EcoBoost vs. Pre-Coyote GT?

[15wile]

Also the base GT brakes are better than the base EB...

I have also made several concessions and positive statements about the EB...you have chosen to ignore them...here are some highlights of things I've said:

- The EB has better build materials
- The EB has a more refined and comfortable interior
- The EB has more amenities and creature comforts
- The EB was probably Ford's best move for the Mustang since the Retro styling
- The EB is massively important for penetrating the international market
- The EB is extremely important for the Mustang brand to take the next step for emissions
- The EB is a great package that delivers solid MPGs but still delivers solid performance, esp for the price!
- With a couple thousand spent in modifications in both cars, the EB is fast than the 4.6 GT

You did, and these are solid.

The ONLY point to which I had a problem with is saying from the perspective of a straight line performance it is equal to the 4.6, because it is not.

Except it is. I have the experience of my own f*cking car to confirm it, too. What's more, take the "official" tested figures for an '05 GT, 0-60 (5.1) and their same for an EB Mustang (5.2). Driver's race, sir.

After that, I took issue with you saying that the EB was a better weekend canyon carver than the GT, because it's not.

Except it is. It's a subjective statement, but the reviewers agree with me. I mean, consider it from another perspective. Those BRZs, or even a GTI, or hell.. even the Focus RS that's coming out. These are cars that don't have the mojo of a GT either. Yet, at the same time, they are considered better for the canyon carving, toss your car around corners, have a hoot of a good time role. The casual, weekend canyon carver. Do you think they are better in this role? If you don't, you're a fool and I can't help you -- there's no reaching you.

If you do think they are better in that role, then tell me why the EB Mustang could not be also.

Then I took issue with your mistaken estimation of weight difference, which you did while not telling the full picture of the GTs better calipers, rotors, and tires in equivalent packages.

The statement was not intended to be a comprehensive breakdown of all components of the car. Nonetheless, I concede a 140lb "nose" weight loss, and a 205lb overall weight loss, relative to automatic trim lines (and slightly less difference in manual trim lines). Do you deny that?

I will never go out of my way to talk crap about an ecoboost, i respect every Mustang, what I don't respect is when owner's of a certain vehicle are boastful about it, and make blatantly false statements.

No, you don't. You denied the obvious, that the 4.6 and 2.3T are comparable motors. You've got a dog in this fight sir, stop lying and admit it.

As I said, if you met with Coyote guys and tried to tell them your EB is a better canyon carver (or anything else) you aren't going to get a good response from anyone.

Except I already have. Last night. You're the only one who seems to give a sh*t. Other people know that statements like that are subjective, and that it is perfectly possible for, say, a BRZ owner to like his slower car, and have MORE fun with it around the twisties, than a GT Mustang owner. You deny this possibility. Your metric is time, not smiles, not fun. You think whichever car gets the best TIME in a given situation is also the most fun to drive. Now THAT is blatantly false, sir.

In response to your questions about me liking my 4.6...yes I do like it...do I wish it could make more power? absolutely...but I also don't try and compare it to a Coyote, Shelby, or anything that outperforms it. I like where it's at (it can hang with a stock SS), Yes, there are some ecoboosts out there that will destroy me, but at the end of the day, I know that my platform has a higher performance potential. But yeah, it wasn't enough for me, which is why I also have a Boss 302.

The Boss 302 is a great car, too. Personally, I'd love to own one. But you're missing the deeper point. If the 2.3T and the 4.6 post very close times, then you can compare them on that basis. There's nothing wrong in doing so. You seemed to take this as a personal affront. As if they were NOT comparable, when clearly they are.

Again, let's list it:

1. Stock vs. Stock: Driver's race. Maybe slight nudge to the 4.6 -- but transmissions matter here.

2. Tuned vs. Tuned: Ecoboost probably wins this.

3. Bolt ons + tune: Driver's race. Probably dead f*cking even otherwise.

4. Built-up: Probably the 4.6L wins this. But this is also partially unknown since the EB is a very new motor. Turbo swaps and built internals seem to max out at around 600RWHP right now, whereas I've seen plenty of 4.6s north of that.

Is *ANY* of that incorrect, sir? Where are the 'false statements' you keep claiming?

Sponsored

 

[thehunterooo]

opcorn:opcorn:opcorn:opcorn:opcorn:opcorn:

 

[15wile]

You know... I've heard it said many times that the Ecoboost's biggest problem is that it's a Mustang.

If you put this package together under a different nameplate, we wouldn't even be having this conversation. Folks like you might be saying the same thing I'm saying now. "Ford releases cheap RWD canyon carving sports car." The reviews would be great, people would be gushing about the value, performance for the dollar, and sheer fun factor.

