13 Gt for 15 eco 4? - Mustang Evolution

Go Back   Mustang Evolution > 1979-2015 Mustang GT || Tech and Talk > 2011-2014 Mustang GT



Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about them here!
Old 04-23-2016, 10:31 PM   #1
Registered Member
Regular
 
FastFord13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Montreal
Region: Canada
Posts: 4,259
13 Gt for 15 eco 4?

Is it a upgrade or not?
Love to hear your opinions.
Sent from the future.
FastFord13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 04-23-2016, 10:52 PM   #2
Registered Member
Regular
 
king_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Clarksville
Region: Tennessee
Posts: 737
Depends, interior? Oh definitely.

Performance? The Coyote will always be ahead mod for mod.

Handling? The S550s handle better (to what degree I can't say, as the one I drove I didn't try anything I wouldn't in mine).

Visually? All dependent on the viewer, I prefer the 13-14 style, could've gotten a 15 but that's not what I wanted.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
2014 Oxford White 5.0 Premium

2015 Maroon Chevy Cruze LTZ
2011 Performance White V6 Premium SOLD
king_13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2016, 10:56 PM   #3
Registered Member
Regular
 
FastFord13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Montreal
Region: Canada
Posts: 4,259
So in your opinion, if you own a 14 GT and trade for a 15 Eco 4 is it an upgrade?

Sent from the future.
FastFord13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 04-23-2016, 11:20 PM   #4
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Region: Canada
Posts: 2,974
Nope. Better car but.sounds bad, can't touch the gt without mods. It's capable but, they ain't super cheap either.
__________________
2014 Premium GT, SGM, Brembo, Auto, Tech, Comfort, etc. GT500s, Steeda UCA, VMP auto N/A tune. 100 shot nitrous on BBR tune. Best e/t 11.42 at 120.64

2012 Premium GT, Candy Red, Brembo package, 3.73, MT82, Comfort, Tech, et al. Procal tune, Roush UCA, UMI poly LCA, GT500s, Steeda red bracket, Hoosier 28x10x16 bias drags. Best e/t 11.91 at 115.23 RIP
5LHO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2016, 11:36 PM   #5
Registered Member
Regular
 
king_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Clarksville
Region: Tennessee
Posts: 737
Quote:
Originally Posted by FastFord13 View Post
So in your opinion, if you own a 14 GT and trade for a 15 Eco 4 is it an upgrade?

Sent from the future.
Not at all, they are in different leagues. If I were to get a turbo 4, I'd get a WRX but that's another topic.

Most cars nowadays come with nice interiors, my wife's 15 Cruze LTZ for example.

I wanted a fast car that I can also enjoy a drive in, not a car I can enjoy a drive in that is capable of being fast. Not to knock any EB owners, I used to own an 11 v6 so I know at least performance wise how it feels to drive them stock. I would've kept the sixxer if my car goals were the latter.
__________________
2014 Oxford White 5.0 Premium

2015 Maroon Chevy Cruze LTZ
2011 Performance White V6 Premium SOLD
king_13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-23-2016, 11:48 PM   #6
Registered Member

Regular
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Spokane
Region: Washington
Posts: 1,595
Disregarding the sound difference between a 5.0 and the 4 cylinder Ecoboost.............being over a second slower to 60 mph would be the deal breaker for me.
Guard 5.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2016, 01:03 AM   #7
Registered Member
Regular
 
5pointYoBro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Nashville
Region: Tennessee
Posts: 730
I wouldn't trade my 14 GT for a 15 Eco. I see that as a downgrade. Maybe a Premium 14 GT to a Base model 15 GT.
__________________
2014 GT. Oxford White.
20" Velgen VMB5s on NT555s.
MBRP Race Series Catback Exhaust
Bama 93 Performance Tune
5pointYoBro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2016, 08:03 AM   #8
Registered Member
Regular
 
FastFord13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Montreal
Region: Canada
Posts: 4,259
I agree, going 13/14GT to 15GT yes but not down to a ECO.
IMO its a down grade also.


