5.0 Mileage

[Free Agent]

I'm pretty sure he's getting the auto and 3.55 is the highest you can get there.

Bingo, we have a winner.

It won't really bother me. I've got a 3.46 rear in my GTO auto(4 spd) and the best long trip highway I can usually get is about 23 to 24 mpg.

I also have to look at the final ratio of 6th in both manual and automatic but I have a feeling even with 3.73's in a manual its 6th gear ratio is lower than the automatics 6th gear with the 3.55's. Give me a minute to find it.

Besides I also paid gas guzzler tax on my GTO back in 2004 as well. Won't have to this time around.

UPDATE:

Manual 6th gear = 0.651 w/ 3.73 rear = 2.43 ratio
Auto 6th gear = 0.69 w/ 3.55 rear = 2.45 ratio

Slight edge goes to manual over the auto in 6th at highway cruising. I'd guess the manual in this configuration may get an minimal mileage edge over an automatic in this configuration. That difference is so small though that highway mileages would probably look the same.

And to be honest I really don't care about the mileage, I'm not buying a Mustang to save gas/money, if I wanted to do that I'd buy a Hybrid (yuck).

Sponsored

 

[fionic]

And to be honest I really don't care about the mileage, I'm not buying a Mustang to save gas/money, if I wanted to do that I'd buy a Hybrid (yuck).

:amen:

 

[DivineStrike]

Well, it's gonna kinda be a gas saver for me since i DD the truck lol. I'm bound to get better mileage outta the stang.

 

[Free Agent]

Well, it's gonna kinda be a gas saver for me since i DD the truck lol. I'm bound to get better mileage outta the stang.

I'm not totally disregarding fuel mileage. I do understand it is important to people. Its just not one of my priorities with the Mustang but I understand it could be with some people. I will say I am glad I don't have to pay the GG tax.

 

[DivineStrike]

Not really a priority of mine besides comparing it to the camaro. If I were to want the camaro, I'd get the 1le but it's mpg's are horrible with that 6.2 and closer gear ratio's. Even the stock SS w/ cylinder deactivation is rated 2hwy mpgs less than the stang. So with me wanting the mustang anyhow it's just icing on the cake.

I'm done playing the buy a car for good mpg's game for now (to a point) and just gonna buy what I want. The mustang is that. Later down the road I'll probably buy a 1st gen focus for real cheap if gas is getting too expensive or maybe something even better on gas. Still gonna have to be cheap.

 

[cbrookre]

:amen:

Caught me there I really meant effort at highway speed, or the total fuel intake required to be more precise. I will be using it as a daily driver and if the real world mileage difference between v8 and eb is big enough then it may be a factor, but for now v8 is the preference mainly for other reasons.

Not sure what you mean about the lower RPMs, since that is dictated by gearing, which has not changed AFAIK.

But some of the changes to the motor are supposed to help with mileage, like the charge motion control valves, specifically. We also already know that the aerodynamic drag of the car has been reduced by 3% as well.

Definitely have no idea what all of it equates to exactly, but there will be some improvement in mileage. Your guess of 1-2MPG seems reasonable.

 

[JimmyTwoTimes]

If you can manage on a long trip, keep her 70mph or below and set the CC you will probably best whatever the epa rating is. My ranger fx4 auto is rated at 19hwy. I've gotten a little better than 20 doing that.

That is, if you can manage driving slow :lol:

Oh, you can manage it if you have to. Last summer I was driving through South Carolina with the cruise control set 1 mph below the speed limit and a cop followed me for 10 miles - guess he saw the New York plates on a Mustang and wanted a catch.

 

[Spartan]

Oh, you can manage it if you have to. Last summer I was driving through South Carolina with the cruise control set 1 mph below the speed limit and a cop followed me for 10 miles - guess he saw the New York plates on a Mustang and wanted a catch.

I can't find the thread that had this.

What's the difference in gas mileage between the 3.15 and the 3.55 with an automatic?

 

[Spartan]

Oh, you can manage it if you have to. Last summer I was driving through South Carolina with the cruise control set 1 mph below the speed limit and a cop followed me for 10 miles - guess he saw the New York plates on a Mustang and wanted a catch.

LOL...I'm sure he did.

I was driving in NJ and saw a Comp Orange Mustang from NY go flying by...about 15 min later...he was pulled over by a NJ State Trooper..lol.

You NY drivers are speed nuts

 

[SeventhWard]

Hey guys. I'm hoping for a modest gain to the 5.0's MPG rating as well - but I wanted to set my expectations. I googled the "most fuel efficient V8" and Mercedes AMG claims their latest 5.5L V8 is the one. Their 5.5L powers the $60K+ SLK55 AMG, makes 415HP 398TQ and gets 19 city, 28 highway, 22 combined. Most fuel efficient V8 in the world. Hmm.

The 2014 Mustang GT is good for 18 city, 25 highway, 20 combined. Our beloved Mustang GT is not only more powerful, but it's close in the efficiency battle.

I'm seriously anticipating the numbers Ford announces. Any type of gain in efficiency will be welcome. If Ford is able to deliver 435HP & 400TQ with SLK55-like numbers, well then that'll be just fantastic. Let's see how close they land.

-SeventhWard

 

[stilesg57]

The new Vette Stingray gets 17/29/21...with more hp, more tq, and ~25% more displacement than the new 5.0...though it does weigh about 350lbs less.

I'd love to see 18/27 in its most efficient guise. Not that it would matter though -- I wouldn't order one without 3.73s

 

[Spartan]

The 2014 Mustang GT is good for 18 city, 25 highway, 20 combined. Our beloved Mustang GT is not only more powerful, but it's close in the efficiency battle.

The new Vette Stingray gets 17/29/21...with more hp, more tq, and ~25% more displacement than the new 5.0...though it does weigh about 350lbs less.

I hope its more then 1 mpg difference then the 2014 Mustang. I mean if the Vette is getting 17/29/21 and the new Camaro is going to get even better, I think Ford has to come out here looking great.

2014 Mustang: 18/25/20
2015 Vette: 17/29/21

I think they really need to shoot for 19/29/22.

To me, if the GT has better improved mileage, it might sway me over the EB just because I'm not 100% sold on the EB engine in that 4 cylinder.

If it was a Ecoboost V6, then I'd be getting that or the base V6 in Premium IF they offered that.

 

[mc lane]

on the german Website

http://www.ford.de/Pkw-Modelle/Produktneuheiten/Mustang (August 10th, 2014)

Ford publishes

"Kraftstoffverbrauch (kombiniert)(fuel consumption combined) [nach (according to) VO (EG) 715/2007]: 13,8-8,6 l/100 km
CO2-Emissionen (kombiniert): 320-199 g/km"

320 g/km is about what chevy Germany published for the Camaro LS3 (i.e. 6.2 litre v8 432 hp) (so that is for the 5.0 gt)
199 g/km is about what Porsche Germany published for the Boxster/cayman S

so i guess, if you have a look at that us mpg figures City and Highway of the camaro or the Porsche, you can pretty well estimate, what figures come with the s550 gt

 

[DivineStrike]

So that converts to 17.04 and 27.35 mpgs for the v8

 

[mc lane]

i guess i have gotta add
they (Ford) are gonna offer the eb and the gt
so 199g/km co2 is for the eb (probably mt) and 320g/km for the gt (i.e. v8) (whichever has the worse fuelconsumption: mt or at)

Sponsored