No Fun Package Name for the 2015 Ford Mustang EcoBoost

It's official now:

I had a chance to speak with Ford Motor Company Global Communications Manager Alan Hall and I asked him if the 2015 Ford Mustang if the EcoBoost engine would be part of a specially named package such as the 2015 Mustang SVO or the 2015 Mustang EcoBoost. He explained to me that those Mustangs fitted with the powerful EcoBoost engine will not carry any special name or trimline. The EcoBoost will be offered as an option in the 2015 Mustang over the standard V6, but much in the same way that the base model Mustang isn’t called the Mustang V6 – Ford won’t officially call appropriately equipped models the Mustang EcoBoost for marketing or sales purposes. Buyers will most likely refer to their S550 as an EcoBoost Mustang or a Mustang EcoBoost to point out that it has that high tech mill, but there isn’t going to be a special package or trimline that includes the new EcoBoost engine.

This is an interesting choice by Ford Motor Company to introduce the new 2.3L EcoBoost as simply an optional engine for the base model 2015 Mustang. It would seem to me that Ford is missing out on an opportunity to call on a popular old school name for marketing purposes, but I'm no marketing expert. This really won’t have any negative impact on the next generation Mustang, but it will most certainly bum out some SVO fans who were hoping to see a reincarnation of the classic turbo-4 trimline.

Click to expand...

http://www.torquenews.com/106/no-fun-package-name-2015-ford-mustang-ecoboost#sthash.By2Cs39o.dpuf

My guess is that nameplate will be reserved for a more exclusive variant of the EB4 Mustang down the road.

I foresee lots of aftermarket badges being made. And someone will have "ECOBOOST" across their windshield. :shudder:

well...
twin (scroll) Turbo should Sound a Little nicer
and please forgive me this Quote from a different muscle-car Forum which could be used be eco boost owners

if it is not blown, it sucks ;-)

Not at all - there is no way this should be named an SVO. The SVO nameplate was on the most sophisticated, best handling, and performing Mustang of those years. To put it on anything else would be a historical mistake.
There aren't any original SVO owners who would want to see the SVO nameplate reappear. I'm an original owner, and I certainly don't want to see it.
That said, the EcoBoost 2.3 is a fine car, it will be flexible and fun to drive. It makes a lot of sense for a lot of people, and I think it will be very popular. And it will make a lot of sense as an export model too because of the taxes and registration costs for cars in certain other countries - there was one heckuva post about that in this forum several months ago and the expenses of owning a car - based on engine size or CO2 emissions - was astounding. That's why there will be only a handful of Coyote powered Mustangs exported.

yeah
tax is based on co2 emissions and gas is 1,60 euro per litre right now, that is about 2,25 us$ per litre or about 8 us$ per gallon
still love my HEMI 300C and still want the Coyote powered s550

S550Boss said:

Not at all - there is no way this should be named an SVO. The SVO nameplate was on the most sophisticated, best handling, and performing Mustang of those years. To put it on anything else would be a historical mistake.
There aren't any original SVO owners who would want to see the SVO nameplate reappear. I'm an original owner, and I certainly don't want to see it.
That said, the EcoBoost 2.3 is a fine car, it will be flexible and fun to drive. It makes a lot of sense for a lot of people, and I think it will be very popular. And it will make a lot of sense as an export model too because of the taxes and registration costs for cars in certain other countries - there was one heckuva post about that in this forum several months ago and the expenses of owning a car - based on engine size or CO2 emissions - was astounding. That's why there will be only a handful of Coyote powered Mustangs exported.

Click to expand...

For $9.99 plus shipping, you can make your 2015 I4 into an SVO. I can even get you some floormats window stickers, etc, etc... okay that was a joke, but this will happen I'm sure....

http://www.latemodelrestoration.com/item/LRS-42528F/Chrome-Svo-Emblem-Badge

From the link above:
"The SVO Mustang was one of the first "european tuner cars."

S550Boss said:

Not at all - there is no way this should be named an SVO. The SVO nameplate was on the most sophisticated, best handling, and performing Mustang of those years. To put it on anything else would be a historical mistake.
There aren't any original SVO owners who would want to see the SVO nameplate reappear. I'm an original owner, and I certainly don't want to see it.

Click to expand...

While I completely agree that the new mass production EB Mustang should not be given the SVO nameplate, I don't see any issue whatsoever with eventually putting it on a souped up, more exclusive variant... something that deserves it.

By your logic, Ford never should have recycled ANY of the previous names (Boss, Shelby, Mach, etc.), as those vehicles were all pretty much at the pinnacle of their respective breeds at the time they were originally introduced as well.

I get that people want to maintain exclusivity for whatever they buy -- not just cars. But it's not like the SVO was such an incredible car that no other Mustang will ever be worthy of its nameplate again. Was it a great car? Absolutely! Was it such a monumental achievement in automotive history that its brand should be retired forever? Nope, not IMO.

As long as they create successors that are worthy of their heritage, I'm cool with them recycling nameplates all they want. Now as to what makes a successor worthy is certainly debatable, and quite subjective, and I don't expect it will be particularly easy to come to an agreement on that.