Sent from the future.
FastFord13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2016, 08:06 AM   #9
Registered Member
Regular
 
FastFord13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Montreal
Region: Canada
Posts: 4,259
Quote:
Originally Posted by king_13 View Post
Not at all, they are in different leagues. If I were to get a turbo 4, I'd get a WRX but that's another topic.

Most cars nowadays come with nice interiors, my wife's 15 Cruze LTZ for example.

I wanted a fast car that I can also enjoy a drive in, not a car I can enjoy a drive in that is capable of being fast. Not to knock any EB owners, I used to own an 11 v6 so I know at least performance wise how it feels to drive them stock. I would've kept the sixxer if my car goals were the latter.
I agree with all your points well put, my thoughts exactly!

Sent from the future.
FastFord13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2016, 09:47 AM   #10
Registered Member
Regular
 
Voltwings's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Houston
Region: Texas
Posts: 3,445
Depends on what you want to do with it. For HPDE, i really considered trading my '13 5.0 for the '15 ecoboost. Lighter (albeit not by much), better suspension, easier on tires / brakes with the lower power, but still enough to be competitive, EB PP comes with better brakes than my stock GT brakes. It made sense to a point, but ultimately i ended up in a mazdaspeed3 because i can track that and put a car seat in the back. The Mrs got to keep her mustang for now lol... for now.
Voltwings is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2016, 10:05 AM   #11
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Charlotte, NC
Region: North Carolina
Posts: 1,045
Definitely not as black and white and really depends what your using the car for. From a power standpoint yes it is definitely a downgrade but entirely depends on what you want


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
StarzTA17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2016, 10:20 AM   #12
Registered Member
Regular
 
5pointYoBro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Nashville
Region: Tennessee
Posts: 730
Then you have to listen to everyone say, "awh it's not a V8?" Lol


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
__________________
2014 GT. Oxford White.
20" Velgen VMB5s on NT555s.
MBRP Race Series Catback Exhaust
Bama 93 Performance Tune
5pointYoBro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2016, 10:26 AM   #13
Registered Member
Regular
 
5pointYoBro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Nashville
Region: Tennessee
Posts: 730
Then you have to listen to everyone say, "awh it's not a V8?" Lol


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
__________________
2014 GT. Oxford White.
20" Velgen VMB5s on NT555s.
MBRP Race Series Catback Exhaust
Bama 93 Performance Tune
5pointYoBro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2016, 10:44 AM   #14
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Region: Canada
Posts: 2,974
See...I'd dig the eco as a second project....the same way I dug the 84.5-86 SVOs back in the day. It was a neat and different solution but, it we are talking having one car? V8 GT for sure.
__________________
2014 Premium GT, SGM, Brembo, Auto, Tech, Comfort, etc. GT500s, Steeda UCA, VMP auto N/A tune. 100 shot nitrous on BBR tune. Best e/t 11.42 at 120.64

2012 Premium GT, Candy Red, Brembo package, 3.73, MT82, Comfort, Tech, et al. Procal tune, Roush UCA, UMI poly LCA, GT500s, Steeda red bracket, Hoosier 28x10x16 bias drags. Best e/t 11.91 at 115.23 RIP
5LHO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2016, 08:58 PM   #15
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Aurora
Region: Missouri
Posts: 471
I wouldn't do it because a turbo charged 4 cylinder does not appeal to me at all. There are things I like better on the new 15/16 Mustangs but not enough to trade at this point. I still prefer the look of the 13/14 over the new ones.
__________________
2014 GT/automatic/Sterling Gray Metallic/GT500AB/GT500 OTA pipes/Bob's oil catch can/Ford aluminum finned diff cover. Ford STB.
70monte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2016, 08:51 AM   #16
REG
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Monaca
Region: Pennsylvania
Posts: 263
Don't forget, they slightly downrated the output of the V6 to ensure the eccoboast makes more horspower. Its still 100 hp less than the GT!
__________________
2013 BBK Short tube, E-Force Stage 2, M/T 245/18/40 DR's, BMR LCA's, Alum D/S, Strange FRT adjustable struts
REG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2016, 04:13 PM   #17
Registered Member
Regular
 
RWSRWS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: West Cost
Region: Florida
Posts: 64
16 months ago, while killing time between appointments I stopped it at the ford deserves and test drove the ecoboost

Just for fun

Wasn't planning to buy a car

Then the sales guy offered to let me test drive a 2014 5.0

I almost didn't do it as I was by that time pushed for time but thought WHAT THE HELL.....

