Ecoboost loses 13% power on 87 octane [Updated with Ford training materials]

[jholtz]

As one of my crazy college professors once put it....."Horsepower gets you to the end of the straight.....Torque gets you up outta da hole!" True story....

I'm pretty sure nobody ordering a 2.3 is trying to break land speed records with it....from what we have ALL read, the engine runs out of steam after 5K. Gimme all that torque down low where I can use it everyday. 13% drop in HP? Big whoop. Throw a tune at it for a couple hundred and you won't be worried about it anymore.

On the street or as a a daily driver, its all about the torque. If you want to race the car, horsepower matters. Even then, the differences are only above 5K RPM which makes it pretty much irrelevant for a daily driver. :shrug:

Jim

Sponsored

 

[69mach1-395]

I prefer being boosted for a DD since I live at 5k feet and a NA would lose 15% up here.

 

[phil1336]

I prefer being boosted for a DD since I live at 5k feet and a NA would lose 15% up here.

Here in Florida we are barely a few feet above sea level so a NA engine works fine.

 

[Sixer]

the EcoBoost is a bit of an odd ball, a Mustang body with a 'foreign' engine dropped in it.
unfortunately the way Ford are selling the convertibles, the EB costs more than I'm prepared to spend.
but I'm more surprised that the mpg isn't higher. I was expecting owners to be reporting 30+ mpg and
most are nowhere near that.
at first I was cost concious, having a small fixed income and thought the EB would be the smart choice
for mpg economy, but not now.
I feel the EB is a let down because of the poor or perhaps I should say lower than expected mpg, and,
the loss of turbo power. it makes the car a bit of a 'what's the point of it ?' imo.
fair enough, it's a first generation EB Mustang.
what's interesting is if a V6 EB were introduced to the Mustang line, if it came with a turbo, or option
for turbo, how would that perform. would it be the end of the current V6 and V8 engines ?

 

[phil1336]

Sixer: I think you see the future for Mustang down the road. In the mean time, if you want a Convertible and not stuck on getting Leather Interior, the Base V6 Convertible with the 051A Package gives you the best combination of "bang for your buck" as long as your not concerned about being tagged as driving a fleet rental car. 32K versus 37K and no loss of HP or Torque using 87 Octane Regular Fuel and similar fuel economy, duh?

 

[jholtz]

the EcoBoost is a bit of an odd ball, a Mustang body with a 'foreign' engine dropped in it.

Foreign engine? Can you elaborate?

Gas mileage is very, very dependent on the driver, temperature and road conditions. What are your expectations?

Jim

 

[wireless]

the EcoBoost is a bit of an odd ball, a Mustang body with a 'foreign' engine dropped in it.
unfortunately the way Ford are selling the convertibles, the EB costs more than I'm prepared to spend.
but I'm more surprised that the mpg isn't higher. I was expecting owners to be reporting 30+ mpg and
most are nowhere near that.
at first I was cost concious, having a small fixed income and thought the EB would be the smart choice
for mpg economy, but not now.
I feel the EB is a let down because of the poor or perhaps I should say lower than expected mpg, and,
the loss of turbo power. it makes the car a bit of a 'what's the point of it ?' imo.
fair enough, it's a first generation EB Mustang.
what's interesting is if a V6 EB were introduced to the Mustang line, if it came with a turbo, or option
for turbo, how would that perform. would it be the end of the current V6 and V8 engines ?

I don't see quite a few of the points you make. First off, it's not a "foreign" engine, unless you mean not a V6 or V8. It's a brand new engine with a much better power curve than the V6, unless you like spending 99% of your time above 5500rpm's. The V6 needs some 3.55's to have a similar feel around town than the 4cyl, since the 4cyl has so much low end power/torque.

The Ecoboost is not the smart choice if you don't want to modify your vehicle & are cost conscious and don't need features. My MPG is very good in my Ecoboost. I'm getting ~300 miles per tank with quite a bit of WOT action. It costs me less than $30 to fill up. I get over 30mpg easy if I'm on the highway, and my average around town is still around ~24mpg.

Regarding your post about the "loss of power" -- your point is? This isn't anything new, and if you expected the car to have similar power on 87 compared to 91/93 then you have wishful thinking, that's almost never the case. Any sort of "lack of power" is also easily remedied just by putting in 91 or 93 in the tank. If you're feeling cost conscious, just run 87 octane. You can view it that way -- normally, my car has 275hp... but if I want to bump it up by 30hp, I just put in better fuel!

 

[Herr_Poopschitz]

:dnftt:

 

[Anvil3]

For me ....the EB is not out of the question yet....IF ford offers a dealer upgrade tune that will produce 350-375 hp for under $600 and it remains under full factory warranty.....then it's a no brainer imo....ford should do it as a new model...mustang 350. It still bothers me to this day though on hot muggy days looking at the boost gauge and wondering why I'm not getting full boost while the car feels tired.

Ford Racing has already announced there will be a factory tune. They're (or their parter Mountune) is working on it and no numbers have been announced. They did reference gains up to 90 ft. lbs. of torque for the Focus ST, so make of that what you will. Announced pricing is $595 for the ProCal handset with tune(s).

The down side is that it won't be available until closer to the end of the year.

I think you can safely assume something like 25+ HP and a sh@#tload of torque.

There are already several good tuning options available but I, like you, would not want to jeopardize my warranty. The car is plenty fast enough for my driving as it is.

