EcoBoost vs. Pre-Coyote GT?

[MrBillton]

What are you comparing? Stock for stock, they are not the same speed in a straight line, feel free to Google that.

Also, see Terminator Cobra which falls under the 4.6 v8 to I4 comparison. I think what people are trying to compare is a stock NA 3v V8 to an ecoboost, and still, they aren't equal.

And actually a couple pages back before I got here, they were talking about modifying the v8 and the i4.

Sponsored

 

[Apwrx]

:frusty: comparing a stock gt the 4.6 that posts basically the same numbers as the Eco....which brought up the comparo. The newer v6 is right in that same ball park also and its na with 2 less cylinders. So know there are two less than v8s that'll match it.oh the horror...
Let it go bud it doesn't take away from how great one of those v8 cars is,the Ecos just pretty dang good.(also the v6)i won't get into what a just straight up tune on the eco would do. Again the s550 is a pretty dang good car no matter the motor.Its better than the Older car which makes sense,technology my friend.

 

[MrBillton]

a half second difference in their stock 1/4 mile times and 3-5mph is not basically the same man.

Technology? It's called a turbo, you know, like they've had in STIs and EVOs for like two decades, in the old SRT4 Neon, Eclipse GSX, and tons of others…People have been trying to argue your side for years pal…

And okay, so if you'll talk about modifying the eco-boost, then I'm happy to talk about modifying the 3v V8. You just don't want to acknowledge physics for some reason. I'll also once again state that thePill also said the 4.6 is faster too, feel free to take it up with him, Car and Driver, Motor Trend, physics text books, anyways you get the point.

:frusty: comparing a stock gt the 4.6 that posts basically the same numbers as the Eco....which brought up the comparo. The newer v6 is right in that same ball park also and its na with 2 less cylinders. So know there are two less than v8s that'll match it.oh the horror...
Let it go bud it doesn't take away from how great one of those v8 cars is,the Ecos just pretty dang good.(also the v6)i won't get into what a just straight up tune on the eco would do. Again the s550 is a pretty dang good car no matter the motor.Its better than the Older car which makes sense,technology my friend.

 

[15wile]

I know, several automotive editorials have shown us their performance times and yes stock for an eco-boost and 05-10 GT are similar but not equal (eco-boost runs about 14@98ish, NA 3v V8 runs about 13.5@100ish) and one has factory boost.

One requires forced induction to make the power, the other does not. One is making it's power easier. One can handily outdo the other with boost modification. I4 and 4.6L V8 are not equal in performance (see Terminator Cobra, 427r, s281, and physics text).

14@98? Lol. No, the Ecoboost runs 13.5-13.8 from the factory and is over 100mph in the traps, stock. Feel free to watch youtube vids of it at the drag strip, there are plenty. And I think some folks have posted their timeslips here, too. If someone is running it north of 14 consistently, they are grannying it. Whether or not it has factory boost is irrelevant to the original question. Stock vs stock, it's very close. It's totally a driver's race.

The Ecoboost responds very well to mild modification. Tune, exhaust, bolt-ons, etc... Major modification is a different animal. You can swap turbos and push it over 500hp, but that's the practical limit. After that you have to start messing with the internals, and that gets expensive. Better to buy a Coyote if that's your goal.

The 4.6 does have a higher mod ceiling, but some folks are happy with tune + bolt-ons, and in that the EB is easily comparable to the 4.6 (if not faster -- it responds REALLY well to a tune).

Though, naturally, the Termi is faster -- but then, the Termi hangs with the Coyotes. I'd love to have a Termi, honestly, but NOT as a daily driver.

Point is, unless you're going into major modification territory, the EB is just as fast, and in some circumstances, is faster.

I'm not sh*tting on the 4.6, either. It's a great motor, and there are times I wish Ford would resurrect it as a mid-range motor. But they won't. Emissions standards and CAFE standards are increasingly making the V8s a luxury proposition.