Oops

Once I drove that '14 5.0 that was it !

Two weeks later I bought a '13 one owner with 6,900 on the clock

I'm 58 years old, have owned and driven Benzes, vettes, firebirds, camaros, Volvos, 300z s and many others

This car is the most fun I, be ever had for a daily driver

The 5.0 test drive is what hooked me


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
__________________
2013 GT Premium (auto) Crystalline,factory 19”wheels, black rocker stripe & heat extractors, redline armrests, Silverhorse windows Polk/Infinity speakers, Dynamat GT500A-bcks 1963 Studebaker Avanti R2 Factory Supercharged still own1938 Studebaker President still own 1969 Mustang Coupe, 302 Blue (sold 1978)1966 Aurora Thunderjet 2+2 Fastback - yellow w/red stripes (owned since age 9)1968 HOT WHEELS Redline Mustang 2+2 Gold - owned since age 11
RWSRWS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2016, 09:04 AM   #18
Registered Member

Regular
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Spokane
Region: Washington
Posts: 1,595
If you've not already purchased an EB Mustang -- pick up the new Car and Driver (the one with the Porsche and the McLaren on the cover), and read what they have to say about the EB Mustang beginning on page 54.......Camaro V-6 against the EB Mustang:

"The EB engine noise is a one-note song, and not a particularly pleasant note at that. This one's a groaner, always groaning the same groan. It's volume changes with revs, but it's pitch never does. There's not much point in exploring the upper reaches of this engine's operational envelope. There's no aural reward for punching beyond 5500 rpm, where horsepower peaks.

How often while driving one of them would you regret not having purchased the V-8? The answer is, in the case of the Camaro, not very often. In the Mustang the answer would be always."



OUCH!
Guard 5.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2016, 09:10 AM   #19
Registered Member
Regular
 
Sterlingbeast5.0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Naples, FL
Region: Florida
Posts: 1,654
My girlfriend drove an EB when we were looking for her most recent car. The sound is definitely not to be desired. It was also the last test drive we did before she bought her new car...
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	20160410_143647.jpg
Views:	91
Size:	1.58 MB
ID:	200371  
__________________
Brembo Pkg, Paxton SC, ID1000's, JMS BAP, Boss IM, JLT CAI, Lund Tuned, Tremec T56 swap, Black Pype Bombs, Pypes LT Headers H-Pipe, McLeod RXT Twin Clutch & LW Flywheel. Alum. DS, MGW Shifter, BMR adj. Panhard, UCA & LCA's, Eibach Pro Damper, Sportline Springs, MMD Louvers, Roush splitters, RTR decklid and surround, CDC Grille, Staggered 20" ACE Alloy Driven, Trufiber Hood.
Sterlingbeast5.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2016, 09:54 AM   #20
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Region: Canada
Posts: 2,974
Yeah, it's so weird they can get it right in the Focus RS and get the same engine so wrong in the arguably more amusing platform. They are doing a BMW here where the M4 is unpleasant and the cheaper M2 fits the experience most people are looking for a lot better. We can also cast our mind back to the last time Ford explored 4 cylinder performance in its lineup of Mustang and others and ditched the glorious Cosworth DOHC 2 litre 4 banger for its distant and slightly retarded cousin, that farm implement, the 2.3 Lima SOHC. It had a pretty sad song to sing as well....
__________________
2014 Premium GT, SGM, Brembo, Auto, Tech, Comfort, etc. GT500s, Steeda UCA, VMP auto N/A tune. 100 shot nitrous on BBR tune. Best e/t 11.42 at 120.64

2012 Premium GT, Candy Red, Brembo package, 3.73, MT82, Comfort, Tech, et al. Procal tune, Roush UCA, UMI poly LCA, GT500s, Steeda red bracket, Hoosier 28x10x16 bias drags. Best e/t 11.91 at 115.23 RIP
5LHO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2016, 01:13 PM   #21
Registered Member
Regular
 
Revvv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Augusta
Region: Georgia
Posts: 3,130
A 4 cyl just does not fit a Mustang in my mind. Mustangs are supposed to be muscle cars. No matter how you try to spin and market a 4 cyl, at the end of the day it is still a 4 cyl. Ok, it has a turbo, but that doesn't make up for the lack of torque or the sound of a V8 that commands attention. If you want an American made econobox, get one that is designed as such. Why did Ford try to put a Mustang cloak on a Focus?

