RE: Mustang Performance Pack launched with 330hp

[GTEYE]

Of course it makes sense, but on PH most are just not getting it.

The car is aimed at: Hertz, Avis and co. for hire fleets in the USA.

The added benefit, anyone else can also purchase if they want or choose the V8.

But be under no illusions without the volume the ‘crappy‘ engines generate, there would be no Mustang!

So, don’t moan so much, please!

[George Smiley]

Would it have made sense to call the 2.3 a Capri?

I think the v8 is intrinsically linked to mustang with the 2.3 to the 70s

Whatever the engine though I love to see these on the road

[300bhp/ton]

George Smiley said:

Would it have made sense to call the 2.3 a Capri?

I think the v8 is intrinsically linked to mustang with the 2.3 to the 70s

Whatever the engine though I love to see these on the road

But it isn’t a Capri. I can’t see badge engineering it and calling it something it isn’t would help. It certainly wouldn’t make it desirable to me. And I doubt any other Capri fans.

As for small engines. It’s part of the cars history since 1964!!! The V8 has never been the base engine. And as mentioned the Mustang II had 4 pots. As did the Fox bodies in the 1980’s.

The 2.3 SVO was in its day the fastest Mustang available new. And out performed the then 5.0 V8.

[George Smiley]

Look at the current rear quarter, it looks very much capri like. RWD, 2.3L would be perfect as a capri - different front end to differentiate it would be perfect

[GTEYE]

George Smiley said:

Look at the current rear quarter, it looks very much capri like. RWD, 2.3L would be perfect as a capri - different front end to differentiate it would be perfect

Capri-like only in the sense that the Capri was inspired by the Mustang in the first place.

So the resemblance is really within the Mustang family.

As an aside the 80s Fox based Mustang was badged as a Mercury Capri...

[Hiro11]

Interesting how the UK people here are very adamant that Mustang = V8 while here in the States, the I4/V6 Mustangs have always outsold the V8/GT models. The Ecoboost easily outsells the GT in the US today and has since 2015. I think people in the UK view this car as an image-laden toy where as here in the US it's a relatively affordable but slightly more sporty commuter for single average Joes and Janes.

[schmalex]

Hiro11 said:

Interesting how the UK people here are very adamant that Mustang = V8 while here in the States, the I4/V6 Mustangs have always outsold the V8/GT models. The Ecoboost easily outsells the GT in the US today and has since 2015. I think people in the UK view this car as an image-laden toy where as here in the US it's a relatively affordable but slightly more sporty commuter for single average Joes and Janes.

Mainly because over here, there are much, much better options than the Mustang at the price point it’s pitched at.

At $25k / £20k, an i4 Mustang is a good, cheap coupe. At £36k / $50k it really isn’t.

If Ford pitched the i4 Mustang at £20k - £25k over here, they would, most likely, sell heaps (possibly more-so if branded as Capri with a different front). Unfortunately, there probably simply isn’t the margin in the business case to do that.

Edited by schmalex on Thursday 18th April 20:37

[George Smiley]

Hiro11 said:

Interesting how the UK people here are very adamant that Mustang = V8 while here in the States, the I4/V6 Mustangs have always outsold the V8/GT models. The Ecoboost easily outsells the GT in the US today and has since 2015. I think people in the UK view this car as an image-laden toy where as here in the US it's a relatively affordable but slightly more sporty commuter for single average Joes and Janes.

Levi jeans

USA 10dollars, uk 100quid

[anonymous-user]

StuH said:

schmalex said:

My wife has a 5.0 Mustang. It's a lovely car because of the V8. It is, however, not a good enough car to warrant not having the V8 when compared to it's equivalents

Is exactly what I was trying to say earlier in the thread. But you put it much better

The 2.3l just makes no sense given the competition at that price.

Really? The competition if as proposed above (4series, A5 & Lexus) is an absolute snorefest. I'd much rather the 2.3 Mustang to any of those bland, generic (and apart from the Lexus) ten a penny cars.

Edited by anonymous-user on Friday 19th April 06:55

[TorqueVR]

Hiro11 said:

Interesting how the UK people here are very adamant that Mustang = V8 while here in the States, the I4/V6 Mustangs have always outsold the V8/GT models. The Ecoboost easily outsells the GT in the US today and has since 2015. I think people in the UK view this car as an image-laden toy where as here in the US it's a relatively affordable but slightly more sporty commuter for single average Joes and Janes.

I've never understood the V8 thing. The early model V8s only had 200bhp so what's wrong with 300+ from a smaller and more economical engine? The Mustang is only a car, it gets you from A to B, its only a 2+2 and you really would not want to be a back seat passenger despite it being bigger than a long wheelbase Land Rover. The difference in performance between a 2.3 and a 5.0 is not that great and despite the lovely exhaust sound the staggering fuel consumption does not make a 5.0 worthwhile. The only discernible difference between them is the badge on the back and the 5.0 badges on the wings. Most Mustang owners don't do many miles - there's 143 used post-2015 V8s for sale on Autotrader now but barely half a dozen have done more than 25,000 miles and many have hardly been run in. I had a 2.3 auto for 34 months and but I did 55,000 miles in it and I loved it and although £31,000 in depreciation and fuel was horrendous it was about £13,000 less than a V8 would have cost.

[schmalex]

Our V8 returns 25mpg on average (sure, it drops a lot when you clog it or crawl through city centres). My 535i BMW only returns 29mpg.

