RHD Ford Mustang Spotted

RHD Ford Mustang Spotted

Author
Discussion

Centurion07

10,381 posts

248 months

Friday 22nd January 2016
quotequote all
No, I agree! Sales WILL slow down. I'm saying that as the orders from now on will be from the general public rather than Mustang fans/petrolheads that the ratio will start swing more towards Ecoboosts.

Big__G

75 posts

135 months

Friday 22nd January 2016
quotequote all
skyrover said:
The thing is... there is sod all difference in fuel economy between the 2.3 turbo and the V8 in the real world.

When tax is harmonized at £140 per year... why on earth would anybody buy the ecoboost?
Unless you're doing 90% motorway driving there's a massive real work difference, 15 in the GT round the town, 25 in the ecoboost.
Long runs there isn't so much difference (35 in EB, high 20s GT) but drop them into town traffic/congestion & it's a different story. Tax may be getting harmoginized to £140 but the 1st year cost on the GT will be £2000 assuming it stays under £40k by 2017 (otherwise it's £450 not £140) £800 on the turbo
GT 3 year cost £2520, EB £1220

Centurion07

10,381 posts

248 months

Saturday 23rd January 2016
quotequote all
C'mon now Big G, stop trying to make yourself feel better that you bought the wrong one! wink

There's no way you're getting a genuine 25 out of an Ecoboost round town.

kambites

67,606 posts

222 months

Saturday 23rd January 2016
quotequote all
Centurion07 said:
There's no way you're getting a genuine 25 out of an Ecoboost round town.
I don't see why it would be much less economical than, say, 428i and they're certainly capable of mid-20s around town.

skyrover

12,680 posts

205 months

Saturday 23rd January 2016
quotequote all
From what I have read, you can expect around 18-22mpg from the ecoboost around town and 28-32mpg on the motorway

Centurion07

10,381 posts

248 months

Saturday 23rd January 2016
quotequote all
kambites said:
I don't see why it would be much less economical than, say, 428i and they're certainly capable of mid-20s around town.
I don't know, but how much work is the turbo going to be doing around town? If it's not doing much then you're relying solely on the 2.3 capacity to move the car around whereas the BMW has an extra 500cc to be doing that with. If that makes sense. wobble

kambites

67,606 posts

222 months

Saturday 23rd January 2016
quotequote all
skyrover said:
From what I have read, you can expect around 18-22mpg from the ecoboost around town and 28-32mpg on the motorway
Are those figures US gallons or UK ones? If UK, that's utterly appalling.

kambites

67,606 posts

222 months

Saturday 23rd January 2016
quotequote all
Centurion07 said:
I don't know, but how much work is the turbo going to be doing around town? If it's not doing much then you're relying solely on the 2.3 capacity to move the car around whereas the BMW has an extra 500cc to be doing that with. If that makes sense. wobble
The BMW is a 2.0.

skyrover

12,680 posts

205 months

Saturday 23rd January 2016
quotequote all
kambites said:
skyrover said:
From what I have read, you can expect around 18-22mpg from the ecoboost around town and 28-32mpg on the motorway
Are those figures US gallons or UK ones? If UK, that's utterly appalling.
UK I believe

kambites

67,606 posts

222 months

Saturday 23rd January 2016
quotequote all
skyrover said:
UK I believe
If that's true Ford have really, really screwed up the design of that engine.

Centurion07

10,381 posts

248 months

Saturday 23rd January 2016
quotequote all
kambites said:
The BMW is a 2.0.
Is it?! rofl

Should've realised since their model numbers stopped bearing any relation to their engine capacity yonks ago!

I would still put money on a 2.3 Mustang not hitting a genuine 25 around town though.

skyrover

12,680 posts

205 months

Saturday 23rd January 2016
quotequote all
I'm not sure I blame ford tbh, turbo powered motors are notorious for getting nowhere near their claimed mpg thanks to an unrealistic test cycle.

kambites

67,606 posts

222 months

Saturday 23rd January 2016
quotequote all
skyrover said:
I'm not sure I blame ford tbh, turbo powered motors are notorious for getting nowhere near their claimed mpg thanks to an unrealistic test cycle.
But the turbocharged competition (such as the 428i) are all comfortably capable of 25 around town. Even our Octavia will do it and that's a significantly older engine albeit in a slightly lighter car.

skyrover

12,680 posts

205 months

Saturday 23rd January 2016
quotequote all
There's probably a myriad of factors involved.

Gearing, weight, boost threshold, driving style... etc

PanzerCommander

5,026 posts

219 months

Saturday 23rd January 2016
quotequote all
kambites said:
skyrover said:
UK I believe
If that's true Ford have really, really screwed up the design of that engine.
Indeed, before I put the 3.73 rear end in my 2006 Automatic V8 used to get 30mpg on a run and it still gets 15-20mpg day to day depending on what driving I am doing.

swisstoni

17,058 posts

280 months

Saturday 23rd January 2016
quotequote all
Centurion07 said:
That's kind of the point I was making.

The people that want a V8 are Mustang/car people, but as the general public start seeing more of them on the road and they start to do some research and find they can get a 2.3, the Ecoboost orders will start catching up with the V8's.
But will non car people be looking at a Mustang at all? They'd be happiier in the usual suspects.

Centurion07

10,381 posts

248 months

Saturday 23rd January 2016
quotequote all
They wouldn't have been, no.

Like I said, as more of them appear on the roads, the more non-petrolheads will start to take an interest that otherwise would've bought one of the usual suspects, which is why the ratio will start to swing towards the Ecoboost as time goes on.

J4CKO

41,673 posts

201 months

Saturday 23rd January 2016
quotequote all
I think the non car geeks will get interested when they appear on the roads in numbers and they go "Want that one", i.e. people that like cars but dont post on forums or read magazines, also, they arent that daft, petrol is a lot cheaper than it was, VW has shown that diesel is perhaps due a kicking on emisssions so they might occasionally make a break from the herd,the BMW is nice but its easy to lose in a car park with millions of them about, I think non car geeks still know what they like but dont go into the minute detail, the Mustang name has a huge awareness and there will be people seeing them and then realising you can buy a "proper RHD one"

My missus wants one and she really isnt all that fussed about cars.

bridgdav

4,805 posts

249 months

Saturday 23rd January 2016
quotequote all
Some people will buy one just for the Pony Puddle lights....
Not caring which engine is in the front. Comfy leather seats, a 2 seater and a big enough boot for shopping.

There is a chance that the Mustang brand as a muscle car could become diluted over the coming years, but equally return to another ethos that it is the working mans sports car, accessible to the masses.

VeeFource

1,076 posts

178 months

Saturday 23rd January 2016
quotequote all
I guess the Ecoboost is an option for those desperate to have a mustang that couldn't afford the V8. Buying one certainly won't help them save to get the V8 though that's for sure.

Personally I just can't think of an Ecoboost Mustang as a Mustang, sorry.