In my opinion the EcoBoost is like a neutered Rottweiler that has also had his teeth pulled and vocal chords snipped. Sure, he looks like a beast, but beyond that there are only remnants of what was and should be.

The EcoBoost has no bark, no growl, no bite, and..... I'm sure you can see where I am going with that statement.




Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk
Revvv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2016, 02:32 PM   #22
Registered Member
Regular
 
Voltwings's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Houston
Region: Texas
Posts: 3,445
The thing is most turbo 4 cylinders sound awesome, the problem is the EB cylinder head design. Its a pimp design and flows incredibly well, especially paired with a twin scroll turbo, but man does it sound like doo doo
Voltwings is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2016, 03:27 PM   #23
Registered Member
Regular
 
Revvv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Augusta
Region: Georgia
Posts: 3,130
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voltwings View Post
The thing is most turbo 4 cylinders sound awesome, the problem is the EB cylinder head design. Its a pimp design and flows incredibly well, especially paired with a twin scroll turbo, but man does it sound like doo doo
I have heard some 4 cyl engines that sing beautifully. My Hayabusa had a tone that was unmistakable. Lotus with a 4 cyl sounds great. The Subaru WRX has a sweet exhaust note. The list can go on. However, a 4 cyl in a Mustang is a mistake.

This is my opinion, and we all know what opinions are like. The Ford Mustang is an American icon. I'm not a Ford fan, but I love the Mustang. The car has been around without ceasing in production for 50 years in some form. What made the Mustang desireable was that it was a small, light car that had a 289 in it originally. The car was, and is, the perfect platform for performance enthusiasts. Sure, there was an optional,6 cyl, but that old tractor motor was reliable. The Mustang rolled out as a Secretary's car and stole the hearts of gear heads.

A 4 cyl in a Mustang is nothing more than a sales pitch to try and grab the attention of younger consumers that like the styling. They are also willing to compromise the heart of the car in the name of being "environmentally friendly". Then there is the fuel mileage.

I don't have a problem with clean air. In fact, I'm all for less pollution. I love the smell of the country side. There is nothing like the smell of true fresh air. I do not have a problem with fuel mileage. Gas is expensive. However, if you are looking to save the planet and drive 6 months on a tank of gas, the Mustang might not be the car for you.

Again, this is my opinion; Ford is hurting the reputation of the Mustang with a 4 cyl engine. It did not work out 30 years ago, and it isn't going to work now.

Would you buy a 4 cyl Corvette? How about a 4 cyl Viper? There's not a chance of that happening.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk
Revvv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2016, 04:12 PM   #24
Registered Member
Regular
 
RWSRWS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: West Cost
Region: Florida
Posts: 64
when the Mustang was initially released, part of the concept was you could have one whatever way you wanted it. 6 cylinder, V-8 and if you wanted, more and more horses under the hood.

This takes it back to that original concept.

Having driven the 4 Turbo, I have to say I was impressed, and on it's own, it's a decent mill.

If I was buying a new one for my wife (she now wants a vert), my choice would be the 4 Turbo.

Same thing if I get one for my daughter. I don't want them getting sideways, or otherwise into trouble either intentionally or by accident.

But for me, the GT 5.0 is the only way to fly on Mustang Airlines...



