Eco VS. V6

[Rough Hollow Man]

Did your Mother ever confide in you that you were one of twins, and she gave your twin to someone in South Louisiana to raise? This is really spooky to me...that we could be twins. Too many of the same takes on things...you are my twin. As it concerns Mustangs, I totally agree with you. And you quote Twain? Spooky brother spooky.

Sponsored

 

[jbailer]

My problem with the V6 was MANY of the options weren't even available on it. Ford purposefully made it the bottom of the line.

 

[Rough Hollow Man]

To push towards the EB I would suspect...

 

[thehunterooo]

thehunterooo: You are (my) Champ......13D Spoiler Delete!

Ahhh now you made me blush opcorn:

 

[phil1336]

Ahhh now you made me blush opcorn:

Must be a Floridah "thang", you think? I feel the same way about Range Rover`s etc with "Rhino Bars" adorning both the Head Lamps & Tail Lamps.

 

[rvlyssup]

I have much love for the v6...my first Stang was a 150HP @ the crank v6.

I told my son to get a v6 even when the EB was my first choice for him. I've ridden in his v6 powered fastback. Color me impressed, I would recommend another one in a heartbeat.

 

[Rough Hollow Man]

Glad to see that the Mustangs still roam the High Desert...

 

[jtmat]

That sounded more like a performance package vs base comparison.

These performance comparisons are always the same story. Eco is a hair quicker. But I don't think majority of V6 owners had performance first in mind to begin with.

I'm in an eco, I did not have performance in mind. Well, I wanted more than what I could get other places in a package that looked nice. Achieved.

If you want performance, get a GT and turbo that. Plain and simple. lol

 

[Papaya]

I agree with the review a little bit. V6/8 engines will be always smoother then a I4 engines. As I mentioned month ago. If the V6 had some options, I would have taken the V6. Enough power for a DD.

 

[wildsailor]

I agree with the review a little bit. V6/8 engines will be always smoother then a I4 engines. As I mentioned month ago. If the V6 had some options, I would have taken the V6. Enough power for a DD.

In general I would agree. A 60° V6 is well balanced except for some coupling modes where a 4 cylinder will tend to have some complex things going on. Sorry, I don't have my engine books with me right now or I could explain the actual modes better.

However, with the 2.3L Ecoboost you do not have a typical 4-cylinder since this engine actually has a balance shaft. My car has none of the typical 4-cylinder 'tingles.' I don't have a lot of seat time in a 3.7L Mustang to directly compare to but the 2.3L Ecoboost is smoother than my 3.8L Mustang and my wife's V6 Equinox. If I did not know this car was a 4 cylinder I would certainly think it was a 6.

But again, both the V6 and I4 engines in this car are great. Either one makes for a great daily driving experience.

 

[EcoSwag1990]

In post #17 above, Mr.EB-Defender, EcoSwag1990, thinks that the reviewer wasn't referring to the V-6 when he stated, "Smoother, more comfortable and cheaper, these are advantages to the V-6 model, especially in base trim". Don't we all love how some on this forum cannot have anything said that's positive about the V-6 without taking issue! Love their consistency, but the reviewer made the quote above about the V-6 , NOT the difference between the performance optioned EB and the non-performance EB. The reviewer is comparing the base V-6 to the EBPP. We do love their enthusiasm though...

LOL please tell what about the V6 makes you think that the reviewer would say it is more comfortable as apposed to him feeling the difference in suspension due to the performance package. Does the V6 have softer seats that I'm not aware of?

Take note of the last line "especially in base trim" meaning without the performance package. He is comparing a V6 to an EB that has the performance package

 

[Rough Hollow Man]

Welcome back EcoSwag1990...thought for a moment that we had lost you on this thread...everyone saying nice things about the V-6 and all. We need your full participation to get the best out of these posts. Of course, the reviewer meant to place "more comfortable" in that sentence. And yes, he was comparing the comfort of his test base V-6 against an EBPP. His test should have been a base V-6 versus a base EB to be more of a direct comparison. OK everyone reading this...here's my original post's point that EcoSwag1990 tried to find fault with: I quoted the reviewer's sentence and said that "Smoother, more comfortable, and cheaper..."were exactly the ATTRIBUTES that I used to base my decision to buy my V-6. I guess that upset Mr. EB-Defender so much that he wanted to post that the reviewer and I shouldn't interpret that the V-6 was "more comfortable" than an EB without PP. Of course, we know the reviewer meant to place "more comfortable" in that sentence. Please go to post #28 in this thread for a very good explanation. Everyone that read the article knows that it really wasn't quite fair to compare a base V-6 to a EBPP. But Ford only sells the V-6 in the basest of forms so as not to hurt the new EB sales numbers. That aside, we know that a fairer test would be base V-6 to non-premium EB. That didn't happen in this test and probably will not if Ford is providing the vehicles. Just look at the vehicles provided at the 6G roll outs. I get what EcoSwag1990 is saying about how the author's use of "more comfortable" in that sentence was derived...but, I choose to interpret that he wanted it's meaning to be a V-6 attribute. One final question that EcoSwag1990 asks of me, "Does the V-6 have softer seats that I'm not aware of?" My answer of course is..."Not softer, just more expensive"!!!

 

[jtmat]

The writer is referring back to what was written earlier in the article:

"Even if it is a bit slower and thirstier, the V6 is the smoother engine."

After driving both, I agree with the writer... I did enjoy driving the V-6... nice engine. Nice sound. Very smooth delivery of power.

Not to say I don't love my eco though... love it...

 

[Rough Hollow Man]

And so the reviewer/writer thinks the V-6 is "smoother", yes I would agree with that. And he is right about it being a bit slower and thirstier than the EB. That's an honest assessment. I also like his use of "comfortable" and "cheaper" in his summation of the V-6. I thought the review was pretty accurate. I'm sure the author would be amused to see the extent of scrutiny of his sentence structure and verbage that is taking place.LOL.

 

[Rough Hollow Man]

I'm getting a lot of interest in my 2015 Mustang from my friends that all drive cars costing $60K+, you know the type that wouldn't be caught dead driving anything made in America. My tennis team friends drive Porches, MBs, Audi, and BMWs, but they all stand around my 2015 vert after matches to talk. They won't admit it but they have "car envy". I have talked engine options on the Mustangs with them for about half a year now. So one bought a Ruby Red EB coupe for his wife and another guy bought a black GT for his son to commute to school. They drive up to the tennis courts in these Mustangs and you can tell they are proud of them...but, they are quick to say they are driving their wife's or son's car. They just cannot admit that they have an American car. Oh, they like EM fine, but it's that phony-baloney keeping up with the Jones suburban BS that they are caught up in. So one guy has a beautiful restored Austin-Healy in his garage but he drives his wife's EB coupe everywhere. Ask him what car he has and he'll say the Healy. Never mentions the Mustang. He's a car snob. Love to be amused by those guys.

Sponsored