2015 Ford Mustang specs revealed

Discussion in 'American Cars' started by V8stangman, Jul 18, 2014.

  1. #26 Veyronman, Aug 21, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    why would anyone bother with the V6?
  2. The ones who are obsessed with the "best bang for the buck" concept. Some American cars are ridiculous with mpg. Some people want the look but don't want gas guzzling cars. So unfortunately the v6 and ecoboost are must haves to some people. IMO, if it's not a V8 then it's not a real American muscle car.
  3. What I'm saying is that the V6 is essentially an ancient relic, since the ecoboost is faster whilst achieving better fuel economy. Paying a bit more for the turbo would be a total no-brainer to me.

    They should just get rid of the V6 entirely.
  4. Turbos have a reputation for being headaches in the long-term. The V6 is there to provide a low-cost long-term ownership option for people on tight budgets and for fleet managers.
  5. #30 Veyronman, Aug 22, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    Turbo tech has come a long way in the last 5 years. It's not like manufacturers don't test their hardware to destruction.

    If Mercedes are happy to release a turbo 4 with over 170hp/litre (A45 AMG, engine pictured) during an important time when they are trying rid themselves of the reputation of poor quality they were saddled with after their ill-advised joint venture with Chrysler, I'm sure Ford can manage something that isn't so highly strung. Not to mention the recent successes they have had with their EcoBoost range. The 1.0 3-pot has won international engine of the year for two years running now.

    I'd still forget the V6. The $1500 increase in the base price for the EcoBoost ( http://www.roadandtrack.com/go/news/2015-ford-mustang-ecoboost-and-gt-pricing-revealed-along-with-official-order-guide) is likely to be won back in reduced fuel costs by the time the warranty expires.

    EDIT: at least over here, where petrol is more valuable than Berkshire Hathaway stock
  6. #31 AMGrulz, Aug 23, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    Manufacturers have always tested their hardware to destruction, but that hasn't stopped embarrassing manufacturer defects from finding their way out into the open (flaming 911 GT3, anyone?). If there aren't any horror stories five years down the road I'm sure Ford and and will axe the NA V6, but until then, there are certain clients who like the tried and true tech. And since most fuel efficiency gains take longer than the average life of the vehicle to see returns over here, it's not really and issue unless it's a night and day difference.
  7. #32 V8stangman, Sep 12, 2014
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 25, 2016
    2015 Ford Mustang Mileage Announced

    The 2015 Ford Mustang will be less efficient than the generation it replaces. Or at least that’s true in certain configurations.

    Official fuel economy estimates were released today, revealing that the new V8-powered GT model should return 15 MPG in the city and 25 during presumably flaccid highway travel while that engine equipped with an automatic transmission is supposed to spit back 16 MPG city and 25 on the open road. Those figures mark a slight, but measurable downgrade in fuel economy compared to the 2014 model.

    Entry-level V6 models also offer worse mileage than the model they replace with 19/28 MPG mated to a manual gearbox or 17/28 MPG in automatic form. Manual models lose three miles per gallon on the highway, which is good enough to drop the overall rating by a single MPG to 22. The automatics lsoe two MPG in the city and one on the highway to also see a single MPG drop in the average rating.

    But none of that matters for Ford, because there’s a new 2.3-liter turbocharged four-cylinder model as well, and that model will make it possible for Ford to advertise the Mustang offering up to 32 MPG. Manual models are rated to return 22/31 MPG city/highway while the automatic numbers to a do-si-do to offer 21/32.

    The GT’s minor mileage concession isn’t without reward because Ford revised much of the 5.0-liter Coyote mill’s internal components to include parts from the Boss 302. Now, the plain Jane GT engine comes with bigger intake and exhaust valves and a higher-lift cam profile along with the same valve springs and connecting rods as the Boss. In English, that means the engine is being advertised with an uprated 435 hp and 400 lb-ft of torque.


Share This Page