RWSRWS
__________________
2013 GT Premium (auto) Crystalline,factory 19”wheels, black rocker stripe & heat extractors, redline armrests, Silverhorse windows Polk/Infinity speakers, Dynamat GT500A-bcks 1963 Studebaker Avanti R2 Factory Supercharged still own1938 Studebaker President still own 1969 Mustang Coupe, 302 Blue (sold 1978)1966 Aurora Thunderjet 2+2 Fastback - yellow w/red stripes (owned since age 9)1968 HOT WHEELS Redline Mustang 2+2 Gold - owned since age 11
RWSRWS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2016, 05:42 PM   #25
Registered Member

Regular
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Spokane
Region: Washington
Posts: 1,595
True, if a wife or young daughter was going to be the primary driver, the EB just might be a GREAT choice in that case.......Especially because you can load up the EB with options, which you cannot do with the base V-6.
It is kind of odd how the engine lineup is designed between the Camaro and the Mustang, with the V-6 and the turbo 4 being in different places in the lineup.
Guard 5.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2016, 12:15 AM   #26
Registered Member
Regular
 
Fender868's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Victoria
Region: Canada
Posts: 550
I think options are great. Remember how much it sucked when All you got was v8 or v6 , leather not leather and stuff? There are far more options now. Less than way back when, but it's fun to see it come back. Look up an ordering guide for a 66 or 67 and options galore . It was almost fully customizable . Despite the large number of cars produced , they still managed to make unique cars with odd options and editions here and there. I have no interest in a 4 cylinder so it makes no difference for me. I think it's great that the options exist. I'd personally prefer to see more mustang 4 bangers than turbo 4 hyundais and what not . Start undercutting the imports by offering people what they want. Let's be honest , not everyone can afford a GT. Kids with jobs out of college owe debts, but they have dreams too. A 4 banger stang is a fun place to start. Legends have got to begin somewhere !


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
Fender868 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2016, 01:45 PM   #27
Registered Member
Regular
 
Voltwings's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Houston
Region: Texas
Posts: 3,445
Quote:
Originally Posted by Revvv View Post
I have heard some 4 cyl engines that sing beautifully. My Hayabusa had a tone that was unmistakable. Lotus with a 4 cyl sounds great. The Subaru WRX has a sweet exhaust note. The list can go on. However, a 4 cyl in a Mustang is a mistake.

This is my opinion, and we all know what opinions are like. The Ford Mustang is an American icon. I'm not a Ford fan, but I love the Mustang. The car has been around without ceasing in production for 50 years in some form. What made the Mustang desireable was that it was a small, light car that had a 289 in it originally. The car was, and is, the perfect platform for performance enthusiasts. Sure, there was an optional,6 cyl, but that old tractor motor was reliable. The Mustang rolled out as a Secretary's car and stole the hearts of gear heads.

A 4 cyl in a Mustang is nothing more than a sales pitch to try and grab the attention of younger consumers that like the styling. They are also willing to compromise the heart of the car in the name of being "environmentally friendly". Then there is the fuel mileage.

I don't have a problem with clean air. In fact, I'm all for less pollution. I love the smell of the country side. There is nothing like the smell of true fresh air. I do not have a problem with fuel mileage. Gas is expensive. However, if you are looking to save the planet and drive 6 months on a tank of gas, the Mustang might not be the car for you.

Again, this is my opinion; Ford is hurting the reputation of the Mustang with a 4 cyl engine. It did not work out 30 years ago, and it isn't going to work now.

Would you buy a 4 cyl Corvette? How about a 4 cyl Viper? There's not a chance of that happening.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk
I agree with some of your points, and disagree with other, but like you said that is the nature of opinions

In my mind Ford did something incredibly right by bringing an "affordable" RWD turbo platform to the market. Considering the new camaro wasnt out at the time, and the Gen coupe hardly counts (due to low volume and no aftermarket support) it was literally the only car on the market in that segment. The engine responds well to mods, makes killer power... its a good car.

Where they failed though was the weight and the sound. I don't mind the sound of a turbo 4, or even some N/a 4s, but something, somewhere, went horribly wrong with this engine lol. That and the weight, if this car were like 3200 lbs or so you can bet your *** there would be one sitting in the driveway right now. 3500+ lbs and 300 hp though a winning combination does not make. The car is good, just ... not good enough.
Voltwings is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2016, 03:25 PM   #28
Registered Member
Regular
 
WJBertrand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Ventura
Region: California
Posts: 517
To my mind a Mustang should just have a V8, it's incomplete otherwise. I would not consider a V6 or 4 cylinder, even if it's turbocharged. So to me this would not be an upgrade, but not a downgrade either, rather some kind of lateral choice. An upgrade from a GT would have to be a GT500 or GT350 to my way of thinking.

