to me at least - should have muscle car engines. The V6 was always dubious in the Mustang. Few people have anything good to say about it. V6s at least sound nice though. I guess I just remain a crap petrolhead because no amount of BHP will ever capture my imagination with an inline 4 and a turbocharger.
I do realise I'm in a minority of 1 though. Carry on... choice is great etc.
I prefer the last generation's frontal styling, but otherwise I like it.
If the price isn't ridiculous, the V8 in RHD should be a very tempting prospect in the sub-£40k market. The new V8 is a peach, and IRS should make it a bit more sophisticated around the bends (although the current live axle ones aren't disasters).
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff