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

[DonLafond]

Wow. So many unreasonable people in the world. No need to justify the purchase of anything if it's your money being spent.

The GT isn't a waste of money. At the same time, the EB is perfect for people that don't want all the power, fuel consumption, etc of the V8 but still want something "sporty". That's why Ford makes both.

+1

Sponsored

 

[Husker]

The EPA doesn't appear to break the Boss302 out seperate from other 5.0L manual trans Mustangs - 17/20/26

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=31165

I dug up a picture of my Boss when it was off-loaded. On the sticker it says 17 & 26 MPG...So yep no different than the GT.

 

[GT]

It went down from 2012 to 2013. 17/26 to 15/26. Not sure why.

 

[Spartan]

I thought the manual was supposed to usually test 1-2 miles better then the auto

 

[Husker]

It went down from 2012 to 2013. 17/26 to 15/26. Not sure why.

I regret not keeping track of MPGs when I had the Boss...But, I'll tell ya one thing, with my ((LEAD-FOOT)) combined with its Ridiculous Thirst, I visited the Gas Stations frequently (Every 4-5 Days)-->:frusty:...So, the #s Ford put on the sticker was a Joke-->:lol:

 

[Barrel]

I regret not keeping track of MPGs when I had the Boss...But, I'll tell ya one thing, with my ((LEAD-FOOT)) combined with its Ridiculous Thirst, I visited the Gas Stations frequently (Every 4-5 Days)-->:frusty:...So, the #s Ford put on the sticker was a Joke-->:lol:

If the weather was nice where the windows were down and I could hear my magnaflow system, I saw about 12 or 13mpg for a tank. Otherwise it would be about 16 or 17mpg for the tank - both were a mix of about 50/50 city/hwy. Considering how I drove it, I was fine with those numbers.

 

[Reds197]

Fuel Mileage was the absolute last thing on my mind when I bought this car.

I had a 2013 Gt and could get 27-28 on the highway at 70 mph.

 

[Husker]

If the weather was nice where the windows were down and I could hear my magnaflow system, I saw about 12 or 13mpg for a tank. Otherwise it would be about 16 or 17mpg for the tank - both were a mix of about 50/50 city/hwy. Considering how I drove it, I was fine with those numbers.

I replaced the exhaust on mine also...I was always entertaining my self with the music from the BOSS + I loved throwing myself or friends back into the seat at almost any speed...Hate to say it, but I didn't care about the gas guzzling part, I hated the time spent finding a station & wasted time filling up-->

 

[Barrel]

I replaced the exhaust on mine also...I was always entertaining my self with the music from the BOSS + I loved throwing myself or friends back into the seat at almost any speed...Hate to say it, but I didn't care about the gas guzzling part, I hated the time spent finding a station & wasted time filling up-->

Ha that reminds me of when I first got the car. It was 2010 so the 5.0 was still really new around my area, so every time I had to stop for gas I was always help up with someone wanting to look at the car. Never failed, every time I stopped for gas it was a 30 minute conversation with an enthusiast. If anything I just wished the car had a larger fuel tank lol.

 

[oj5OH]

Here is the GT manual:

Hmmm, I wonder why nothing's changed on my sticker..

 

[Chris95GT]

I thought the manual was supposed to usually test 1-2 miles better then the auto

Used to be true, before automatics started getting as many gears as the manuals. Between that and the computers controlling the shift points, the autos get slightly better mileage nowadays...

 

[Spartan]

Used to be true, before automatics started getting as many gears as the manuals. Between that and the computers controlling the shift points, the autos get slightly better mileage nowadays...

Yah but the 2014 manual got 15C - 26H - 19CB and the auto got 18C-25H-20CB.

I thought manuals got better Highway and autos better city. Nothing has changed between the manual or auto on the 2015...just odd...there's always some difference.

 

[ARS]

Ford is scared to death with EPA rated mileage and has finally erred on the side of caution with the Cmax/F usion hybrid disaster. Not only the Cmax but several other vehicles. Fords ecoboost turbo engines have also been beat to death in the real world of not delivering mileage. That my friends is just a fact. Ford pushed the limits and have been caught and I thing this is why you are not seeing stellar ratings these days.

I am skeptical of the 2.3 turbo actually delivering and I honestly think the V6 has been downgraded on paper to sell more turbos. Fords NA engines do pretty well for the most part. Turbos, not so much. THey are gas hogs.

 

[Spartan]

So realistically what do the GT owners think they are going to get as their MPG numbers? And by that I mean driving normally...not like a rocket ship nor driving like Miss Daisy.

 

[stilesg57]

That thread was mostly you justifying your purchase. You also went from 15K to 10K in the thread by listening to other members.

I don't want to relive that miserable thread but you're reading the outcome wrong: someone might be able to get the difference down just $10+k, but for me it's still like $14k. Heck, the mpg info alone on the leaked stickers shows a per-year difference of $650, or $3,900 over 6yrs. Add that to the $8k cost difference between a GTPP and an EBPP and you're already at $12k, and that's assuming you don't spend a dime more in insurance on the GT vs the EB (which everyone will, and I most definitely will).

Basically people who want to pad that cost of ownership number can get to $15k pretty easily and people who want to pare that number as much as possible will convince themselves that they can get all the way down to the difference in invoice price between the two cars only.

The truth is somewhere in between...but it's gonna be at least an additional third of a non-premium EBPP's invoice, and in my case closer to a half.

You are basically saying cheaper = better value, but that isn't true. Both are great values for different buyers.

But one is a better value if you call "value" the ratio of stuff you get to dollars you spend ;)

Sponsored