Consumer Reports Crappy 15 Mustang Reliability

[Hack]

I've noticed the same thing - that CR doesn't rate the Mustang (and a number of other Ford vehicles) very high. I have to say I have had some issues here and there, but not really big problems with the reliability of the engine/transmission/drive train.

I think that most Mustang buyers don't have quality or reliability as their #1 concern. I know I don't. I want a relatively inexpensive car with a lot of performance/excitement for my $$. If quality was my top want - there are other cars out there where the manufacturer's efforts go more toward quality rather than performance and fun.

I can't remember whether CR has a rating on enjoyment and whether the owner is likely to buy another car from the same manufacturer. I think I've read that Ford is doing well in that statistic.

Sponsored

 

[Bullitt]

If this CR report counts both the EcoBoost and GT in the same rating then I can see why it's low. Anyone hanging out in the EcoBoost subforum back in the spring will remember engines failing left and right. Some were modded, others stock. My EcoBoost had the weird occasional smoking issue once I put the downpipe on, a strange check engine light and odd things showing up in data logs (weird turbo spool etc). And things like spark plugs needing regapped because they were incorrectly gapped at the factory and a PCV valve mod and catch can being considered nearly mandatory mods in order to ensure the proper performance and decent long-term health of the motor were annoying. After all the above, I had had enough and traded up for the GT and couldn't be happier. Sounds like 2016+ Ecoboosts are much better but those early production 2015 EcoBoosts are definitely hit or miss. Having said all that, first production run of a new motor in a new car, I understand not everything will be perfect but I can easily see people running and complaining to CR.

 

[wildcatgoal]

I think there was a count of about +/-18 known early Ecoboost engine failures + one SubaruWRXfan freak-out as a result. It was not an epidemic. And from what I could tell, most of them were due to someone trying to accelerate in a high gear shoving a bunch of boost into an engine that isn't at a high enough RPM to safely take it.

 

[Bullitt]

I think there was a count of about +/-18 known early Ecoboost engine failures + one SubaruWRXfan freak-out as a result. It was not an epidemic. And from what I could tell, most of them were due to someone trying to accelerate in a high gear shoving a bunch of boost into an engine that isn't at a high enough RPM to safely take it.

I agree, 18 is pretty accurate count on the forums. Outside of the forums it's hard to say since dealers don't release that data, but this is why I'm saying the CR report might give some insight into that about what non-forum posting owners have been experiencing. I take CR ratings with a grain of salt usually as well, but they have been accurate on some cars in the past based off my experiences (like my problem-riddled R56 Mini Cooper S for example). I still get messages from people with issues with their stock EcoBoosts.

But like I said originally, I'm not even talking about outright engine failures as mine never failed, I just meant all the annoying little engine "quirks" I guess you could more affectionately call it, that the average consumer wouldn't be as tolerant of.

 

[RazorRamon]

Nice car....Except it doesnt come with a manual transmission option.....and that it looks like a plain ol' (previous generation) malibu.

It does come with a manual. 2015, 2016 and there will be one for its last year - 2017.

 

[RazorRamon]

I know that, both Ford and Holden shut down. 2017 will be the last year of the SS sedan, unless they decide to build them in the US(doubtful). There are 20% off bonus tags on them. They were never meant to be a volume car either. It's just finding the right color that's driving me nuts. Currently 20% off on SS sedans and Scat/Pack Chargers is causing a conundrum, as well as I really enjoy my Mustang too. First world problems...

Scat/Pack for the bolder look and being faster off the line. The SS takes the cake once you start going around corners and consider ride feel.

 

[Maggneto]

If this CR report counts both the EcoBoost and GT in the same rating then I can see why it's low. Anyone hanging out in the EcoBoost subforum back in the spring will remember engines failing left and right. Some were modded, others stock. My EcoBoost had the weird occasional smoking issue once I put the downpipe on, a strange check engine light and odd things showing up in data logs (weird turbo spool etc). And things like spark plugs needing regapped because they were incorrectly gapped at the factory and a PCV valve mod and catch can being considered nearly mandatory mods in order to ensure the proper performance and decent long-term health of the motor were annoying. After all the above, I had had enough and traded up for the GT and couldn't be happier. Sounds like 2016+ Ecoboosts are much better but those early production 2015 EcoBoosts are definitely hit or miss. Having said all that, first production run of a new motor in a new car, I understand not everything will be perfect but I can easily see people running and complaining to CR.

Modified eco engines account for nearly all the blown engines and have nothing to do with the CR rating. To say the problems are all Ecoboost related is ridiculous.

