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

[phil1336]

Please tell me this is a typo and you meant 13.6. Otherwise, you're going to be severely disappointed...due to outrageous expectations.

Is this Vehicle for Street use or the Track? Just curious?

Sponsored

 

[scottpe]

So now, the last piece of the puzzle, what will impress me on the strip?
The GT will need to be a solid 12.5 car. Solid 12.5 meaning that many runs will be faster than 12.5. If it's a solid or 12.7 car that will be an improvement but it won't be like "WOW, impressive".
The EB will have to be a 12.6 car.

I won't be particularly disappointed if it doesn't achieve that level of performance but if not, I certainly won't be saying that it's an impressive car, I'll just be saying that I'm impressed with the interior on the new Mustang

This post reminded me of how absolutely spoiled we are with the performance of cars today. My first V8 Mustang (my 2nd overall) was a '95 GT. Did the quarter mile in about 15.1 seconds stock. I had to modify the crap out of that thing, spending thousands on mods along the way, to squeeze a streetable 13.0 out of it (street tires). And now to hear someone saying that 12.7 in a GT, off the showroom floor would be unimpressive is pretty amazing. I realize that it's all relative, and I catch myself falling into the same line of thinking, but it just struck me (again) how far we've come.

 

[Old 5 Oh]

This post reminded me of how absolutely spoiled we are with the performance of cars today. My first V8 Mustang (my 2nd overall) was a '95 GT. Did the quarter mile in about 15.1 seconds stock. I had to modify the crap out of that thing, spending thousands on mods along the way, to squeeze a streetable 13.0 out of it (street tires). And now to hear someone saying that 12.7 in a GT, off the showroom floor would be unimpressive is pretty amazing. I realize that it's all relative, and I catch myself falling into the same line of thinking, but it just struck me (again) how far we've come.

Totally agree. I felt my stock 99 Cobra (which was probably a mid- to high-13 car) was much more than I needed for the street. The EB has the same HP and more torque than that "monster," albeit with 200 or so pounds more weight. There's NO WAY an EB will see 12s, so this poster is going to be "disappointed" with its performance. I wouldn't be, but I wanted the V8 sound track. Whether the V8 runs 12.5 or 12.9, it will be more than I ever ask from it.

 

[midnite9150]

My only disappointment with this is intentionally hurting the V6's mpg's to promote the EB. Also, w/ the EB manual getting the same highway mpg as the previous v6 auto's. We will have to wait and see if the EB auto is worth writing home about. 32 would be good but 33 or 34 would be better on the highway. But 33 imo would be plenty sufficient as an improvement for the auto

I dont think they intentionally hurt the v6's mileage, I think it was overstated previously. The v6 also banked on the 2.73 gearset to get that 31mpg highway figure which they dont have anymore as that was a terrible gearset for a less torquey engine.

 

[dwaleke]

The EB will have to be a 12.6 car.

You do know that the EB is a 4 cylinder turbo and not a 6 cylinder turbo correct? I would be shocked if the 4 cylinder turbo gets into the 13s.

I don't get it. The 4 cylinder turbo is a NA V6 replacement engine. Probably a good one at that. But anyone thinking it will compete with the 5.0 V8 on any level will be hit will a sad taste of reality.

I hope Ford eventually puts the 3.5L V6 turbo EB in this car. Then it would be interesting to see how that does against the 5.0.

 

[Merle]

I dont think they intentionally hurt the v6's mileage, I think it was overstated previously. The v6 also banked on the 2.73 gearset to get that 31mpg highway figure which they dont have anymore as that was a terrible gearset for a less torquey engine.

My 2013 V6 is a 2.73 and the MPG is ALWAYS 33+ on road trips. I just
returned from Dallas 1375 Mile trip. First 200 Miles was 35+ and it was
33+ after getting to Dallas and driving 120 miles in TOWN. This car
just got Mobil 1 put in for the trip. Tires at 35 PSI. I did the speed limit
and from Texarcana to Dallas about 190 miles it is 75MPH.

This car is Faster than a 97 Cobra I had NEW and Pulls like mad.
I did put the STOCK TOWER BRACE on and it goes around corners
like it is on a rail. I Love this car. May get a new 2014 instead of the
2015 cause I'm not crazy about the 15. I HATE the rear.

 

[62Telecaster]

You do know that the EB is a 4 cylinder turbo and not a 6 cylinder turbo correct? I would be shocked if the 4 cylinder turbo gets into the 13s.

I don't get it. The 4 cylinder turbo is a NA V6 replacement engine. Probably a good one at that. But anyone thinking it will compete with the 5.0 V8 on any level will be hit will a sad taste of reality.

I hope Ford eventually puts the 3.5L V6 turbo EB in this car. Then it would be interesting to see how that does against the 5.0.

My biggest constraint is that you know Ford will be making changes soon...Chevy is using a 4cyl as the base engine, tweaking their V6, and then who knows as the V8(Corvette?) For the upcomming Camaro. Ford knows that the 3.7 can't keep up as a middle option and that the 2.3 is destined to be the bottom/base engine.

...considering that the 2015 is basically the same as the 2014 on paper as far as engine options go, you know that Ford is going to hit us hard with something good fairly soon. Logical reasoning is a new turbo V6 option and a bump for the 5.0 2016 or 2017 model years. They'll be upping their game soon enough once the competition is there...it's common sense, especially considering that nothing was really done for 2015.