I think Ford came out with the Tubo 4 thinking it would appeal mostly to foreign markets, but guess what is happening? The V8 is turning out to be the preferred engine in Australia, Europe and the UK.
__________________
-Jeff-
Ventura, CA
2013 GT Premium Brembo
MGW, Blow Fish, AM Hood Struts
Tinted, Borla Touring AB, ProCal Tune
Full Shelby/Kicker Audio Upgrade
WJBertrand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2016, 03:38 PM   #29
Registered Member
Regular
 
2011 Kona Blue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Region: Maryland
Posts: 7,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fender868 View Post
I think options are great. Remember how much it sucked when All you got was v8 or v6 , leather not leather and stuff? There are far more options now. Less than way back when, but it's fun to see it come back. Look up an ordering guide for a 66 or 67 and options galore . It was almost fully customizable . Despite the large number of cars produced , they still managed to make unique cars with odd options and editions here and there. I have no interest in a 4 cylinder so it makes no difference for me. I think it's great that the options exist. I'd personally prefer to see more mustang 4 bangers than turbo 4 hyundais and what not . Start undercutting the imports by offering people what they want. Let's be honest , not everyone can afford a GT. Kids with jobs out of college owe debts, but they have dreams too. A 4 banger stang is a fun place to start. Legends have got to begin somewhere !


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
Dont forget Not everyone that wants a mustang wants a V8. A lot of consumers out there just don't care. A lot of people don't care the V8 engine is a better platform for making 8000 hp.

Just a near stock 3.7
2011 Kona Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2016, 03:40 PM   #30
Registered Member
Regular
 
RWSRWS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: West Cost
Region: Florida
Posts: 64
Ford Mustang Weight-to-Power Ratios Explored

SOUND and TORQUE aside, it's really not an issue if you look at the numbers . .

I'm a GT guy, all the way but there are reasonable alternatives . . .

Here's the real data:


2014 Mustang GT with a manual, strains the scale at a burly 3,618 pounds. Dividing that figure by 420 results in a rating of 8.61 pounds per horsepower, which is significantly better than either the V6 or EcoBoost models.

A 2014 Mustang with the V6 engine and a manual transmission weighs about 3,496 pounds. Dividing that figure by 305, which is the car’s horsepower rating, results in 11.46 pounds per horsepower. Not too shabby.

A similarly equipped 2015 model weighs 3,526 pounds and brandishes 300 ponies. Doing the math that works out to about 11.75 pounds per horsepower, slightly worse.

An EcoBoost fastback with a stick weighs 3,524 pounds and has 310 horses, numbers that work out to 11.37 pounds per pony, slightly better than the 2014 car can muster. That’s progress, albeit a baby-step forward.


For a little perspective a 2004 GT coupe was powered by a SOHC 4.6-liter V8 that delivered just 260 hp, 40 LESS than the new six-cylinder engine despite having almost a liter’s worth of additional displacement! With a curb weight around 3,006 pounds this decade-old car had a weight-to-power ratio of 11.56

check out a 1965 Mustang’s specs. Hardtop models weighed around 2,556 pounds. If customers sidestepped the standard inline-six and opted for the available 289 V8 instead they were treated to 220 horses. Crunching these numbers results in a rating of 11.61 pounds per pony, not as far off as you might expect thanks in large part to the car’s feather-light curb weight.


cut and pasted from this article (see link)

