EcoBoost sales vs GT

[StuckInNYForever]

This will not be a repeat of the SVO. Times are very different. Gas prices matter more, and the EcoBoost will be much better than the V8. Price matters, and unlike the SVO, it will be priced about 20% less than the V8 (not just the engine, but the entire car). Now, there is tremendous aftermarket support for these types of engines, and can probably match the V8 in power if desired.

Sponsored

 

[c3po]

This will not be a repeat of the SVO. Times are very different. Gas prices matter more, and the EcoBoost will be much better than the V8. Price matters, and unlike the SVO, it will be priced about 20% less than the V8 (not just the engine, but the entire car). Now, there is tremendous aftermarket support for these types of engines, and can probably match the V8 in power if desired.

^^ I agree. If the SVO back in the mid-eighties would have been sold for a thousand or two less than the 5.0, they probably would have sold many more and it's success would have probably driven Ford to keep selling them.

 

[Five Oh Brian]

This will not be a repeat of the SVO. Times are very different. Gas prices matter more, and the EcoBoost will be much better than the V8.

For those not old enough to remember the 1970's, there were a pair of oil embargos that made getting gasoline very difficult. The late 70's saw the second oil embargo, so the 1979 Mustang 2.3L Turbo should have sold like crazy - but didn't. It didn't outsell the V8 ever, even though logic dictates it should have, given how hard it was to get gasoline for a thirsty V8.

As for the EcoBoost being "better" than the V8, that depends on how you define "better."

Price matters, and unlike the SVO, it will be priced about 20% less than the V8 (not just the engine, but the entire car). Now, there is tremendous aftermarket support for these types of engines, and can probably match the V8 in power if desired.

True that the '15 2.3L Turbo will be cheaper than the V8, unlike the SVO vs V8, so you may be onto something there. However, there is still a huge contingent of pro-V8 buyers that will line up to buy the '15 Mustangs, who will not even consider a non-V8, regardless of good (or cheap) it is. Ford is smart to be offering several powertrains to better capture more buyers.

 

[Five Oh Brian]

I'll keep a running count of the order breakdown for the dealership I work for (since I do all of our ordering). Here's our current count for customer ordered '15's...

2 - GT's
0 - V6
0 - EcoBoost

Update time...

Here's our current count for customer ordered '15's...

3 - GT's
0 - V6
0 - EcoBoost

 

[rtk]

Actually, the SVO was much more expensive than a GT back in the '80s. In 1984, a SVO was north of $17,000 while a GT could be had for $10,000. Ford reduced prices on the SVO in 1985 and 1986 to stimulate sales. Unfortunate that it didn't sell better as it was a superior vehicle and introduced 5 lug hubs and 4 wheel disk brakes to the Fox bodied line. The pedals were perfectly situated for heel and toe, the seats (Lear Seigler) were perfectly bolstered (especially the 1984 model, bolsters were reduced in 1985/1986). Had the SVO lived to 1987, there was a rumored 4 valve, DOHC head that would have boosted output to over 260 hp.

Mustang enthusiasts like to count to 8. It was understood then, and when the Probe was introduced as a potential Mustang replacement. (Enthusiasts rallied against a FWD, 4 and 6 cylinder "Mustang.") I suspect the number of early adopter orders are enthusiasts, so that's why so many GTs are being ordered versus the other engine choices.

Today's world has changed (more-so than in the 80's). Technology has come a long way to produce high output, small displacement motors that work reliably and with little drawbacks and better fuel efficiency. With gasoline in the US over $4.00 per gallon, that will impact buyers decisions, especially if this is going to be their primary vehicle. I think we'll see plenty of current and new enthusiasts going for the Ecoboost as more power is just a tune and increased boost away. The GT will sell just fine to the hardcore Mustang enthusiast.

As for my SVO… I've never had a problem as I never took it to Ford for service. The mechanics never understood that car and never could service it properly. I've gone through lots of Mustangs (over 9) including a 2003 Cobra, and 2003 Mach 1. With the exception of the 1970 Mach 1 which I wish I had also kept, the SVO is the only Mustang I kept and cherished above the others.

