new 2015 engine lineup info including Ecoboost Coyote - Mustang Evolution

Go Back   Mustang Evolution > 4 Cylinder | V6 | Classic Mustangs || Tech and Talk > 2015+ Mustang Ecoboost (and V6)



Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about them here!
Old 04-04-2013, 07:59 PM   #1
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: San Diego
Region: California
Posts: 44
Thumbs up new 2015 engine lineup info including Ecoboost Coyote

New Automobile article ( scans):

2015 Mustang s550 Preview by Automobile Magazine (May 2013 issue) - 2015+ S550 Mustang Forum (6th Generation Platform) - Mustang6G.com

They say IRS and six engines are coming, including Ecoboost Coyote for high-po model
Lighter and smaller too.
Ricky35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 04-04-2013, 08:23 PM   #2
Registered Member
Regular
 
UltArc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Region: Ohio
Posts: 1,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ricky35
New Automobile article ( scans):

2015 Mustang s550 Preview by Automobile Magazine (May 2013 issue) - 2015+ S550 Mustang Forum (6th Generation Platform) - Mustang6G.com

They say IRS and six engines are coming, including Ecoboost Coyote for high-po model
Lighter and smaller too.
Agree with those posts. Too many engine options. I had a bad feeling that the rumors about the 5.8 were true.
__________________
2012 Mustang EPA: 19/29
2012 AeroStang: 40/46

My sponsor, Tokkyo Nutrition, offers 50% off your entire order with the code "PowerHouse"
UltArc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2013, 08:46 PM   #3
Registered Member
Regular
 
wheelman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Region: Connecticut
Posts: 1,187
Although I prefer retro, I'd eat up an IRS-equipped Boss in that style. Don't call it a comeback!
wheelman is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 04-04-2013, 09:08 PM   #4
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: San Diego
Region: California
Posts: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by wheelman View Post
Although I prefer retro, I'd eat up an IRS-equipped Boss in that style. Don't call it a comeback!
Yea, pretty sick looking version in that render.
Ricky35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2013, 09:58 PM   #5
Registered Member
Regular
 
tgmeyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Region: Wisconsin
Posts: 285
What do you guys think the ecoboost 3.5L V6 is going to produce? Starting price on that?

Cause I can't decide on to pull the trigger on a'13 V6 or wait and see what '15 will bring regarding styling and power. I'm in love with the current style and and I think the 3.7 V6 is producing tons of power (regardless of cylinders or anything. Just as a car).
tgmeyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2013, 10:01 PM   #6
The Blue Dragon
Regular
Supporter
 
GrabberBlue5.0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Louisville
Region: Kentucky
Posts: 5,661
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgmeyer View Post
What do you guys think the ecoboost 3.5L V6 is going to produce? Starting price on that?

Cause I can't decide on to pull the trigger on a'13 V6 or wait and see what '15 will bring regarding styling and power. I'm in love with the current style and and I think the 3.7 V6 is producing tons of power (regardless of cylinders or anything. Just as a car).
I'm pretty sure they article in the post said 365 hp
__________________
New quick exhaust video

AUGUST 2012 MOTM!!!!
GrabberBlue5.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2013, 10:04 PM   #7
Registered Member
Regular
 
tgmeyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Region: Wisconsin
Posts: 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrabberBlue5.0 View Post

I'm pretty sure they article in the post said 365 hp
Ah, missed that. Thank you! Now.. the extra $$$ over 3.7L?
tgmeyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2013, 10:20 PM   #8
Registered Member
Regular
 
redbeast0712's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Region: Nevada
Posts: 545
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgmeyer View Post
What do you guys think the ecoboost 3.5L V6 is going to produce? Starting price on that?