Not at all:
Ford said repeatedly when they introduced the new 2012 Boss that they would not reuse the name until it was worthy. And it was worthy, exceeding the original Boss 302 in every way except collectability. And it did so without the broken pistons of the original, and with a far more thorough rework of the base car than Ford did with the original Boss. Arguably, the original Boss 302 wasn't that extensive an engineering job, and a year later GM flattened it with the handling prowess of the new 70.5 Z28 and Trans Am (where Herb Adams in particular did far more suspension tuning for the Trans-Am than Ford had ever done for the Mustang). Sorry for the stark story here, but Ford then walked away, gave up, and put the wrong product on the market twice in a row.
The Mach was originally little more than a trim package... not much there, most were automatic cruisers, but with huge collectability today (my own goal is to add a dark red '70 Mach to my collection). The more recent Mach was extensive, with a unique engine (albeit shared with the Marauder and Aviator), unique suspension tuning, appearance, seats. Ford put some good work into it but I don't see any collectability there.
The latest Shelby stands on it's own merits, especially since only a few of the originals could stand on theirs as a serious track package, and the later years were simply luxo cruisers (old 'shel collecting his licensing fees while contributing nothing to the package: history repeats itself). So the latest Shelby has done well, too and with it's extensive options it spans performance and the full range of options.

But an EcoBoost 2.3 "SVO" cannot repeat what it originally set out to do, or what it did indeed accomplish. It was literally developed in two years of 24-hour showroom stock endurance racing, it was the first modern Mustang designed as a complete car with extensive work across multiple areas (suspension, engine, seating, braking even the shifter and pedals - all in a single and thoroughly integrated package), it made the same years of GT handling dynamics look pathetic (and it was, I owned one of both and hated the lousy GT), it out-ran the GT.
But as a legacy it also set the standard in two important ways in later years:
- First as an example of how Ford dealers didn't know how to sell specialized-audience products. The recognition of that as a systemic failure soon led Ford to perform considerably more dealer sales training for specialized products such as the SC and SHO. And many years later, when there was still an actual real SVT organization, to extensive training and certifications (all gone now, absorbed into the regular process - although in reality most of the attendees at offsite events weren't the designated SVT sales reps but the owners of the dealers. The majority of training was done via Ford's live training system, and via video tape - of which I have several). Ford learned from all of this and has improved enormously.
- Second as an example of how many times Ford set plans in place, only to cancel them due to cost or lethargy (the SVO's planned DOHC engine and IRS, then later the planned and cancelled MN12 and DEW98-based Mustangs, and 10 years ago the S197 IRS and aluminum-engine Cobra 5.4 as well as the DOHC 7L big-block). Ford appears to have finally learned from all of this (across many of the car lines.. maybe not Lincoln). The S550 was on solid budget ground and it's a solid piece of work (with reservations noted in other threads, and concern about it not being a shared platform).

The EcoBoost 2.3 isn't aimed at the same market as the SVO was... it's designed for people that want a more spirited driving experience than the otherwise excellent V-6. The Focus ST is too hardcore or kidstuff, not sleek enough, and the V-8 Mustang is too excessive. This will be an unique product in the Mustang lineup - there is nothing like the feeling of boost.... and the immediate torque is more gratifying to the owners as well as the mileage.
And it's also aimed at export markets, where it will admittedly be on the large size in the body and engine size (two factors that will drive the overall parameters of the next Mustang). The product isn't 100% optimum for most of those markets, and it's an experiment of sorts.
It will be interesting to see the sales stats for how the EcoBoost 2.3 Mustangs are configured - how loaded with options they are, the percentage of PP takers, the transmission choices. I'd like to see those stats for all the worldwide markets, although they will almost certainly never be released. Also interesting is why the Camaro chief puffed up his chest and said the Camaro would "never" offer a 4-cylinder engine (a huge mistake and a limiting factor, IMHO), and what other competitors will offer in this same "eco-sport" vein (upcoming refreshed Genesis and the upcoming forced induction 4-cylinder Z) - not that either of those cars has much volume.

S550Boss said:

Not at all - there is no way this should be named an SVO. The SVO nameplate was on the most sophisticated, best handling, and performing Mustang of those years. To put it on anything else would be a historical mistake.
There aren't any original SVO owners who would want to see the SVO nameplate reappear. I'm an original owner, and I certainly don't want to see it.
That said, the EcoBoost 2.3 is a fine car, it will be flexible and fun to drive. It makes a lot of sense for a lot of people, and I think it will be very popular. And it will make a lot of sense as an export model too because of the taxes and registration costs for cars in certain other countries - there was one heckuva post about that in this forum several months ago and the expenses of owning a car - based on engine size or CO2 emissions - was astounding. That's why there will be only a handful of Coyote powered Mustangs exported.

Click to expand...

Original SVO Owner - would have been happy to see it come back. right now the poll is 50% for SVO coming back from original owners

It wouldn't be the first time that a nameplate has changed with the times would it? In 50 years it's not just the Mustang itself that has changed but the spirit and identity of the Mustang spinoff variants have changed also. Sure SVO was a powerhouse in the Fox days but V8s were not what they are today. A 4 cylinder really can not dream of surpassing the Coyote in performance.

Point being, the spirit of the SVO can live on even if it is not positioned the same way as its 'heritage' - with a EB+PP it would be no slouch!

I agree with J.W., this Ecoboost Mustang and the SVO were aimed at different crowds. Keep in mind, this EB Mustang will eventually replace the BASE V6. That's the key word... BASE. Do you really want everyone driving that nameplate around? If anything, and if another model is needed, I would prefer a new Mustang SVT. It would still carry some of the SVO heritage and be targeted for that specific crowd as the original. The SVO's would be a one of a kind and era correct, the SVT would continue the tradition but evolved. The Base Mustang is simply called Mustang... That is what it should be for the lowest entry fee. SVO would also throw off the streamlined and scaling Mustang, GT, GT350 and GT500 naming scheme.

Mustang SVT would fit though...

Hmmm I think I said this months ago.

SVO has no reverence anymore--that team was disbanded and replaced with SVT--and we have SVT Mustangs. The SVO was a bit of a sales failure for all the folks bowing down to the cars.

What if they took the EB with PP and made that the new SVO/SVT? I like the heritage aspect of things and a turbo 2.3L (twin screw, in this case) along with the performance pack kind of lends itself to that heritage IMO.