 

[Five Oh Brian]

In other EcoBoost vs V8 news, Ford was quite successful in offering the 3.5L V6 EcoBoost in the F-150 back in the 2011 MY. Competitors laughed at Ford, but it's Ford who's laughing all the way to the bank now, as the 3.5L EB has been a great sales success. During the first model year, we couldn't get enough EB's to satisfy demand, so Ford had to put lofty rebates on the other engines to help balance inventory. 2nd year (2012) and 3rd year (2013) EB sales stayed strong at nearly 50% of the mix. Now in 2014 we're seeing a sharp decline in the EB sales, with 5.0L V8's being the hot ticket in F-150's. No more extra rebates from Ford on non-EB engines, and Ford is trying desperately to get dealers to order EB's by restricting 5.0L V8 orders. Amazing how the market can swing so quickly. I think people have figured out that the EB doesn't really offer much better fuel economy than the V8, and the fear of higher maintenance expenses for a more complex engine makes some people leary. I love the way an EB F-150 drives and have even considered buying a '14 F-150 Tremor for myself, but he V8 does sound awesome. Tough choice!

 

[5.0 Coyote]

That EcoBoost might do well in Europe,but I still think that 4 Banger Mustang is going to be a huge flop here,there has always been that GT vs 6 Banger thing with the Mustang fans, I can"t imagine being at a car show with a 2015 4 Banger Mustang, with Coyotes parked all around me.:amen:

 

[StuckInNYForever]

For those not old enough to remember the 1970's, there were a pair of oil embargos that made getting gasoline very difficult. The late 70's saw the second oil embargo, so the 1979 Mustang 2.3L Turbo should have sold like crazy - but didn't. It didn't outsell the V8 ever, even though logic dictates it should have, given how hard it was to get gasoline for a thirsty V8.

As for the EcoBoost being "better" than the V8, that depends on how you define "better."

I remember the oil embargoes. Our family car became a Honda Civic 2-door in the 70's. It was, ummm, cute. But, I think most people realize these oil shortages are usually temporary, which could possibly be why the turbo did not outsell the v8. I am not sure of the mileage difference between the 2, so that could be a factor. Also, turbo technology was newer then, and not so widely used.

Regarding the "better" comment, I was referring to gas mileage only.

 

[ARS]

In other EcoBoost vs V8 news, Ford was quite successful in offering the 3.5L V6 EcoBoost in the F-150 back in the 2011 MY. Competitors laughed at Ford, but it's Ford who's laughing all the way to the bank now, as the 3.5L EB has been a great sales success. During the first model year, we couldn't get enough EB's to satisfy demand, so Ford had to put lofty rebates on the other engines to help balance inventory. 2nd year (2012) and 3rd year (2013) EB sales stayed strong at nearly 50% of the mix. Now in 2014 we're seeing a sharp decline in the EB sales, with 5.0L V8's being the hot ticket in F-150's. No more extra rebates from Ford on non-EB engines, and Ford is trying desperately to get dealers to order EB's by restricting 5.0L V8 orders. Amazing how the market can swing so quickly. I think people have figured out that the EB doesn't really offer much better fuel economy than the V8, and the fear of higher maintenance expenses for a more complex engine makes some people leary. I love the way an EB F-150 drives and have even considered buying a '14 F-150 Tremor for myself, but he V8 does sound awesome. Tough choice!

Fords turbo engines suck gas at an alarming rate imo. V6 power with V6 gas mileage and V8 power with V8 gas mileage. If anybody is buying the 2.3 for gas mileage be warned right now and I dont care what the sticker says. Ford has figured out a way to lay down some decent numbers in the epa tests but in the real world they dont deliver and have wild swings in fuel economy. When you get into the boost even just a little they gulp fuel. Plus, you paid extra for a more complicated engine. I am not sold on the turbo engines for anything except more power.

 

[StuckInNYForever]

Fords turbo engines suck gas at an alarming rate imo. V6 power with V6 gas mileage and V8 power with V8 gas mileage. If anybody is buying the 2.3 for gas mileage be warned right now and I dont care what the sticker says. Ford has figured out a way to lay down some decent numbers in the epa tests but in the real world they dont deliver and have wild swings in fuel economy. When you get into the boost even just a little they gulp fuel. Plus, you paid extra for a more complicated engine. I am not sold on the turbo engines for anything except more power.

