2015 Mustang EPA DATA!!!! for most models.... UPDATE 2 ALL MODELS

[Seabee1973]

Still depends on the driver... it could flip or flop either way good and bad....auto or manual...but knowing your shifting on a manual can exceed tested mpg... there is not much room for the autos (full auto) versus shifted auto which has no "real" coasting/neutral like manuals

Sponsored

 

[souprmage]

I like the range for 'sub-compact' is 15 to 119 mpg. They should also report the median, that would be more informative. Although based on the savings/cost numbers, the average is 24mpg

Also that 1mpg = $500 per 5 years, or $100 a year.

Now I'm really curious where the V8 numbers go. Seems like not that much of a fuel savings to me. I guess that makes me happy since the only reason I was considering an EB was the economy of it.

 

[e30og]

I think V6 mileage will be on par with the EB given with actual world driving and these numbers, just like EVERY manufacturer EPA number (especially Ford), is derived from tuning made specially for the EPA cycle test.

Im sure you can meet or exceed these numbers if the car is broken in and you drive like a grandma

 

[Spartan]

I don't get where you guys are getting better highway mileage for the Auto in the mustang. They are the same transmissions as last year and the Manual (V8) didn't better on the highway. So don't get your hopes up. Although for some reason it's different on the V6 vs the V8 although they are the same transmissions. The v6 did get better on the highway w/ the auto :shrug:

We'll see. But it's a whole new car. I know the weight went up but they are also waiting till the last possible minute for these things so maybe they are making minor mods, tunes, etc to make sure its the same or better.

 

[Tony Alonso]

We'll see. But it's a whole new car. I know the weight went up but they are also waiting till the last possible minute for these things so maybe they are making minor mods, tunes, etc to make sure its the same or better.

Since production started Monday, it seems kind of late to tweak at this point :-)

 

[aardvark]

Decent numbers for the EB...

But allow me an 'I told ya so' regarding some forum optimists' claims that 40 mpg highway was realistic for the EB.

 

[Spartan]

Since production started Monday, it seems kind of late to tweak at this point :-)

Well obviously. I was saying that since the mileage was last to be released I'm sure it's one of the things they were trying to ring as much out of the car as they could before sign off for production.

 

[Spartan]

Decent numbers for the EB...

But allow me an 'I told ya so' regarding some forum optimists' claims that 40 mpg highway was realistic for the EB.

Base Eco Boost without any options could get high 30s I bet.

 

[JimmyTwoTimes]

My 2011 V6 auto was rated at 19/31. Yay progress.

Keep in mind that the 2.3L is probably getting that mileage on premium fuel, rather than regular fuel... and based on current average fuel prices, that 31 mpg on premium fuel will cost you the same as 28 mpg on regular fuel.

 

[Sal JC]

So 2011 they made such a big deal that the v6 got up to 31 & now the 2.3 is only 31
and the v6 is mysteriously down to 28? Sounds like a bunch of games.

 

[DivineStrike]

We'll see. But it's a whole new car. I know the weight went up but they are also waiting till the last possible minute for these things so maybe they are making minor mods, tunes, etc to make sure its the same or better.

If I remember correctly the V6 only gained 12-30 lbs. It really didn't gain much. And for it to drop in MPG's tells me Ford is playing games or really F'd it up somehow.

 

[zackmd1]

If I remember correctly the V6 only gained 12-30 lbs. It really didn't gain much. And for it to drop in MPG's tells me Ford is playing games or really F'd it up somehow.

I would be willing to bet its a combination of newer EPA test regulations, conservative estimates on ford's part, and yes some manipulation to make the EB look better. Another thing to remember though is that the standard rear gear ratio on the V6 is 3.15 now instead of 2.73...

 

[DivineStrike]

That's interesting, and that definitely wasn't to improve the V6. This is seriously the first time I've seen a manufacturer purposely butcher one of their products from a previous year to promote another, at least in this cafe day and age.

 

[Spartan]

I would be willing to bet its a combination of newer EPA test regulations, conservative estimates on ford's part, and yes some manipulation to make the EB look better. Another thing to remember though is that the standard rear gear ratio on the V6 is 3.15 now instead of 2.73...

Yah I think for sure its the EPA test regulations and conservative estimates on Ford's parts so they don't get sued again. And that is a somewhat big jump on RGR.

 

[Brent302]

Sponsored