 

[JohnD]

I stopped paying attention to CR in the early part of this century. Their ratings on products that I was in the business of fixing totally defied the real situation. There were 3 manufacturers whose product failed consistently, those 3 made up about 75% of my repairs and were rated tops for reliability. I got a lot of laughs out of that.

 

[Bullitt]

Modified eco engines account for nearly all the blown engines and have nothing to do with the CR rating. To say the problems are all Ecoboost related is ridiculous.

Here we go with the defensive EcoBoosters. I never said "all problems are ecoboost related" I just said that if CR doesn't separate the ratings between EB and GT that could be why the ratings are lower. All premium models (EB and GT) that have cooled seats don't work properly in 99% of cars produced, and I think that could be another contributor to the lower scores.

The PCV problem in the EB isn't insignificant. It was shown to happen even in some stock cars and it was widespread enough and important enough that Ford issued a TSB and re-engineered the part at least once. That is a fact. If the average Joe buys a brand new EcoBoost and it starts producing white smoke out of the exhaust within a year or two, you better believe they'll freak out. Overreaction or not, they'll be upset and things like that will show up in those CR surveys if they're widespread enough.

 

[Gigantor]

All you have to do is google "ecoboost blown engine" and you
will get myriads of threads on blown ecoboost engines.

I know econboost is the future, but maybe it's time for Ford to consider dropping the ecoboost in favor of a NA engine to obtain fuel efficiency. The Europeans been doing it for years. The Mustang GT gets up to 29 mpg with cruise control.

 

[Maggneto]

Here we go with the defensive EcoBoosters. I never said "all problems are ecoboost related" I just said that if CR doesn't separate the ratings between EB and GT that could be why the ratings are lower. All premium models (EB and GT) that have cooled seats don't work properly in 99% of cars produced, and I think that could be another contributor to the lower scores.

The PCV problem in the EB isn't insignificant. It was shown to happen even in some stock cars and it was widespread enough and important enough that Ford issued a TSB and re-engineered the part at least once. That is a fact. If the average Joe buys a brand new EcoBoost and it starts producing white smoke out of the exhaust within a year or two, you better believe they'll freak out. Overreaction or not, they'll be upset and things like that will show up in those CR surveys if they're widespread enough.

To even suggest that the Ecoboost modified engine failure is the cause of the low CR rating is nonsense. That is like saying all the GT's crashing leaving Cars and Coffee is the reason for the low CR rating.

The PCV is a TB, not a recall and is certainly not to blame for the low CR rating. It is not widespread and if you have some white smoke go to the Ford service center and they will replace it. Don't go playing backyard mechanic.

The EB is just as reliable as the V6 and the GT. Anyone who says otherwise is talking out of their backside. And don't give me this Defensive Ecobooster crap either. Don't say stupid shit and you won't get called out.

 

[Maggneto]

All you have to do is google "ecoboost blown engine" and you
will get myriads of threads on blown ecoboost engines.

I know econboost is the future, but maybe it's time for Ford to consider dropping the ecoboost in favor of a NA engine to obtain fuel efficiency. The Europeans been doing it for years. The Mustang GT gets up to 29 mpg with cruise control.

Ford builds how many Ecoboost engines a year? All this talk about reliability is your opinion and is not based on facts. There are 10 times the number of Ecoboost engines vs. 5.0 V8. Turbo is the future for this simple reason, Turbo charged engines are superior to normal aspirated engines, end of story.

Ford doesn't need to rethink its strategy to keep a small group of people happy.

Mar 17, 2015 | WAYNE, Mich.

Ford Marks Production Milestone As 5-Millionth EcoBoost-Equipped Vehicle Rolls Off Assembly Line

• Ford Focus 1.0-liter becomes 5-millionth EcoBoost®-equipped vehicle manufactured
• Ford now producing more than 200,000 EcoBoost engines per month worldwide
• Ford Fusion, Escape and F-150 are the best-selling turbocharged midsize car, utility and truck sold in the United States