 

[15wile]

Because, we've known for years that larger displacement and more cylinders makes for a faster engine…

These types of threads are on every mustang forum out there, they're always started by ecoboost owners, and they all end up the same way…there were tons of them when the 3.7s first came out also.

Engines are not that simple, sir. Take an old 5.0 from the Fox Body days. Is it more powerful? No. Displacement and cylinder count do matter, but they are not the only variables. There is so much more that goes into them.

You're just quoting the old catchphrase "there's no replacement for displacement." But there is. Technology and Forced Induction. That's the whole point here. The 3.7L was a hair slower than the 4.6, when it came out. But it was very close. It was impressive that nearly a liter less displacement came that close. The 3.7L motor was a newer design and featured more technological enhancements. It still lacked in the torque department, though... something the EB corrects.

Boosted engines are going to become more commonplace in the future. Dumbass government regulation is rapidly turning NA V8s and even NA V6s into luxury buys. The everyman will probably be seeing a lot more boosted fours and boosted sixes in the future, because that's the alternative.

Hell, the Ford GT is coming out with a boosted six.

I'm kind of sad about this, honestly. I'd prefer a cheap, bargain V8 over this turbo-4. If Ford offered the 4.6 as the mid range motor alongside the EB, I'd buy the 4.6. Not because it's faster, but because I am exhausted of irritating guys who are supposedly Mustang fans crapping all over the car because of cylinder count.

That, and I'd have the option of slapping a supercharger on it if I wanted to be a lunatic with my money down the road.

But Ford doesn't give us that option. Blame the government (and not just the American one). As far as a substitute goes, the EB is damn nice, and is pretty comparable in every metric except sound. And it IS posting about the same times.

 

[15wile]

Like I said, if someone bought the ecoboost as speed for their first priority then they're morons. Build the engine, upgrade the turbo and you're at what a mild bolt-on 5.0 does for more the price.

I'm not bashing the eco but speed should not be why people buy this car. Should be for a happy medium of looks, comfort, and enough pep for be a fun daily and most importantly the great gas.

I'd agree, but add that some folks (myself included) prefer to buy new anyway. And as a new car, there's nothing in the EB's price range that's faster, at the moment. Got mine for 23k + government fees/taxes (though it's a stripped base).

What else do you get for that money? A BRZ? A Civic Si? Lolz. The EB Mustang stomps them all.

The EB Mustang is a happy medium of price, looks, comfort, handling, fuel economy, and speed. It doesn't win in *ANY* of those categories at an absolute level, but it's very good in every one of them. As far as I'm concerned, it's the best non-V8 Mustang since the SVO.

 

[Apwrx]

a half second difference in their stock 1/4 mile times and 3-5mph is not basically the same man.

Technology? It's called a turbo, you know, like they've had in STIs and EVOs for like two decades, in the old SRT4 Neon, Eclipse GSX, and tons of others…People have been trying to argue your side for years pal…

And okay, so if you'll talk about modifying the eco-boost, then I'm happy to talk about modifying the 3v V8. You just don't want to acknowledge physics for some reason. I'll also once again state that thePill also said the 4.6 is faster too, feel free to take it up with him, Car and Driver, Motor Trend, physics text books, anyways you get the point.

:lol:somebody's panties are in a bunch. Dysto posted the basics already so ill refer you there...pal:lol:"the pill said"oh boy you're a riot.Anyhow Go enjoy your v8 and quit crying about something matching or being faster.

 

[thehunterooo]

Thank god this thread is back up and running. How are most people on here haters?

 

[15wile]

Thank god this thread is back up and running. How are most people on here haters?

No idea why there are haters. This is a pretty entertaining match up.

 

[MrBillton]

My point in saying thePill brought this up is that I'm far from the first person to tell you this but you chose to ignore it.