 

[Merle]

I don't see quite a few of the points you make. First off, it's not a "foreign" engine, unless you mean not a V6 or V8. It's a brand new engine with a much better power curve than the V6, unless you like spending 99% of your time above 5500rpm's. The V6 needs some 3.55's to have a similar feel around town than the 4cyl, since the 4cyl has so much low end power/torque.

The Ecoboost is not the smart choice if you don't want to modify your vehicle & are cost conscious and don't need features. My MPG is very good in my Ecoboost. I'm getting ~300 miles per tank with quite a bit of WOT action. It costs me less than $30 to fill up. I get over 30mpg easy if I'm on the highway, and my average around town is still around ~24mpg.

Regarding your post about the "loss of power" -- your point is? This isn't anything new, and if you expected the car to have similar power on 87 compared to 91/93 then you have wishful thinking, that's almost never the case. Any sort of "lack of power" is also easily remedied just by putting in 91 or 93 in the tank. If you're feeling cost conscious, just run 87 octane. You can view it that way -- normally, my car has 275hp... but if I want to bump it up by 30hp, I just put in better fuel!

Wireless! I made my last trip to Dallas and back December 22-23 arriving
6AM IN THAT THUNDER STORM that was going on. I departed Dallas this
same Day the 23. I drove all monday night (10 hours) to Dallas left I635
and I30 at 1:30pm Back To Paris arriving (10 Hours) later. Total Miles 1216.
It is 75MPH from Texarkana To Dallas And ofcourse the same back to
Texarkana. 2 X 177 miles =354 Miles @ 76MPH on My Speedo. I used
38 Gallons. 1216 divided by 38 =32MPG THIS IS 4500 to 5700 MILES
ON MY ODOMETER. STILL ON THE ORIGINAL BLEND OIL FROM THE FACTORY. NOW this same run in my 2013 V6 Mobil 1 5W20 would have
been 33 PLUS. WITH KICKING IT EVER NOW AN THEN TO GET AWAY FROM
A TRUCK THAT WOULD BE PUSHING ME IN A PASS. AND THE TIMES I DID
KICK TO STAY CLOSE TO THE CAR I FOLLOW DOWNTOWN FROM Addison
on 635 and 35. THIS IS ON 87 FUEL I never put in anything but 87 in the
13 I had for 30,000 miles and the same for my 14 NOW! I SET MILES to 0
and do not change untill I arrive home. Sooooo THIS IS GREAT MPG. I will
be changing Oil the firs time at about 6000 miles. 47% of oil life is on the
computer. I think 5000 to 6000 or 4 to 5 months which ever comes first
is fine. THIS IS A STOCK 2014 3.7 AUTO Trans WITH Michelin P215/65R17
All Season Tires @ 35PPI. I must drive again to Dallas Feb. 2, 2015.

 

[Sixer]

phil1336: I can get leather for C$1,200 .

jholtz: 'foreign' in the sense of not Mustang pedigree, a newcomer.
mpg: well over 30 regardless of the variables you mention.

wireless: " I'm getting ~300 miles per tank " / 15.5 gallon gas tank capacity = 19.35 mpg ???

 

[Tamadrummer88]

phil1336: I can get leather for C$1,200 .

jholtz: 'foreign' in the sense of not Mustang pedigree, a newcomer.
mpg: well over 30 regardless of the variables you mention.

wireless: " I'm getting ~300 miles per tank " / 15.5 gallon gas tank capacity = 19.35 mpg ???

You do realize that ford has been putting 4 cylinder turbo motors in the Mustang before right? And they have been using 4 cylinders in mustangs during the Fox Body days. Remember the SVO? Just because its "not a V8" Doesnt mean its not of Mustang pedigree. The early Mustangs came with inline 6's, are those not of Pedigree? Furthermore, what is "of Mustang pedigree?"

 

[wireless]

phil1336: I can get leather for C$1,200 .

jholtz: 'foreign' in the sense of not Mustang pedigree, a newcomer.
mpg: well over 30 regardless of the variables you mention.

wireless: " I'm getting ~300 miles per tank " / 15.5 gallon gas tank capacity = 19.35 mpg ???

I also have put nearly 2,000 very hard miles on my car

also, hand calculating it the average has been around ~22.5mpg. Once again, I consistently drive like a bat out of hell lol

Honestly, the gas in this car is nice. It's not great considering how I drive, but if I sit and cruise I get fantastic mileage. I took a ~200 mile round trip trip the other day and I didn't even use half of a tank. My average that tank was around 27mpg since the other half was city driving.

 

[smidra]

Can anyone advice about the European mustang's performance? Our (Czech Republic) regular fuel is 95 octane with premiums being either 98 or 100 Octanes.
Will ford just tune the engine so it delivers the 314HP avertised on the 95 octane fuel? Does anyone have a qualified guess what (if anything) could be expected from the 100 octanes fuel?

 

[Max57]

You do realize that ford has been putting 4 cylinder turbo motors in the Mustang before right? And they have been using 4 cylinders in mustangs during the Fox Body days. Remember the SVO? Just because its "not a V8" Doesnt mean its not of Mustang pedigree. The early Mustangs came with inline 6's, are those not of Pedigree? Furthermore, what is "of Mustang pedigree?"

My 65 Mustang was an inline 6 with a three speed stick. I had that car in the late 60s and used it every day back & forth to work. It never let me down!

Sponsored