RWSRWS

2015 Ford Mustang Weight-to-Power Ratios Explored » AutoGuide.com News
__________________
2013 GT Premium (auto) Crystalline,factory 19”wheels, black rocker stripe & heat extractors, redline armrests, Silverhorse windows Polk/Infinity speakers, Dynamat GT500A-bcks 1963 Studebaker Avanti R2 Factory Supercharged still own1938 Studebaker President still own 1969 Mustang Coupe, 302 Blue (sold 1978)1966 Aurora Thunderjet 2+2 Fastback - yellow w/red stripes (owned since age 9)1968 HOT WHEELS Redline Mustang 2+2 Gold - owned since age 11
RWSRWS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2016, 04:03 PM   #31
Registered Member
Regular
 
elkoritaNAY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Los Angeles
Region: California
Posts: 851
Interesting weight to power... So my base v6 was at 3496 lbs+100 lbs supercharger n components - 20 lbs lighter ds + 100 lbs misc upgrades: exhaust shorties headers 19 in wheels Etc etc = 3676 lbs / say 475 hp flywheel = 7.73 lbs/hp... Seems reasonable to me. Maybe the 100 lbs misc is a little small.



410 rwhp 320 ft-lbs
Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
elkoritaNAY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2016, 06:50 PM   #32
Registered Member
Regular
 
TRMN8ER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: San Diego
Region: California
Posts: 176
I personally was in the same dilemma as you - 15 eco or 13 GT. I went with the 13 GT and with the extra money I saved, dumped it into upgrades. Regardless of saving money, you will be much more satisfied buying a Mustang with a V8 over a turbo 4 cylinder. It's a muscle car, not something made over seas.
TRMN8ER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2016, 07:06 PM   #33
Registered Member
Regular
 
2011 Kona Blue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Region: Maryland
Posts: 7,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRMN8ER View Post
I personally was in the same dilemma as you - 15 eco or 13 GT. I went with the 13 GT and with the extra money I saved, dumped it into upgrades. Regardless of saving money, you will be much more satisfied buying a Mustang with a V8 over a turbo 4 cylinder. It's a muscle car, not something made over seas.
So you mean that all the people who buy the 4 bangers would be much more satisfied buying a Mustang with a V8 over a turbo 4 cylinder? Then why are there so many 4's selling?

I didn't buy a V8 Mustang and I'm satisfied with my purchase. I just enhanced my non V8 to make it more satisfying but don't and didn't have any regrets about my non V8

Just a near stock 3.7
2011 Kona Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2016, 07:23 PM   #34
Registered Member
Regular
 
Revvv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Augusta
Region: Georgia
Posts: 3,130
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2011 Kona Blue View Post
So you mean that all the people who buy the 4 bangers would be much more satisfied buying a Mustang with a V8 over a turbo 4 cylinder? Then why are there so many 4's selling?

I didn't buy a V8 Mustang and I'm satisfied with my purchase. I just enhanced my non V8 to make it more satisfying but don't and didn't have any regrets about my non V8

Just a near stock 3.7
I have not seen a single eco 4 on the roads where I live. I have a feeling those cars are going to end up in rental fleets.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk
Revvv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2016, 07:27 PM   #35
Registered Member
Regular
 
Voltwings's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Houston
Region: Texas
Posts: 3,445
Quote:
Originally Posted by Revvv View Post
I have not seen a single eco 4 on the roads where I live. I have a feeling those cars are going to end up in rental fleets.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk
I see more of those here than i do 5.0s. I'm in South Houston though, so i see a TON of every kind of car you know, sample size and all that.
Voltwings is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Lower Navigation
Go Back   Mustang Evolution > 1979-2015 Mustang GT || Tech and Talk > 2011-2014 Mustang GT

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
4cyl Eco Boost spotted. mrkrabz 2015+ Mustang Ecoboost (and V6) 56 08-30-2013 08:02 PM
Chevy fires a shot at the Eco boost. DDTCM General Car Discussion 35 03-28-2013 10:00 AM
2.0L eco boost in a mustang TheStig 2011-2014 Mustang GT 125 03-22-2013 06:35 AM
F150 eco boost Shelby09 Pictures and Videos 3 09-04-2012 10:56 PM
Eco Boost Mustang? sonicpony03 General Mustang Discussion 12 04-27-2008 08:34 PM

» Like Us On Facebook



05:06 PM


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0

MustangEvolution.com is in no way associated with or endorsed by Ford Motor Company.