Cause I can't decide on to pull the trigger on a'13 V6 or wait and see what '15 will bring regarding styling and power. I'm in love with the current style and and I think the 3.7 V6 is producing tons of power (regardless of cylinders or anything. Just as a car).
I think it will be around 380 to 400 for the v6 Eco. The f150 Eco put out 265and the 5.0 put out 360. The eco could really put out more but it will be to close to the NA 5.0 motor with boss intake. IMO I think ford is trying to go for a v8 muscle car in the 5.0 and also have an option for someone that wants the same power but to save gas mileage in the v6 Eco. I'm just trying to think here why they would do this?
redbeast0712 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2013, 10:56 PM   #9
Registered Member
Regular
 
Boomdizzle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Cincinnati
Region: Ohio
Posts: 681
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltArc View Post
Agree with those posts. Too many engine options. I had a bad feeling that the rumors about the 5.8 were true.
Yeah as soon as the new Cobra Jet had a twin turbo 5.0 in it I knew the 5.8 TVS blown motor was gone. Not saying that is a bad thing, but I doubt we'll see another 662 HP GT 500 that can get to 800 with basic mods again.
__________________
Torque: It's like crack for your right foot
Boomdizzle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2013, 10:57 PM   #10
Registered Member
Regular
 
tgmeyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Region: Wisconsin
Posts: 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by redbeast0712 View Post

I think it will be around 380 to 400 for the v6 Eco. The f150 Eco put out 265and the 5.0 put out 360. The eco could really put out more but it will be to close to the NA 5.0 motor with boss intake. IMO I think ford is trying to go for a v8 muscle car in the 5.0 and also have an option for someone that wants the same power but to save gas mileage in the v6 Eco. I'm just trying to think here why they would do this?
Ugh! Ford can't do this to me! I've been wanting so badly to pull the trigger on a'13 V6, but the 3.7L would look like nothing compared to a TT 3.5 ecoboost. What would you think the ecoboost will start at for pricing?
tgmeyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2013, 10:57 PM   #11
Registered Member
Regular
 
BlackBetty5.0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: New York
Region: New York
Posts: 167
I like the idea of the v6 ecoboost, mustang with a factory Direct injected, fully forged motor, TT setup. Ford already has this motor available, it really just makes sense to put it in a mustang. Just look the the 365HP and 420TQ The EB produces. This engine in the mustang aftermarket would take off and never look back. Tune and crank up the boost and you are looking at a TQ monster with HP in the "coyote" range with V6 MPG. Just look at the GT-R. TT V6 and drives like a bat outa hell.
BlackBetty5.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2013, 11:36 PM   #12
Registered Member
Regular
 
mrkrabz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Region: Texas
Posts: 767
I don't see the point in have an EcoBoost v6, and a regular V6. The ecoboost will have more hp, and get better millage. There is no point in the typical v6
mrkrabz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2013, 11:43 PM   #13
Registered Member
Regular
 
BlackBetty5.0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: New York
Region: New York
Posts: 167
Agreed Thats whats so great about it!!!
BlackBetty5.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2013, 10:22 AM   #14
Registered Member
Regular
 
redbeast0712's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Region: Nevada
Posts: 545
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgmeyer View Post

Ugh! Ford can't do this to me! I've been wanting so badly to pull the trigger on a'13 V6, but the 3.7L would look like nothing compared to a TT 3.5 ecoboost. What would you think the ecoboost will start at for pricing?
I think it will be ether about the same or a little less then the gt. I think ford is just giving an extra option for us mustang fans. I would love to see a 5.0 2015 vs the Eco v6 2015 in a drag race. Watch! it will be on the cover of motortrend when it comes out.
redbeast0712 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2013, 11:18 AM   #15
Registered Member
Regular
 
Aggiesrok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Bryan
Region: Texas
Posts: 1,883
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrkrabz View Post
I don't see the point in have an EcoBoost v6, and a regular V6. The ecoboost will have more hp, and get better millage. There is no point in the typical v6
I'll bet the V6 turbo will be a GT option motor and the base car will still be a NA V6. The base car won't be that close to a GT in terms of performance.
__________________
chevy runs deep, Don't step in chevy!

289 - Holley 4150 570cfm; Performer intake; mild cam; MSD HEI; 302 heads; Roller Tips; Hedman Tri-Y headers; H-pipe w/Flowmaster 40's; 9 in posi 3.50; 205/50-17F; 225/50-17R.
Aggiesrok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2013, 11:44 AM   #16
Registered Member
Regular
 
BlackBetty5.0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: New York
Region: New York
Posts: 167
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgmeyer View Post
Ugh! Ford can't do this to me! I've been wanting so badly to pull the trigger on a'13 V6, but the 3.7L would look like nothing compared to a TT 3.5 ecoboost. What would you think the ecoboost will start at for pricing?

