RE: Ford Mustang Ecoboost: Driven

[zeppelin101]

Ecosseven said:

The 2.3 Ecoboost has the highest specific output of all the engines so not sure how much more Mountune can extract?

1.0 = 125 bhp / litre (Focus, Fiesta, B-Max, etc)
1.6 = 113 bhp / litre (Fiesta ST - 182bhp)
2.0 = 124 bhp / litre (Focus ST - 248bhp)
2.3 = 135 bhp / litre (Mustang - 310bhp)

Without knowing the engineering spec of either the bottom end or the standard fit turbo, you can't even begin to guess where it could go to.

135 hp/litre isn't that high now-a-days, there are plenty with higher specific outputs in the making from various manufacturers.

[chuntington101]

zeppelin101 said:

Ecosseven said:

The 2.3 Ecoboost has the highest specific output of all the engines so not sure how much more Mountune can extract?

1.0 = 125 bhp / litre (Focus, Fiesta, B-Max, etc)
1.6 = 113 bhp / litre (Fiesta ST - 182bhp)
2.0 = 124 bhp / litre (Focus ST - 248bhp)
2.3 = 135 bhp / litre (Mustang - 310bhp)

Without knowing the engineering spec of either the bottom end or the standard fit turbo, you can't even begin to guess where it could go to.

135 hp/litre isn't that high now-a-days, there are plenty with higher specific outputs in the making from various manufacturers.

There will be plenty more they can extract! The current setup with be chocked by the intake and the exhaust not to mention using a turbo that is optimized for fast spool rather then power.

As per with other Ford cars I'm sure they will over a nice power and torque increase over stock.

[Clivey]

The Ecoboost's not for me personally (can't wait for the V8) but I really, really hope it does well. - We need MORE of this sort of car in the UK. Much more.

[croyde]

Not sure why people are thinking this is a big car. Yes, maybe big compared to a Focus but the Mondeo is a pretty big car too.

I drive a Mercury Grand Marquis as a daily and sure, it's size along with LHD, made it a bit awe inspiring in London traffic at first but now I'm used to it, I can thread it with ease through the commuting masses. Not bad considering it's over 17ft long and 6.5 ft wide

Anyhow I would love one of these in V8 please but would be interested to see if it is priced more than personally importing one. Lower VED if you do.

I wonder what they will cost 3 years down the line?

[J4CKO]

MC Bodge said:

These coupe and V8 purists need to realise that they are in a tiny minority.

Most people look at the tax/costs and the "perceived image" of driving a car. Actually driving the thing, on congested dual carriageways, in the Trafford Centre car park and whether it has no 'feel' is almost/entirely irrelevant.

Yeah, I think a lot of non petrolheads are like that and any feel represents a lack of refinement, or its a bit scary, there is a majority that want near silence and very muted feedback, the same way as we view a nice quiet washing machine.

Thing is, they aren't "wrong", it is just a different point of view.

[SturdyHSV]

irocfan said:

IMO most 4 bangers have got all the aural desirability of hearing your parents shagging(

You sir, have hit the nail squarely on the head

[BoostMonkey]

I think a comparison test between the M235i and stang 2.3 would make a very interesting PH article

[skyrover]

For those wondering about size, here is a quick compare of various sports cars

Ford Mustang:

Length: 4,784 mm (188.3 in)
Width: 1,916 mm (75.4 in)

Jaguar F-type:

Length: 4,470 mm (176 in)
Width: 1,923 mm (75.7 in)

BMW M5:

Length: 4,910 mm (193.3 in)
Width: 1,891 mm (74.4 in)

Nissan GTR:

Length: 4,671 mm (183.9 in)
Width: 1,895 mm (74.6 in)

EDIT: to correct width

Edited by skyrover on Friday 19th September 10:03

[Matthen]

skyrover said:

For those wondering about size, here is a quick compare of various sports cars

Ford Mustang:

Length: 4,784 mm (188.3 in)
Width: 1,891 mm (75.4 in)

Jaguar F-type:

Length: 4,470 mm (176 in)
Width: 1,923 mm (75.7 in)

BMW M5:

Length: 4,910 mm (193.3 in)
Width: 1,891 mm (74.4 in)

Nissan GTR:

Length: 4,671 mm (183.9 in)
Width: 1,895 mm (74.6 in)

You've ballsed something up there.