[300bhp/ton]

schmalex said:

Our V8 returns 25mpg on average (sure, it drops a lot when you clog it or crawl through city centres). My 535i BMW only returns 29mpg.

The 2.3 I had in FL did over 28mpg for 1900 miles. That’s US. So imperial that is 32mpg+

I think that is pretty impressive for the performance and the way I drove it.

I have 2 LS1 z28 Camaros. My blue one is an auto and that will typically return 22-24mpg overall average since owning it. My green one I’ve owned for only a year and half. It’s identical to the blue one but is a manual. In theory the manual can be more economical. However when I’ve calculated the mpg in the manual I’ve not gotten over 18mpg yet.

I would image if I drove a 5.0 GT in the UK. I’d get similar mpg to my z28’s. And for me the mpg difference the 2.3 offers is enough that the 2.3 could be considered as a daily. While a V8 would be a weekender only.

[donkmeister]

Hiro11 said:

Interesting how the UK people here are very adamant that Mustang = V8 while here in the States, the I4/V6 Mustangs have always outsold the V8/GT models. The Ecoboost easily outsells the GT in the US today and has since 2015. I think people in the UK view this car as an image-laden toy where as here in the US it's a relatively affordable but slightly more sporty commuter for single average Joes and Janes.

The last iteration of the v6 model was a bit crap compared to the v8 (from personal experience). It felt underpowered and the top speed was limited due to a propensity for the v6 propshaft to commit Hari Kari above 110mph.

[CaptainSensib1e]

300bhp/ton said:

I would image if I drove a 5.0 GT in the UK. I’d get similar mpg to my z28’s. And for me the mpg difference the 2.3 offers is enough that the 2.3 could be considered as a daily. While a V8 would be a weekender only.

FWIW my Mustang V8 is my daily. Fuel economy isn't great, but in reality it costs me probably an extra tank of fuel per month. Not enough to justify running a second car.

[carparkno1]

Elatino1 said:

StuH said:

schmalex said:

My wife has a 5.0 Mustang. It's a lovely car because of the V8. It is, however, not a good enough car to warrant not having the V8 when compared to it's equivalents

Is exactly what I was trying to say earlier in the thread. But you put it much better

The 2.3l just makes no sense given the competition at that price.

Really? The competition if as proposed above (4series, A5 & Lexus) is an absolute snorefest. I'd much rather the 2.3 Mustang to any of those bland, generic (and apart from the Lexus) ten a penny cars.

Edited by Elatino1 on Friday 19th April 06:55

BMW 440i with mppsk. Straight six with 360bhp+ & rear wheel drive.

Not boring.

[300bhp/ton]

CaptainSensib1e said:

FWIW my Mustang V8 is my daily. Fuel economy isn't great, but in reality it costs me probably an extra tank of fuel per month. Not enough to justify running a second car.

I do 70 miles a day to work and back.

[300bhp/ton]

carparkno1 said:

BMW 440i with mppsk. Straight six with 360bhp+ & rear wheel drive.

Not boring.

Are these £38k?

[schmalex]

CaptainSensib1e said:

FWIW my Mustang V8 is my daily. Fuel economy isn't great, but in reality it costs me probably an extra tank of fuel per month. Not enough to justify running a second car.

My wife uses hers daily.

She says the V8 rumble makes every journey an event and is easily worth the extra £50 or so a month in fuel.

A little, buzzy four-banger would be horrid in it and you’d constantly be thinking “what if...”

Knowing the car pretty well, I do maintain that, without the V8, it’s a pretty mediocre, heavy handling, cramped coupe. If I had to go down the four-banger route, the Mustang, at close to £40k, wouldn’t make the shortlist.

[Otispunkmeyer]

300bhp/ton said:

donkmeister said:

It is part of the recipe for a Pony though....

But it isn't.

"Pony car is an American car classification for affordable, compact, highly styled coupés or convertibles with a sporty or performance-oriented image."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pony_car


The Mustang for instance was launched with a 2.8 litre Straight 6.

Sweet six cylinder Mustang!

[Centurion07]

TorqueVR said:

I've never understood the V8 thing. The early model V8s only had 200bhp so what's wrong with 300+ from a smaller and more economical engine?

Nothing. If the 2.3 was the only engine available. When you can have the same car with proper-sounding V8 though, it kind of puts a dampener on the 2.3

TorqueVR said:

The Mustang is only a car, it gets you from A to B

It really REALLY isn't though. They are recognised the world over, in all their iterations.

Even now when I go over the channel people will still gather round it when it's parked up, pull alongside on the motorway and ask you to gun it etc etc. It is WAY more than "just a car" to a huge number of people. Something that people that argue about the price point or the competition or the size or the handling or anything else negative, like to overlook.

TorqueVR said:

...only a 2+2 and you really would not want to be a back seat passenger despite it being bigger than a long wheelbase Land Rover

Agreed.

TorqueVR said:

The difference in performance between a 2.3 and a 5.0 is not that great and despite the lovely exhaust sound the staggering fuel consumption does not make a 5.0 worthwhile. The only discernible difference between them is the badge on the back and the 5.0 badges on the wings.

Performance-wise no, there isn't a lot between them, but you HAVE pointed the single most important reason for choosing the V8 over the 2.3.

Even non-car people smile at the sound of a proper V8.

And FYI, my V8 will happily return in the region of 33/34mpg on the motorway. Over a total 33K miles I think I'm on roughly about 24/25mpg.