If you look at the F-150 the ecoboost is roughly a $1300 option over the 5.0, one would have to assume it would be in the same ballpark for the mustng.
BlackBetty5.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2013, 12:11 PM   #17
Registered Member
Regular
 
mrkrabz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Region: Texas
Posts: 767
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aggiesrok View Post
I'll bet the V6 turbo will be a GT option motor and the base car will still be a NA V6. The base car won't be that close to a GT in terms of performance.
I highly doubt that they will ever put the GT stamp on a v6, regardless of how much power it has. That's the easiest way to piss off your loyal fan base.
mrkrabz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2013, 02:48 PM   #18
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: San Diego
Region: California
Posts: 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrkrabz View Post
I highly doubt that they will ever put the GT stamp on a v6, regardless of how much power it has. That's the easiest way to piss off your loyal fan base.
Agreed.
No way they do that while there's still a V8 engine available.
Ricky35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2013, 04:38 PM   #19
Registered Member
Regular
 
tgmeyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Region: Wisconsin
Posts: 285
So do you think the ecoboost V6 would be an option above the 5.0? Or what?! AAh! Do I pull the trigger on a 13 V6 or wait for the '15?

Do you guys think the difference between the 3.5TT and the 3.7L is going huge performance wise? How about price wise?
tgmeyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2013, 04:46 PM   #20
Registered Member
Regular
 
mrkrabz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Region: Texas
Posts: 767
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgmeyer View Post
So do you think the ecoboost V6 would be an option above the 5.0? Or what?! AAh! Do I pull the trigger on a 13 V6 or wait for the '15?

Do you guys think the difference between the 3.5TT and the 3.7L is going huge performance wise? How about price wise?
I would get the 13'. Not only do I love the look, but the price dropped due to the 14' release (which is almost exactly the same as the 13') and, over time your 13' will become more valuable, as that generation will be come more scares and hard to come by.

Go for the 13' IMO
mrkrabz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2013, 05:09 PM   #21
Registered Member
Regular
 
Aggiesrok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Bryan
Region: Texas
Posts: 1,883
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrkrabz View Post

I highly doubt that they will ever put the GT stamp on a v6, regardless of how much power it has. That's the easiest way to piss off your loyal fan base.
They're not going to offer a base car with V6 turbo that's almost the same HP and speed as the 5.0 GT.
so you think a turbo V6 is going to put out 50 more HP. It'll probably be close to 400hp. The car will require too many upgrades to handle the increase. It'll be a GT option for the Eco freaks, who want better mpg than the 5.0.
__________________
chevy runs deep, Don't step in chevy!

289 - Holley 4150 570cfm; Performer intake; mild cam; MSD HEI; 302 heads; Roller Tips; Hedman Tri-Y headers; H-pipe w/Flowmaster 40's; 9 in posi 3.50; 205/50-17F; 225/50-17R.
Aggiesrok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2013, 05:00 PM   #22
Registered Member
Regular
 
CYCLON37's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Region: New York
Posts: 1,798
Eh, just some he said, she said stuff. "Our sources said.." Who's the source? Where are the quotes from that person? Their source could be a 10y/o kid for all we know. I'm waiting for Ford to announce something. Until then, it's just rumors. Would love that EcoBoost V6 though!
CYCLON37 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-06-2013, 05:59 PM   #23
Registered Member
Regular
 
kdbdallas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Region: Arizona
Posts: 187
Personally I don't like the look of that render. I hope it doesn't look like that
__________________
2013 V6 Black

"These cars are meant to be driven", so enjoy the hell out of all of it - not just the look of it when it is all clean" - Carroll Shelby
kdbdallas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 12:04 AM   #24
Registered Member
Regular
 
kdbdallas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Region: Arizona
Posts: 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgmeyer View Post
So do you think the ecoboost V6 would be an option above the 5.0? Or what?! AAh! Do I pull the trigger on a 13 V6 or wait for the '15?