This is my main concern. I have poked around the Focus ST sites as they have a similar turbo engine. It seems the mileage is there if you can stay out of the boost. If you put on an aftermarket tune (and stay out of boost), it even increases notably. Being that I use these cars for 80% commuting, it should work for me. The Focus ST tune also adds around 50-60 lb/ft of torque, so it may be the best of both worlds - mileage, and power when you want it.

 

[DivineStrike]

Fords turbo engines suck gas at an alarming rate imo. V6 power with V6 gas mileage and V8 power with V8 gas mileage. If anybody is buying the 2.3 for gas mileage be warned right now and I dont care what the sticker says. Ford has figured out a way to lay down some decent numbers in the epa tests but in the real world they dont deliver and have wild swings in fuel economy. When you get into the boost even just a little they gulp fuel. Plus, you paid extra for a more complicated engine. I am not sold on the turbo engines for anything except more power.

Word, in my gti the active fuel economy gauge drops to 3mpg with full boost lol. But it's not really that hard to stay out of boost. Although don't expect to get good gas mileage over 70mph. Upgrading to a bigger turbo might help with that as it won't spool up as easily.

 

[kentak]

I had a 79 Cobra with the 2.3 L turbo. For it's time it was pretty good, but the V-8 was better. You could, however, stay out of the boost, and get much better mileage. Loved the alloy wheels and the Michelin TRX tires until it was time to replace them! Silver with black lower body it was a very modern looking car at a time when the auto industry was looking very primitive. They had a factory recall for the turbo and later in it's life the exhaust manifold cracked, but that was it. No other problems. Not a bad car at all.

Way better than the Mustang II!

I'll be eagerly awaiting the test results and see how the various drivetrains perform and whether there is sweet spot in the cost/performance/insurance.

Ken

 

[Natpag]

The eco boost will have to be driven light to get the gas mileage they will no doubt claim. Well lets see how that goes over when owners realize they are in boost almost all the time and the gas mileage is worse than a 6er. Now I'm a V8 guy. I've got an 89 331 stroker and traded a 436 whp 2012 gt. But let me tell you something, the v8 is no slouch on gas mileage. Mine had 3.73 gears and I clocked it at 30.2 mpg riding at 60 mph for 35 miles on a road trip. I drove it very lightly, but I'd expect you'll have to do the same to get great gas mileage out of the ecoboost. Pick your poison. One thing is for sure, the sound is a hell of a lot sweeter out of the V8

My 2012 was a black premium with glass roof and was black (mods included kooks long tubes, boss intake, jlt cai, borla s type axelback, barton shifter, 93 dyno tune) I felt the car was so nice that I didn't drive it. How could I put miles on something so nice? This time I'm looking for a DD. I'm thinking ingot silver base gt with PP and possibly recaros. I'm planning on the whipple 2.9 that they are developing for this model as well. I'll surely have to change my 3.73s to 3.31s or 3.08s, but we'll see!

My ratio goes
35% - V6
40% - Eco
25% - coyote

 

[Five Oh Brian]

My '07 Mustang GT was supercharged. Pretty decent fuel economy on the highway (26-27 mpg), but get into the boost and fuel economy plunged into single digits. My '14 GT automatic easily knocked out 29 mpg highway stock. Small engines may do better on the highway, but around town, it's still the same amount of weight (roughly) to get moving, so V8's will fair about the same as the EcoBoost and V6 models.

 

[deeps29]

My '14 GT automatic easily knocked out 29 mpg highway stock.

That's a pretty good number for V8. What mpg did you notice for completely city driving?

My daily driving requirement is not much, with my previous car I only drove about 800 - 900 miles a month and it was all with in city with lots of stops. My GC gave me 17 mpg in city. I don't feel very confident about 2.3L engine after reading about other EB engines now. :help: And 14 Mustang V8 is actually rated to 18/25 which is slightly better than my GC.

Sponsored