Instead, 4.6 guys come in here, pissed that this blasphemous Mustang is here, and that the people who drive it have the temerity to ask if their car is faster, stock -- a legitimate question given how close the reported times are. They should sit down and shuttup. Don't open your mouth unless you have 8 cylinders. Don't even like your car. Don't join a forum and ask questions about it. Just kiss the ass of anyone who spent more money than you (and don't say you didn't, now that you mentioned the Boss 302). How dare they enjoy their car, or think it's better for them in some roles.

I'm done with you. You pretend to respectful conversation, but your purpose here is exposed for all to see.

Spartan, I owe you an apology. You, sir, are not a troll. I don't care for your opinions on the Camaro much, but you're at least not like this guy. THIS is a troll.

 

[15wile]

opcorn:opcorn:opcorn:opcorn:opcorn:opcorn:

You're the smart one, sir. I should know better than to feed the trolls.

 

[15wile]

If I can find my old post (you can only go back so many), I actually complied all the positives from the EB reviews of all the various articles that were posted I'll re-post it in here.

The standard gripes from most of the reviews (and I read them all) were the standard ones. Engine sound, some minor turbo lagg, and needed to be a tad lighter but there were tons of positives for the EB.

I fully agree on the engine sound. It sucks. I kept the stock mufflers when f*cking with the exhaust, just because all the aftermarket ones make it sound like a fart can.

The turbo lag isn't bad, though -- but then again, the only other turbo car I have to compare it to is a Mercedes C250 I had for awhile. Now THAT was turbo lag. You hit the gas and it was all: "Hmmmm let me think. You pressed the gas pedal. What does that mean? Ah, I should go forward. But it's so slow... did I forget something? OH YEAH! This turbo thing. I should probably spool it... tomorrow, maybe."

You can shave 40-50lbs off this car just by swapping the exhaust. Ford's stock exhaust was terribly overweight. Aside from that, though... it's hard to imagine it any lighter, and still be the car that it is. They'd have to go aluminum to reduce weight much further than that. Then the price would go up...

 

[Spartan]

You know... I've heard it said many times that the Ecoboost's biggest problem is that it's a Mustang.

If you put this package together under a different nameplate, we wouldn't even be having this conversation. Folks like you might be saying the same thing I'm saying now. "Ford releases cheap RWD canyon carving sports car." The reviews would be great, people would be gushing about the value, performance for the dollar, and sheer fun factor.

Instead, 4.6 guys come in here, pissed that this blasphemous Mustang is here, and that the people who drive it have the temerity to ask if their car is faster, stock -- a legitimate question given how close the reported times are. They should sit down and shuttup. Don't open your mouth unless you have 8 cylinders. Don't even like your car. Don't join a forum and ask questions about it. Just kiss the ass of anyone who spent more money than you (and don't say you didn't, now that you mentioned the Boss 302). How dare they enjoy their car, or think it's better for them in some roles.

I'm done with you. You pretend to respectful conversation, but your purpose here is exposed for all to see.

Spartan, I owe you an apology. You, sir, are not a troll. I don't care for your opinions on the Camaro much, but you're at least not like this guy. THIS is a troll.

Haha...no worries man. Actually like I said throughout hundreds of posts (and Im sure you don't have the time to go through old posts) but I'm a Mustang fan. I do like a few things Chevy is doing with the Camaro (engine line up order/8 sp trans/v6 premium) but I want those things to spur Mustang into doing better or at least matching (making a V6 premium). And apologies right back at you. ;)

 

[MrBillton]

One race you had with a random guy in a manual GT hardly proves anything...stop acting like it does.

You did, and these are solid.

Except it is. I have the experience of my own f*cking car to confirm it, too. What's more, take the "official" tested figures for an '05 GT, 0-60 (5.1) and their same for an EB Mustang (5.2). Driver's race, sir.

Yeah it was intended to be a statement reflecting the difference in weight. You didn't "concede" anything...you were shown to be inaccurate in your hasty statement of vehicle weight...then owned it...fair enough.

The statement was not intended to be a comprehensive breakdown of all components of the car. Nonetheless, I concede a 140lb "nose" weight loss, and a 205lb overall weight loss, relative to automatic trim lines (and slightly less difference in manual trim lines). Do you deny that?

They are not comparable motors...one is an NA 4.6L V8...the other is a 2.3L I4 with a Turbo...as several others have said here...apples to oranges...the V8 has higher performance capability, end of story, get over it.

No, you don't. You denied the obvious, that the 4.6 and 2.3T are comparable motors. You've got a dog in this fight sir, stop lying and admit it.

I didn't tell you to tell them your car was light and nimble.

I told you to tell them your car is better at canyon carving...so I highly doubt you told a group of Coyote owners that your ecoboost is a better canyon carver than their GT. That is exactly what you said on here...and if you say that specific phrase to any group of Mustang owners you will not be received kindly.

