Old guy Mustang questions.

[MrMike]

Getting ready to purchase my cross country sight seeing convertible used Mustang. Question 1 : does a GT really require 90+ octane? and realistically what highway mileage would one get at 80 mph? Questin 2: Since I can't locate GT with the options I want ( 401, active exhaust, safety stuff) would I regret settling for an Ecoboost?
Thanks!

You can cruise on regular no problem. I've always ran 91, 93, or 94.

It's going to vary from person to person, but IMO never settle on engine or transmission.

Just read more replies and saw you scored a Mustang with everything you wanted. Congrats, post pics.

Sponsored

 

[young at heart]

If you're asking about MPGs, a GT isn't for you. Get the Ecoboost, especially for cross country sight seeing convertible.

Yeah, this right here.

I’ve always wondered how many guys on the Ferrari forums post about MPGs. No, I’m not equating Mustangs with Ferraris but come on. If I’m worried enough to even think about it I’m getting something else.

 

[Ecto1]

I bought a used '15 Ecoboost ragtop a little over a year ago. I don't consider myself a mustang guy but the late model 'stang ragtops are one of the more practical touring cars available on a budget. I would have liked the fire breathing V8 but I didn't want to spend the add'l $$$$ for the V8. I liked the Ecoboost response when I initially drove the car. The performance, features, exterior colors, and off white seats are why I purchased the car I did. I've been very happy with it and it makes a GREAT touring car. Comfortable, roomy, adequate cargo room, stylish, and a blast to drive. The only downside is that the gas mileage isn't much better than the V8. Also you'll need to use premium gas in the Ecoboost. I was originally using 87 octane in the car after I bought it but it doesn't like it. I'm using 91 now and it's much happier. Food for thought.

However ... since I'm not a mustang guy I didn't expect to enjoy the car as much as I do. It really is a GREAT touring car. Much better than my old XK8 and much more practical than the C5 or C6 'vette ragtops. After owning the car for a little while I really do regret NOT buy the fire breathing V8. The 15+ 'stang V8s are 400+ HP. This is on par with the C5 & C6 'vettes. If you've ever driven the 'vette the acceleration is addictive. For me it is the only redeeming quality of the 'vettes. If you can afford the V8 'stang premium ragtop definitely put it at the top of your list. I think you'll enjoy the car more and you'll definitely get one of the better touring cars on the market today.

Happy shopping.

 

[young at heart]

I bought a used '15 Ecoboost ragtop a little over a year ago. I don't consider myself a mustang guy but the late model 'stang ragtops are one of the more practical touring cars available on a budget. I would have liked the fire breathing V8 but I didn't want to spend the add'l $$$$ for the V8. I liked the Ecoboost response when I initially drove the car. The performance, features, exterior colors, and off white seats are why I purchased the car I did. I've been very happy with it and it makes a GREAT touring car. Comfortable, roomy, adequate cargo room, stylish, and a blast to drive. The only downside is that the gas mileage isn't much better than the V8.

However ... since I'm not a mustang guy I didn't expect to enjoy the car as much as I do. It really is a GREAT touring car. Much better than my old XK8 and much more practical than the C5 or C6 'vette ragtops. After owning the car for a little while I really do regret NOT buy the fire breathing V8. The 15+ 'stang V8s are 400+ HP. This is on par with the C5 & C6 'vettes. If you've ever driven the 'vette the acceleration is addictive. For me it is the only redeeming quality of the 'vettes. If you can afford the V8 'stang premium ragtop definitely put it at the top of your list. I think you'll enjoy the car more and you'll definitely get one of the better touring cars on the market today.

Happy shopping.

Very well put on the touring car thing. That’s exactly how I see my ‘20 GT convertible premium.

And you’re so right about the addictive nature of the acceleration. Especially if like me you only roll with the top down in track mode. What a glorious soundtrack!

 

[Rob00GT]

It's all pretty much been covered here, but I will point out that fuel economy goes out the window with the top down. I average 19mpg and drive almost exclusively with the top down and, since this is my "fun" car, I do not drive it in an economical manner.

 

[Desmodeous]

There is only one solution. Turo an ecoboost for a weekend and a GT on another and see which one you like better. Then consider what your trip would look like with or without the $9,000 you would spend the GT. Your move.

 

[PoCoBob]

People really should not speak on what they don't know. A previous poster is correct cars knock all the time during normal use no matter (pump gas) the octane. You can literally hook up and datalog and watch it happen. The ECU will correct for it. Unless it gets so bad it no longer can. But that doesn't happen with a healthy engine and clean gas.

87 is PERFECTLY fine to run. Not optimal but just as safe as anything. Anyone trying to say otherwise is just trying to justify their neurotic habit of only filling 93.

So what is your message here? I'm not trying to call you out but what does perfectly fine but not optimal mean? Yes my owners manual says the car will run on 87 but 91 is recommended for maximum engine performance. I didn't buy this car so I could cheap out and use fuel that the engine has to detune itself in order to run properly. I doubt many others on the forum did either.

From about 6000 rpm+ there is a very noticeable difference in how hard the engine pulls using 91 over 87. I know most of us rarely rev the engine over that but when you do it's worth the extra few bucks per tank to feel all the car has in it.

In 2018 the compression jumped to 12:1. Prior to that maybe there wasn't a noticeable difference, or maybe in British Columbia it's just our crap gas. Either way it's not about our neurotic idea of using better than what the manufacture recommends, it's actually what the manufacture does recommend.