How are my panties in a bunch exactly? I have two mustangs a 4.6 and a Roadrunner 5.0, so I'm just fine dude.

You guys weight single 1/4 mile times with way too much weight…there are too many factors such as ambient temp, driver skill, drivers weight, wind resistance, prepped track vs not, etc. to take one run on it's own But if you look at the general bunch of times and take the mean the ecoboost is generally trapping around 98-99, AM did this test, Car and Driver, Motor Trend, and more, I'm happy to provide links if needed.

:lol:somebody's panties are in a bunch. Dysto posted the basics already so ill refer you there...pal:lol:"the pill said"oh boy you're a riot.Anyhow Go enjoy your v8 and quit crying about something matching or being faster.

Dude, I don't disagree with any of your points here…I already admitted they are pretty similar in basic straight line perf. metrics, but generally speaking, it seems the NA 3v V8s seem to be a bit higher, however like you said, they're damn near the same. But, the V8 has higher performance potential and that's the end of it.

It already has a turbo, so yeah you can tune it up and make some great gains, or keep going and watch the motor go pop but what's that prove. I'll say it again, the turbo Honda and Subaru guys have been trying to say they're just as fast/faster than the 4.6 Mustangs, were they right too all this time?

If both motors see the same boost pressure, they do not have the same performance so that should tell you that the motors are not equals. From a straight racing perspective, yes a stock 3v GT and ecoboost stang will make for some very entertaining races. I'm not trying to diss on the EB4 either man, it's a great car in so many ways, and probably Ford's best move for the Mustang brand since going with a retro look in '05!

14@98? Lol. No, the Ecoboost runs 13.5-13.8 from the factory and is over 100mph in the traps, stock. Feel free to watch youtube vids of it at the drag strip, there are plenty. And I think some folks have posted their timeslips here, too. If someone is running it north of 14 consistently, they are grannying it. Whether or not it has factory boost is irrelevant to the original question. Stock vs stock, it's very close. It's totally a driver's race.

The Ecoboost responds very well to mild modification. Tune, exhaust, bolt-ons, etc... Major modification is a different animal. You can swap turbos and push it over 500hp, but that's the practical limit. After that you have to start messing with the internals, and that gets expensive. Better to buy a Coyote if that's your goal.

The 4.6 does have a higher mod ceiling, but some folks are happy with tune + bolt-ons, and in that the EB is easily comparable to the 4.6 (if not faster -- it responds REALLY well to a tune).

Though, naturally, the Termi is faster -- but then, the Termi hangs with the Coyotes. I'd love to have a Termi, honestly, but NOT as a daily driver.

Point is, unless you're going into major modification territory, the EB is just as fast, and in some circumstances, is faster.

I'm not sh*tting on the 4.6, either. It's a great motor, and there are times I wish Ford would resurrect it as a mid-range motor. But they won't. Emissions standards and CAFE standards are increasingly making the V8s a luxury proposition.

 

[MrBillton]

an '07-09 Shelby GT500 has similar 1/4 mile time and trap speed as a coyote GT, but i wouldn't really compare them…

Dysto, i also agree with your point regarding engine tech advancing…I just don't think that's happened enough from the s197 3v to the eb4, dating back the fox body, yes, thats 30 years old at this point though. once again, it's a great car in so many ways, it just doesn't have the straight line performance as the 3v v8, generally speaking.

 

[15wile]

Dude, I don't disagree with any of your points here…I already admitted they are pretty similar in basic straight line perf. metrics, but generally speaking, it seems the NA 3v V8s seem to be a bit higher, however like you said, they're damn near the same. But, the V8 has higher performance potential and that's the end of it.

It already has a turbo, so yeah you can tune it up and make some great gains, or keep going and watch the motor go pop but what's that prove. I'll say it again, the turbo Honda and Subaru guys have been trying to say they're just as fast/faster than the 4.6 Mustangs, were they right too all this time?