Do you guys think the difference between the 3.5TT and the 3.7L is going huge performance wise? How about price wise?
With the unknown of the 15, and possibly UGLY design, go for the 13. I have a 13 V6, and love that thing!!!

Agree with the 13/14 remark. 13's a bit cheaper now with 14, later part of your 'value' has to do with miles. Say in 10 years when someone looks at the mileage, if you get a 14 you will have around a year of extra mileage on it "then it should", and with there being NO difference (unless one of the couple color options means everything to you) save some $ now and overall and get a 13.

If Ford screws over the Mustang crowed with a non-mustang with the Mustang name, then pre-15's might go up in value.

Just my two cents
__________________
2013 V6 Black

"These cars are meant to be driven", so enjoy the hell out of all of it - not just the look of it when it is all clean" - Carroll Shelby
kdbdallas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 12:12 AM   #25
Registered Member
Regular
 
mrkrabz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Region: Texas
Posts: 767
I really think that pre-15's will go up in value in a few years. Since they are radically changing the design. At least that's what I'm counting on.
mrkrabz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 03:05 AM   #26
Registered Member
Regular
 
tgmeyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Region: Wisconsin
Posts: 285
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdbdallas View Post

With the unknown of the 15, and possibly UGLY design, go for the 13. I have a 13 V6, and love that thing!!!

Agree with the 13/14 remark. 13's a bit cheaper now with 14, later part of your 'value' has to do with miles. Say in 10 years when someone looks at the mileage, if you get a 14 you will have around a year of extra mileage on it "then it should", and with there being NO difference (unless one of the couple color options means everything to you) save some $ now and overall and get a 13.

If Ford screws over the Mustang crowed with a non-mustang with the Mustang name, then pre-15's might go up in value.

Just my two cents
I'm sold on the correct design and look of the 13-14. The only thing that has me waiting on '15 is the engine choices. I want good MPG, but don't want to sacrifice performance. The answer is the 3.5L Ecoboost. What do you guys think it would be in price and performance comparison to the 3.7L?
tgmeyer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 03:32 AM   #27
Registered Member
Regular
 
kdbdallas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Region: Arizona
Posts: 187
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgmeyer View Post
I'm sold on the correct design and look of the 13-14. The only thing that has me waiting on '15 is the engine choices. I want good MPG, but don't want to sacrifice performance. The answer is the 3.5L Ecoboost. What do you guys think it would be in price and performance comparison to the 3.7L?
My guess (based on NOTHING but my guess) is that it will probably get about the same as the current 3.7 (maybe a little more) but that it will cost a LOT more.

Just look at Hybrid cars...
For the most parts its still true that if you compare say a Toyota Camry vs a Toyota Camry Hybrid, both with the same "packages", so the only difference is the Hybrid, it is going to cost you an extra ~$10k

(At least that is how it was when I got my Camry Hybrid in 2009)

We decided that the extra money up front would be made up by gas savings in the long run. Honestly I couldnt tell you if it did or not... maybe... but I do know that when anything breaks of a Hybrid vs a standard, the Hybrid is going to cost 2x the cost to fix. I don't know if that is how the Ecoboost would go too, but my guess is that it would be the same.
kdbdallas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 01:50 PM   #28
Registered Member
Regular
 
stangaroo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Region: California
Posts: 716
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrkrabz View Post

I would get the 13'. Not only do I love the look, but the price dropped due to the 14' release (which is almost exactly the same as the 13') and, over time your 13' will become more valuable, as that generation will be come more scares and hard to come by.

