Any V6 fans?

[as0014]

2015 V6 should be less than 100 lbs. heavier than 2014 V6 (based on info that has been released by Ford).

According to the leaked and seemingly authentic weights - the 2015 V6 is only 20ish pounds heavier than the 2014. So, I agree - the weight should make little difference.

Sponsored

 

[stangs-R-me]

Thanks for sharing.

But...I can not help wondering...how much of your high MPG do you think is because of the ethanol free 91 gas that you are using? Just curious, if you add regular 87 gas (with up to 10% ethanol), what kind of MPG would you expect?

Maybe 1 to 2 MPG.

I've only run E10 87 in the car once (grabbed the wrong nozzle at the station by mistake). Had to run home and switch the tune back to the factory tune (vs Bama SCT P91), and ran it that way for the whole tank. I actually did not notice much difference in MPG between the week before or after this tank ... however it was winter time where there are a lot more variables (vs. summer) ... I.E. snow vs. no snow, head wind vs. tail wind, etc ... so I may have had a a couple of variables in my favor that week.

Doug

 

[phil1336]

While you can debate the possibility of better MPG with the 2.3 EB 4 Cyl Engine over the 3.7 V6, one thing is a no brainer. If you just want a "Base" 2015 Mustang Convertible, there is over a $5.500 (savings) going with the V6! EB 2.3 Convertibles only available in Premium Trim, just saying.......How long before you regain your Fuel savings with that difference in price?

 

[JimmyTwoTimes]

While you can debate the possibility of better MPG with the 2.3 EB 4 Cyl Engine over the 3.7 V6, one thing is a no brainer. If you just want a "Base" 2015 Mustang Convertible, there is over a $5.500 (savings) going with the V6! EB 2.3 Convertibles only available in Premium Trim, just saying.......How long before you regain your Fuel savings with that difference in price?

Yeah, but if you're spending extra money on a convertible, wouldn't that money be better spent keeping the hard top and getting a nicer interior? I mean, the car's going to be driven with the top up 95% of the time...

 

[EE]

I'm interested in the V6 for several reasons:

- Lower upfront costs.
- If using the recommended premium fuel in the Ecoboost, the mileage benefits likely won't pan out from a $ standpoint vs. using the recommended regular fuel for the V6. This may not be an issue if you use 87 in the ecoboost, but I would personally fill up with the recommended fuel.
- Reliability. This is speculation, but I would imagine long term reliability of the 6 cylinder will be better than the 4-cylinder turbo. I don't replace cars every 2-3 years.

 

[Horse]

I'm interested in the V6 for several reasons:

- Lower upfront costs.
- If using the recommended premium fuel in the Ecoboost, the mileage benefits likely won't pan out from a $ standpoint vs. using the recommended regular fuel for the V6. This may not be an issue if you use 87 in the ecoboost, but I would personally fill up with the recommended fuel.
- Reliability. This is speculation, but I would imagine long term reliability of the 6 cylinder will be better than the 4-cylinder turbo. I don't replace cars every 2-3 years.

Same here...all these valid points you mentioned...

Another thing is the fun factor. Some say that driving a turbo is fun, more fun than driving V6. Even trying to deal/play with the (possible) turbo lag is part of the fun. I will wait and see...

 

[DBCooper]

I'm interested in the V6 for several reasons:

- Lower upfront costs.
- If using the recommended premium fuel in the Ecoboost, the mileage benefits likely won't pan out from a $ standpoint vs. using the recommended regular fuel for the V6. This may not be an issue if you use 87 in the ecoboost, but I would personally fill up with the recommended fuel.
- Reliability. This is speculation, but I would imagine long term reliability of the 6 cylinder will be better than the 4-cylinder turbo. I don't replace cars every 2-3 years.

Ya, I'd consider getting the V6 if I could get some of the premium features like heated/cooled seats.

In regards to the premium fuel statement, I've never seen a reference to the EB requiring premium. I have seen several references to 87 octane (can't put my hands on them right now.

 

[Proflig8tor]

I have the 3.7 L V6 in my F150. It's a engine that likes to rev, gets good mileage, has bulletproof reliability and needs only to be unburdened of over a ton of truck. Before I knew of the 2015's Mustang's specs I thought, "man, that would be a great engine in a sports car."

I may order a GT, but the fact they ALL are equipped with a Limited Slip Rear Diff, the smart money on a cheap performer may very well be the V6 and it will be 120 to 150 pounds lighter than the GT, as well as enjoy a better weight distribution.

... and FWIW, it is a whole lot lighter and more powerful than the 4.6L v8, back when that was a thing.

 

[Brent302]

I have the 3.7 L V6 in my F150. It's a engine that likes to rev, gets good mileage, has bulletproof reliability and needs only to be unburdened of over a ton of truck. Before I knew of the 2015's Mustang's specs I thought, "man, that would be a great engine in a sports car."

I may order a GT, but the fact they ALL are equipped with a Limited Slip Rear Diff, the smart money on a cheap performer may very well be the V6 and it will be 120 to 150 pounds lighter than the GT, as well as enjoy a better weight distribution.

... and FWIW, it is a whole lot lighter and more powerful than the 4.6L v8, back when that was a thing.

3.7 is great but it never had that punch you in the seat feel of the 4.6

Owned 2011 3.7 and 2009 4.6

Id take the old 4.6 any day.