 

[Herr_Poopschitz]

I don't get it. The 4 cylinder turbo is a NA V6 replacement engine. Probably a good one at that. But anyone thinking it will compete with the 5.0 V8 in stock form as delivered from Ford will be hit will a sad taste of reality.

Fixed.

Btw, it should easily go 13s w/ the auto.

 

[Boss Man]

You do know that the EB is a 4 cylinder turbo and not a 6 cylinder turbo correct? I would be shocked if the 4 cylinder turbo gets into the 13s.

I don't get it. The 4 cylinder turbo is a NA V6 replacement engine. Probably a good one at that. But anyone thinking it will compete with the 5.0 V8 on any level will be hit will a sad taste of reality.

I hope Ford eventually puts the 3.5L V6 turbo EB in this car. Then it would be interesting to see how that does against the 5.0.

+1. A EB6 would have been pretty damn interesting and would have stole the show. Nipping on the heels of the V8 and with some simple mods showing the v8 its tail lights. It certainly steals 5.0 sales and a lot of other car brand sales.

The EB4 is not going anywhere, a EB6 will eventually be the future GT, with the v8 reserved for the SVT/Specialty lines. Basically what is happening to the v6 with the EB4 is going to happen to the v8 with a EB6 in the next 8 years.

 

[phil1336]

+1. A EB6 would have been pretty damn interesting and would have stole the show. Nipping on the heels of the V8 and with some simple mods showing the v8 its tail lights. It certainly steals 5.0 sales and a lot of other car brand sales.

The EB4 is not going anywhere, a EB6 will eventually be the future GT, with the v8 reserved for the SVT/Specialty lines. Basically what is happening to the v6 with the EB4 is going to happen to the v8 with a EB6 in the next 8 years.

I think your correct but your time line might be off. I don`t think it will be 8 years but more like 4 at the Max. As soon as they kill off the 3.7 V6 and replace it will the EB 2.3 I4 the next logical evolution will be to slot in the EB 3.5 V6 and probably leave for limited Production SVT Versions of the 5.0 V8. It will help Ford with their CAFE numbers too.

 

[FordBlueHeart]

I think your correct but your time line might be off. I don`t think it will be 8 years but more like 4 at the Max. As soon as they kill off the 3.7 V6 and replace it will the EB 2.3 I4 the next logical evolution will be to slot in the EB 3.5 V6 and probably leave for limited Production SVT Versions of the 5.0 V8. It will help Ford with their CAFE numbers too.

I think you're both wrong. No way the V8 will be SVT only within 8 years.

 

[DivineStrike]

I dont think they intentionally hurt the v6's mileage, I think it was overstated previously. The v6 also banked on the 2.73 gearset to get that 31mpg highway figure which they dont have anymore as that was a terrible gearset for a less torquey engine.

Ford intentionally changed the standard gearing for the V6 to a shorter drive ratio. That is in fact intentionally hurting the V6's highway mpg's. They might use the guise of saying "we changed the gearing to improve driveability" But as far as I remember those gears were offered anyhow. The 2.73 was only there for MPG's, the fact they removed it means they wanted to separate the EB from the V6 even more than it already does. Please don't delude yourself into thinking Ford did this to "improve" the V6. They don't care about that engine at all anymore beyond what it does to help them market the Mustang at a better price and possibly fleet sales.

I personally don't have any problem with Ford promoting the EB but I just think it's dishonest to cripple a product to make another look better than it really is, even if that product is already pretty good. Again I have decided to wait on giving the EB final judgement in regards to efficiency until they release the auto figures.

 

[Brent302]

I highly doubt the 3.5 EB will come to the Mustang. We have a better chance seeing the new 2.7 V6 EB from the new Edge and F150. It would put it smack dead in between the 2.3 and 5.0 power.

 

[xlover]

Ford intentionally changed the standard gearing for the V6 to a shorter drive ratio. That is in fact intentionally hurting the V6's highway mpg's. They might use the guise of saying "we changed the gearing to improve driveability" But as far as I remember those gears were offered anyhow. The 2.73 was only there for MPG's, the fact they removed it means they wanted to separate the EB from the V6 even more than it already does. Please don't delude yourself into thinking Ford did this to "improve" the V6. They don't care about that engine at all anymore beyond what it does to help them market the Mustang at a better price and possibly fleet sales.

I personally don't have any problem with Ford promoting the EB but I just think it's dishonest to cripple a product to make another look better than it really is, even if that product is already pretty good. Again I have decided to wait on giving the EB final judgement in regards to efficiency until they release the auto figures.

You are forgetting that ford also redesigned the diff. Although the ratios are the same would it be worth having their supplier produce a 2.73 that was going on only 1 engine and that they can handily beat its fuel economy with the ecoboost. I don't think so. The v6 was not going to be the fuel economy leader anyway even with the 2.73 so why bother to produce another variant of the diff?????? Makes no sense to me.

 

[Spartan]

I highly doubt the 3.5 EB will come to the Mustang. We have a better chance seeing the new 2.7 V6 EB from the new Edge and F150. It would put it smack dead in between the 2.3 and 5.0 power.

Agreed...the 2.7 is definitely coming to the Mustang...when...who knows. I wish it was now, because I would get that.

Sponsored