Go for the 13' IMO
14 is an anniversary model
__________________
2008 4.0 SOLD (I will miss my first stang forever)
2011 5.0 black on black with 3.73 manual and I still get over 26 mpg
stangaroo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 02:00 PM   #29
Registered Member
Regular
 
mrkrabz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Region: Texas
Posts: 767
Quote:
Originally Posted by stangaroo View Post
14 is an anniversary model
I don't think it is. It doesn't have the badge or anything, I think the 15 will be the anniversary model.
mrkrabz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 04:30 PM   #30
The Blue Dragon
Regular
Supporter
 
GrabberBlue5.0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Louisville
Region: Kentucky
Posts: 5,661
Technically the first model year of the mustang is '65, the 64 1/2 is just something people made up.
__________________
New quick exhaust video

AUGUST 2012 MOTM!!!!
GrabberBlue5.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 07:13 PM   #31
Registered Member
Regular
Supporter
 
93slowstang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Walker
Region: Louisiana
Posts: 3,436
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrabberBlue5.0 View Post
Technically the first model year of the mustang is '65, the 64 1/2 is just something people made up.
The reason it's dubbed the 64 1/2 is because it was introduced halfway through the 64 model year. Not completely made up....
__________________


93 GT with more junkyard mods than you can imagine.
90 GT bone stock down to the air filter, awaiting restoration.
Join Mustang Evolution today. Click here
93slowstang is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 07:36 PM   #32
The Blue Dragon
Regular
Supporter
 
GrabberBlue5.0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Louisville
Region: Kentucky
Posts: 5,661
Quote:
Originally Posted by 93slowstang View Post

The reason it's dubbed the 64 1/2 is because it was introduced halfway through the 64 model year. Not completely made up....
Dubbed by the public... The first model year is 65, 64 1/2 is made up
__________________
New quick exhaust video

AUGUST 2012 MOTM!!!!
GrabberBlue5.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-07-2013, 10:27 PM   #33
Registered Member
Regular
 
Aggiesrok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Bryan
Region: Texas
Posts: 1,883
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrabberBlue5.0 View Post

Dubbed by the public... The first model year is 65, 64 1/2 is made up
The 64 1/2 is actually different than the model made in the fall of 64. They are all the 65 body style. But the 64 1/2 is not made up. It was built in the 2nd production run of the 64 model years. Normally a model would begin in a summer production run and be available in the Fall of that year.
__________________
chevy runs deep, Don't step in chevy!

289 - Holley 4150 570cfm; Performer intake; mild cam; MSD HEI; 302 heads; Roller Tips; Hedman Tri-Y headers; H-pipe w/Flowmaster 40's; 9 in posi 3.50; 205/50-17F; 225/50-17R.
Aggiesrok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2013, 06:50 AM   #34
The Blue Dragon
Regular
Supporter
 
GrabberBlue5.0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Louisville
Region: Kentucky
Posts: 5,661
Ok so after doing a little more reading the reason it's called the 64 1/2 is because it was released between year model releases, in April instead of October. And all mustangs since at least the 2011 (maybe before that) were all beginning delivery in late march to early April, much like the "64 1/2" mustang. So technically we are all driving 11 1/2, 12 1/2, 13 1/2, or 14 1/2 mustangs... At least according to this fictitious half year model moniker.

How 'bout them apples!

Either way I know how to admit when in wrong, which I am. But that would make the first year model of the mustang a 64 not necessarily 64 1/2
__________________
New quick exhaust video

AUGUST 2012 MOTM!!!!
GrabberBlue5.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-08-2013, 07:07 AM   #35
Registered Member
Regular
Supporter
 
93slowstang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Walker
Region: Louisiana
Posts: 3,436
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrabberBlue5.0 View Post
Ok so after doing a little more reading the reason it's called the 64 1/2 is because it was released between year model releases, in April instead of October. And all mustangs since at least the 2011 (maybe before that) were all beginning delivery in late march to early April, much like the "64 1/2" mustang. So technically we are all driving 11 1/2, 12 1/2, 13 1/2, or 14 1/2 mustangs... At least according to this fictitious half year model moniker.

How 'bout them apples!

Either way I know how to admit when in wrong, which I am. But that would make the first year model of the mustang a 64 not necessarily 64 1/2
That's why I was saying it wasn't completely made up.
__________________


93 GT with more junkyard mods than you can imagine.
90 GT bone stock down to the air filter, awaiting restoration.
Join Mustang Evolution today. Click here
93slowstang is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Lower Navigation
Go Back   Mustang Evolution > 4 Cylinder | V6 | Classic Mustangs || Tech and Talk > 2015+ Mustang Ecoboost (and V6)

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


» Like Us On Facebook



08:40 AM


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.