[Clivey]

croyde said:

I drive a Mercury Grand Marquis as a daily and sure, it's size along with LHD, made it a bit awe inspiring in London traffic at first but now I'm used to it, I can thread it with ease through the commuting masses. Not bad considering it's over 17ft long and 6.5 ft wide

I would love a panther-platform car as a daily cruiser (especially a Marauder) but they're like hen's teeth over here. - I'm going to miss seeing Crown Vics, Grand Marquis and Town Cars when the remaining ones disappear from US fleets. The last one (Marquis taxi) that I rode in had half a million miles on the clock yet was as smooth as butter...the automotive landscape just won't be the same without (so many of) them.

On the plus side, I too wonder how much the V8 'Stang will cost over here and what it'll be worth after 3-or-so years.

[Mastodon2]

The idea of a 4 cylinder Mustang appeals about as much as a bad case of the sh*ts, I'd rather have the "rental spec" V6, or wait for the V8. That said, if I had to go 4 cylinder, I'd much rather have one of these over the over-priced chintz that Germany are making these days, but for me, Mustangs are about V engines, preferably 8 cylinders.

[skyrover]

Matthen said:

You've ballsed something up there.

Can't see it... can you educate me?

[k-ink]

Mastodon2 said:

The idea of a 4 cylinder Mustang appeals about as much as a bad case of the sh*ts, I'd rather have the "rental spec" V6, or wait for the V8.

Easy to say when you only have to put fuel in your 1.8 Focus. Try running a V8 for real, then see if it changes your perspective

[Fartgalen]

I really like the look of this new Mustang. But if/when I get one it'll be with the wheel on the left and a throbbing v8 up front.

[skyrover]

k-ink said:

Easy to say when you only have to put fuel in your 1.8 Focus. Try running a V8 for real, then and see if it changes your perspective

A 2.3 turbo won't be far behind the V8 in fuel consumption tbh, especially when driven hard.

I estimate an average low 20's for the turbo and high teens to low twenties for the V8. Probably less than 5mpg in it.

Worth it for the extra 100hp, NA throttle response and soundtrack of the V8 IMO.

[k-ink]

Well yes, IF there was only a 5mpg difference I agree, pointless. But the whole point of EcoBoost tech is to make a large difference in MPG. Lets wait until the real road tests have been carried out then slate it or not

[Matthen]

skyrover said:

Can't see it... can you educate me?

look at widths in mm, then widths in inches then compare the M5 and mustang

[Prawnboy]

skyrover said:

k-ink said:

Easy to say when you only have to put fuel in your 1.8 Focus. Try running a V8 for real, then and see if it changes your perspective

A 2.3 turbo won't be far behind the V8 in fuel consumption tbh, especially when driven hard.

I estimate an average low 20's for the turbo and high teens to low twenties for the V8. Probably less than 5mpg in it.

Worth it for the extra 100hp, NA throttle response and soundtrack of the V8 IMO.

i'm running a 12 year old V8 as a daily right now and get that kind of MPG, (low 20's), i would expect the latest engines to do a bit better, i reckon the 2.3 will be easily over 30. Probably will be more than 5mpg in it, especially if sat in traffic.
Oh and the ecoboost has more power than my V8 so i don't think it will be lacking.
Looking forward to finding out when they get here.


PS. want the V8 though, i'm to used to it now.

[skyrover]

k-ink said:

Well yes, IF there was only a 5mpg difference I agree, pointless. But the whole point of EcoBoost tech is to make a large difference in MPG.)

I have yet to see a turbo engine make anywhere near the mpg claims in real world driving.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/caradvice/hone...

Fiesta 1.0 ecoboost advertised as 50-55mpg but getting 38-40 in the real world.

These guy's recorded 19mpg overall for the 2.3 ecoboost

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2015-ford-must...

[MC Bodge]

croyde said:

Not sure why people are thinking this is a big car. Yes, maybe big compared to a Focus but the Mondeo is a pretty big car too.

And the Mondeo is too big for many people. Mine is a good car, but a bit wider than ideal for enthusiastic back roads driving. Hedges get a bit of contact when passing too. Boulevard cruising is fine in a wide car.