 

[phil1336]

Seriously, your rationale for opting for the Fastback Hardtop makes no sence? I live in South Florida where it is Summer 11 months of the year! Sure. during June, July, August & September the (Top) will be UP and the A/C engaged but in the evenings, how about a leisurely drive with the (Top) DOWN and maybe the A/C on for additional comfort? The whole idea of the Mustang experience is predicated on having a Convertible. Even if the (Top) "never" gets put down, its a much sharper looking Sports Car, IMO. Forfeiting the Convertible and spending an additional $5,500 to get the Premium EB 2.3 4 Cyl Version or simply getting it in Fastback instead? Hmmm, No Convertible, save 5K and get instead, Leather Interior (too Hot for FL), "MFT" & Sync w/Touchscreen & Upgraded Radio (never use), Fog Lamps (Never used) Blade Spoiler (would Delete with Option # 13D), 18`` Wheels & Tires (more expensive to replace). To each their own but for me, its a Rag Top or nothing, period! Last but not least, the EB 2.3 4 cyl engine is (recommended) for use with "Premium Gasoline" while the V6 will run just fine on Regular Grade 87 Octane Gas even with the added 10% Ethanol, Case Closed! I don`t keep my Vehicles longer then 4 or 5 years (but) if I did, a naturally aspired engine like the V6 will have much less maintenance issues in the future then a Turbo Charged Twin Scroll aspired engine. If I needed the extra power and performance, and did`nt care about fuel economy or using Premium Grade Gasoline, I`d opt for the V8 GT.

 

[66coupe]

I'm interested in the V6 for several reasons:

- Lower upfront costs.
- If using the recommended premium fuel in the Ecoboost, the mileage benefits likely won't pan out from a $ standpoint vs. using the recommended regular fuel for the V6. This may not be an issue if you use 87 in the ecoboost, but I would personally fill up with the recommended fuel.
- Reliability. This is speculation, but I would imagine long term reliability of the 6 cylinder will be better than the 4-cylinder turbo. I don't replace cars every 2-3 years.

I also think the V6 will have a lower cost of ownership. Maybe the EB is better for someone looking to mod the cars for high horsepower (I don't know much about that), but 300 HP should be more than enough for my needs.

Reliability is a big consideration for me too. I never kept a car for less than 10 years and it's my guess that the V6 will hold up better then the EB.

I occasionally drive long distances for work (~600 miles in a day), and the V6 seems like a nice combination of power and fuel economy (and fun to drive). Plus, I like the V6 exhaust note. It's not as nice as the V8, but it is still very nice.

 

[66coupe]

3.7 is great but it never had that punch you in the seat feel of the 4.6

Owned 2011 3.7 and 2009 4.6

Id take the old 4.6 any day.

Given a choice, I'd take the 4.6 over the V6 too. The exhaust note alone might be worth the reduced fuel economy. And then there's all the extra torque that pushes you back in the seat. But when you factor in the extra cost to buy a V8 (4.6 or 5.0), and the cost to feed it gas (I drive a lot), then I'm not as interested. Clearly many people view it differently, but for me the V6 is a much better fit for my daily driver.

As between the EB and the V6, I'm still leaning strongly toward the V6.

 

[66coupe]

I have the 3.7 L V6 in my F150. It's a engine that likes to rev, gets good mileage, has bulletproof reliability and needs only to be unburdened of over a ton of truck. Before I knew of the 2015's Mustang's specs I thought, "man, that would be a great engine in a sports car."

I may order a GT, but the fact they ALL are equipped with a Limited Slip Rear Diff, the smart money on a cheap performer may very well be the V6 and it will be 120 to 150 pounds lighter than the GT, as well as enjoy a better weight distribution.

... and FWIW, it is a whole lot lighter and more powerful than the 4.6L v8, back when that was a thing.

Thanks for sharing your first hand experience with the 3.7. The bolded part keeps coming up and it is important to me.

Until I know more about the long term reliability of the EB, I think the V6 is the more compelling engine choice. A few years down the road the EB may distinguish itself as the better engine, but the 3.7 has set the bar pretty high.

 

[phil1336]

Ford, at least here in the U.S. has determined to make the 2015 Base V6 Mustang Fastback & Convertible as (least desirable) as possible aiming it specifically as a Rental Car/Fleet Vehicle and the majority of its (domestic) Sales of perhaps 30% destined for frugal buyers who simply want the Next Generation Mustang without going much over 30K. Why else would they have limited Interior choices to only Ebony Black Cloth Interior? Ford Canada for 2014 even offered a Special V6 Performance Package, (not) just a Premium Trim Package with additional Option Upgrades. Even for 2015, Canadian Mustangs come Standard with Halogen Fog Lamps even on the Base Trim V6 Fastback Coupes and Convertibles where in U.S. Mustangs, you need to upgrade to the 051A Package in V6 Mustangs to get LED Fog Lamps. I`m okay with a $31.000 2015 Mustang V6 Convertible with AT and a Spare Tire. I`ll pass on the Premium EB 2.3 Convertible version at $35.500 w/Manual Transmission or going "all in" with a GT V8 Convertible version with loaded Options topping out at over 45K!

 

[Horse]

OK, they are discussing/debating fuel requirement for EB over there

http://www.mustang6g.com/forums/showthread.php/ecoboost-fuel-requirements-2179.html

Sponsored