WAYNE, Mich., March 17, 2015 – Ford has hit a new production milestone with its fuel-efficient EcoBoost® engine technology. Late last week, the 5-millionth vehicle with a Ford EcoBoost engine rolled off the assembly line at Michigan Assembly Plant in Wayne, Michigan.
It was just less than three years ago that Ford celebrated production of its 500,000th EcoBoost-equipped vehicle. Now, a Ford Focus equipped with 1.0-liter turbocharged engine represents the 5-millionth Ford EcoBoost engine produced.
EcoBoost was launched in 2009 on Ford Taurus SHO with the 3.5-liter EcoBoost V6. That year, 14,439 EcoBoost engines were manufactured.
In 2010, the first full year of EcoBoost production, 62,704 vehicles with the technology were built. The 2-millionth EcoBoost engine rolled off the line at Louisville in October 2013.
Production of the 5-millionth EcoBoost-equipped vehicle coincides with the first full year in which customers can choose EcoBoost-equipped engines on 100 percent of Ford’s passenger vehicles sold in the United States. The fuel-saving technology is now available in every region the company serves.
This most recent production milestone constitutes another step forward in the One Ford plan to drive innovation across the company’s global product portfolio, and continues to deliver on Ford’s commitment in its Blueprint for Sustainability.
Award-winning EcoBoost engine technology
The 1.0-liter three-cylinder EcoBoost is a multiple award-winning engine, earning Engine Technology International’s International Engine of the Year honors three years in a row. No other automaker has won the award three straight years. The 1.0-liter EcoBoost has also earned a Ward’s 10 Best Engines nod two years running.
Other members of Ford’s global EcoBoost family include the 1.5-liter, 1.6-liter, 2.0-liter and 2.3-liter four-cylinder engines, and the powerful 2.7-liter and 3.5-liter V6 engines.
Ford Focus, a model for EcoBoost adaptability, adoption
The new 2015 Ford Focus exemplifies the frugal yet rewarding choice EcoBoost engine technology provides new car shoppers. In its most efficient configuration, the 2015 Focus SFE with 1.0-liter EcoBoost engine returns EPA-estimated fuel economy of 42 mpg highway. The new Focus offers a remarkable combination of features in its class, including lane-keeping system, active park assist and standard rearview camera.
Focus ST, with its 252-horsepower 2.0-liter EcoBoost, has a top speed of 154 mph, yet still returns EPA-estimated fuel economy of 32 mpg highway.
Earlier this month, Ford debuted its newest EcoBoost overachiever at the 2015 Geneva Motor Show. The 2016 Ford Focus RS, a global all-wheel-drive performance car equipped with 2.3-liter EcoBoost engine technology, is projected to produce more than 315 horsepower from only four cylinders. This high-performance hatch promises thrilling performance and unbridled driving enjoyment for enthusiasts worldwide, including North American customers for the first time.
Production of Focus RS with 2.3-liter EcoBoost is planned to begin later this year.

 

[crs2879]

There is a fairly large used dealer near me that carries a number of "lemon law" cars (cars that were re-purchased by manufacturers, repaired & sold with branded titles". He generally has cars from nearly any manufacturer, I've even seen Lexus buy-backs on his lot. By far the most are Mercedes and BMW. I have wondered whether they are simply too complex, poorly manufactured or pickier owners than most due to the initial cost?

 

[Gigantor]

You can stay on the ecoboost fan club, but for me a NA will always be more consistent & reliable than hair dryers. Look at the HP numbers other manufacturers are putting out with NA engines.

Ford will have to address the blown head gaskets eventually. We will agree to disagree.

Let me disclose I had a F-150 ecoboost

 

[Bullitt]

To even suggest that the Ecoboost modified engine failure is the cause of the low CR rating is nonsense. That is like saying all the GT's crashing leaving Cars and Coffee is the reason for the low CR rating.

The PCV is a TB, not a recall and is certainly not to blame for the low CR rating. It is not widespread and if you have some white smoke go to the Ford service center and they will replace it. Don't go playing backyard mechanic.

The EB is just as reliable as the V6 and the GT. Anyone who says otherwise is talking out of their backside. And don't give me this Defensive Ecobooster crap either. Don't say stupid shit and you won't get called out.

Again, you're not understanding what I'm saying. Please read better if you want to have a constructive discussion. What I said is that EcoBoosts have issues that the GTs don't have. Primarily the PCV for the sake of this discussion although there are other issues like the incorrectly gapped spark plugs that I briefly alluded to. I already stated the PCV was a TSB, not a recall, so not sure why you're clarifying that...

You keep wanting to blame engine failures on mods when there have been many documented stock blown motors too. It's not that easy to dismiss. But hey, ignorance is bliss. I get it, the 2.3EB is the greatest thing since sliced bread. This is why I stay out of the EcoBoost subforum now and didn't bother making an "EcoBoost to GT" thread. So many super sensitive EcoBoost owners that don't want to acknowledge the issues in plain sight. Nice gif by the way, very mature.

Sponsored