If both motors see the same boost pressure, they do not have the same performance so that should tell you that the motors are not equals. From a straight racing perspective, yes a stock 3v GT and ecoboost stang will make for some very entertaining races. I'm not trying to diss on the EB4 either man, it's a great car in so many ways, and probably Ford's best move for the Mustang brand since going with a retro look in '05!

See, I disagree there. A motor that runs high boost from the factory is built to handle it. You couldn't just run 20PSI+ on a 4.6L without doing some other work. If I recall, the procharger system runs only 8-10. The Ecoboost comes from the factory ready to handle higher boost.

But I don't regard a boosted motor as somehow inferior to larger NA engine. As with all things, how you rate the motor depends on what you want to do with it.

If you're like me, and you're a tune + bolt-on guy, and don't poke around with the internals, the Ecoboost is likely a better bet. If you're going to really build up the motor, mess around with the internals, etc... then sure, the 4.6L is a better base for that (though if you had the money, I'd steer you to the Coyote 5.0, nowadays). Stock, it pretty much doesn't matter, except 4 cylinders don't sound as good as a V8, but they save you some gas money though. So, still something of a wash in the end.

As I mentioned, I beat a stock 4.6L 05-09 car off the light, back when I was still stock. It was close, and I think he was a manual (I'm in an automatic, so that may help). And in different conditions, maybe he'd have won. But the point is, it's so close, it's a driver's game. Which pretty much concludes this thread and the OP's original question.

 

[MichelBee]

As I mentioned, I beat a stock 4.6L 05-09 car off the light, back when I was still stock. It was close, and I think he was a manual (I'm in an automatic, so that may help). And in different conditions, maybe he'd have won. But the point is, it's so close, it's a driver's game. Which pretty much concludes this thread and the OP's original question.

Can't argue with that.

 

[Whiskey11]

The 4.6 is going to be better in a straight-line.


If you are into Solo or AutoX, you can't beat the EBPP right now. Maybe the 2016 Miata will be a better Solo bang for the buck. Right now, you can't beat the EB and EBPP in Solo/X.

They are becoming Coyote and Boss 302 competitive in FS.

What?

I'd take a 3V over the Ecoboost any day of the week for autocross. The RPM range most used in autocross is where the Ecoboost motor is weakest (4000-7000) and a thrust analysis based on the torque curves and gearing show the Ecoboost to be slower than a 3V there. Weight difference is still pretty substantial... an 05-06 Base GT will come in around 3350lbs, possibly less depending on fuel level. You are looking at upper 3400's to low 3500's in an EB Mustang. About the only advantage they have is a better weight distribution but really the EB wont be useful until Street Prepared for Solo because of the weight disadvantage and the fact it doesn't really make much more power than a 3V.

As someone who has dabbled in 3V power levels in stock, and street touring, I can tell you that the absence of the 120 hp from the 4.6L to 5.0L is substantial. The Coyote has a clear advantage, even on street tires, between elements in an autocross course that are remotely close to straight and it is substantial. I was getting raw timed by F-Street 5.0L's at Spring Nationals this past weekend and had been in the past at other events. It isn't driving related, I put someone with considerable talent in my car and we ran similar times (I was actually a few tenths quicker on the practice course) and both he and his co-driver said the same thing: Car handles great, but it needs more power and is giving up A LOT on course.

As for the Ecoboost? I test drove a Premium EB w/ PP and while you could tell the car was more agile than the GT/PP I also drove, the engine was underwhelming. I'm sure a tune that ups the boost would be a huge benefit but isn't Solo legal to tweak boost directly until E-Street Prepared. A tune is legal in Street Touring but the boost tables can't be altered at all. Turboed cars get the shaft in ST.

 

[Macfarland]

Just for sound the 4.6 wins. I don't care if an Ecoboost catches me. Just the fact that he is listening to a fake sound and turbo whistle and I'm listening to a true V8 growl, I win!!

Sponsored