 

[Millarduck]

Don't get hung up on not having the Co-Pilot 360. I have a '20 GT, when it was offered as an option. Premiums come with back up sensors and blind spot monitoring. The whole purpose of the touring is to be engaged with the car and the road. My other cars have the safety systems, and that's fine for them as SUV's. For a GT and convertible, you are engaged at all times with driving. With the top down, I have rarely used the A/C, I don't have the top radio, and I don't take calls on the bluetooth. It's all engagement and enjoyment of the V-8.

 

[ShadesOfBloo]

2: Since I can't locate GT with the options I want ( 401, active exhaust, safety stuff) would I regret settling for an Ecoboost?
Thanks!

If your biggest demand is to go 80mph down the highway, a 2.3 EB can do that all day long.
Ford has sold much bigger vehicles with much weaker engines, and convinced people they were sporty.

I've rented an EcoBoost Mustang for a weekend and my problem was with the transmission, not the engine. A winding road in the Blue Ridge Mountains was not its happy place.
The engine had 350 lb-ft of torque at 3000rpm - Eclipsing the torque a Mustang GT had in the '90s - but that dumbass transmission was determined not to let me see 3000rpm.
That A10 kept shifting up and keeping the engine below 2000rpm, and it felt like it was in a constant bogged-down state. 6th gear, uphill, in a 35 zone was pretty ridiculous.
As soon as I overrode the computer with the paddle shifters, the engine had all the power it needed to pull uphill and pull out of corners and pass people going uphill.

...But if you're looking for active exhaust, you have certain expectations for the sound, don't you?

What stopped me from buying an EcoBoost was the sound. No matter what exhaust you put on it, at best the 2.3 EB sounds like a rally car. I don't like that sound, and decided I was overdue to own something with more than 4 cylinders, so I bought a GT.
(...with a stick, in case there was any doubt.)

 

[Balr14]

Don't get hung up on not having the Co-Pilot 360. I have a '20 GT, when it was offered as an option. Premiums come with back up sensors and blind spot monitoring. The whole purpose of the touring is to be engaged with the car and the road. My other cars have the safety systems, and that's fine for them as SUV's. For a GT and convertible, you are engaged at all times with driving. With the top down, I have rarely used the A/C, I don't have the top radio, and I don't take calls on the bluetooth. It's all engagement and enjoyment of the V-8.

Well said. If you need all that other crap, a convertible probably isn't for you.

 

[Mustang Enjoyer]

So what is your message here? I'm not trying to call you out but what does perfectly fine but not optimal mean? Yes my owners manual says the car will run on 87 but 91 is recommended for maximum engine performance. I didn't buy this car so I could cheap out and use fuel that the engine has to detune itself in order to run properly. I doubt many others on the forum did either.

From about 6000 rpm+ there is a very noticeable difference in how hard the engine pulls using 91 over 87. I know most of us rarely rev the engine over that but when you do it's worth the extra few bucks per tank to feel all the car has in it.

In 2018 the compression jumped to 12:1. Prior to that maybe there wasn't a noticeable difference, or maybe in British Columbia it's just our crap gas. Either way it's not about our neurotic idea of using better than what the manufacture recommends, it's actually what the manufacture does recommend.

My message is the car runs fine on any grade that's standard in the US. And you said it yourself "for maximum engine performance". It's an intentionally vague term written for your average person. Ford isn't going to give themselves the headache of putting out a mass production car that won't run without any issues with normal 87.

It's at best a 3-5hp difference. You won't feel it. It's really even within margin of error to test. Just think of how many non elitists out there are running 87 on these cars with 10s of thousands of miles or more now. You're average non enthusiast is going to never look at the manual. Is always going to put even low grade 87, and never think twice. Will run it at least 100k mi and likely never have an issue. Not to mention all the fleet mustangs.

It's your car, do what you feel honestly, and I will 93 too, but it's not nearly as big as a difference as some claim.

 

[ShadesOfBloo]

My only personal things that I dislike about the EB are the turbo lag and how the A10 downshifts in Sport+ mode.

In my (one weekend) experience with an EB I never noticed turbo lag.
It felt like all the lag could be blamed on software, starting with the transmission software.
I'd push the gas pedal all the way to the floor, and the computers would talk amongst themselves like "He doesn't really mean it, does he? Nahhh."

I feel a power surge when it downshifts while braking harder which feels unnatural. Maybe that's just me and I don't know how to drive an auto.

I forgot about that weird surge under hard braking! But now that you mention it, yeah it was weird.

 

[stannypack]

In my (one weekend) experience with an EB I never noticed turbo lag.
It felt like all the lag could be blamed on software, starting with the

did you have the 6mt? I also never experienced turbo lag with mine

 

[MAGS1]

Can I just ask when it became “elitist” to fill up with premium gas (93 here in Chicago)? There’s been a few comments about it now. Yeah, gas ain’t cheap but for the tiny gas tank they give us you’re talking about an extra $10-$15 at fill up? Hardly seems elite to me but maybe I’m missing something. Use 87, 91, 93, whatever moves you. Ford states in the manual it’s fine.

 

[ShadesOfBloo]

did you have the 6mt? I also never experienced turbo lag with mine

No, it was a rental car so it was an automatic.

Sponsored