Except I already have. Last night. You're the only one who seems to give a sh*t.

At least I have one. What is your metric exactly? Smiles? uhh okay, so you're just assuming that someone will have more fun in an ecoboost than the GT? So no, I think that the car that is a better performer and gives a bigger rush is more fun to drive, and yeah, going faster doing it can add to the fun factor.

You encourage me to drive an ecoboost, yet in your postings it's easy to tell that you've probably never owned (maybe even driven) a faster car in your life...so I'd encourage you to drive the Coyote.

Once again you did not say that you think that the ecoboost is more fun for canyon carving. You said better, it is not, it is inferior by any measurable metric, and equivalent at best in your made up metric of smiles (even though we both know it's not as much fun).

Sounds fairly accurate...so you've now admitted that stock, the 4.6 GT is faster, but similar, and has a higher performance ceiling and that the ecoboost is only faster when you spend some specific amount of money on the car (but not too much)

A one-off scenario you devised to support your argument is not indicative of their overall comparison.

Your metric is time, not smiles, not fun. You think whichever car gets the best TIME in a given situation is also the most fun to drive.

Again, let's list it:

1. Stock vs. Stock: Driver's race. Maybe slight nudge to the 4.6 -- but transmissions matter here.

2. Tuned vs. Tuned: Ecoboost probably wins this.

3. Bolt ons + tune: Driver's race. Probably dead f*cking even otherwise.

4. Built-up: Probably the 4.6L wins this. But this is also partially unknown since the EB is a very new motor. Turbo swaps and built internals seem to max out at around 600RWHP right now, whereas I've seen plenty of 4.6s north of that.

Is *ANY* of that incorrect, sir? Where are the 'false statements' you keep claiming?

 

[MrBillton]

How am I a troll? Because I disagree with you and have continuously refuted your points...

Once again, nothing bad to say about the EB, only EB OWNERS that want to compare it's straight line performance to modern V8.

Only a couple posts ago you acknowledged the several positive things I said and now insinuate that I'm being disrespectful and am on some V8 high horse. So it's pretty clear your emotion has taken over at this point.

If you're done here, maybe you can go make another thread about when it's okay to fart in your car for the first time.

Instead, 4.6 guys come in here, pissed that this blasphemous Mustang is here, and that the people who drive it have the temerity to ask if their car is faster, stock -- a legitimate question given how close the reported times are. They should sit down and shuttup. Don't open your mouth unless you have 8 cylinders. Don't even like your car. Don't join a forum and ask questions about it. Just kiss the ass of anyone who spent more money than you (and don't say you didn't, now that you mentioned the Boss 302). How dare they enjoy their car, or think it's better for them in some roles.

I'm done with you. You pretend to respectful conversation, but your purpose here is exposed for all to see.

Spartan, I owe you an apology. You, sir, are not a troll. I don't care for your opinions on the Camaro much, but you're at least not like this guy. THIS is a troll.

 

[04SloSnake]

My last car was faster than a 3v and a Coyote. Do I win anything?

 

[Tamadrummer88]

How am I a troll? Because I disagree with you and have continuously refuted your points...

Once again, nothing bad to say about the EB, only EB OWNERS that want to compare it's straight line performance to modern V8.

Only a couple posts ago you acknowledged the several positive things I said and now insinuate that I'm being disrespectful and am on some V8 high horse. So it's pretty clear your emotion has taken over at this point.

If you're done here, maybe you can go make another thread about when it's okay to fart in your car for the first time.

In case anyone hasn't told you yet..

Just drop the fucking subject and walk away. Seriously. This is turning into a bloody pissing contest and taking away from what is originally being discussed. Stop trying to preach your opinion as fact. Stop muddying the thread.

Seriously, now you're just being a troll.

Just go.

 

[04SloSnake]

Serious question. How fast is the fastest bolt on / tune 3v S197?

 

[MrBillton]

It's not MY opinion...see post #2 of the thread.

In case anyone hasn't told you yet..

Just drop the fucking subject and walk away. Seriously. This is turning into a bloody pissing contest and taking away from what is originally being discussed. Stop trying to preach your opinion as fact. Stop muddying the thread.

Seriously, now you're just being a troll.

Just go.

 

[MrBillton]

Hmm, good question, I'm curious as well, do you mean basically everything but cams and heads?

we'll probably see some solid variance on it too based on the tires being ran (slick vs radial vs street tire).

Serious question. How fast is the fastest bolt on / tune 3v S197?

With every bolt on including gears, an upgraded intake manifold and throttle body (no head or cams) it'll be around 340-350whp...which will put it somewhere around a 12.5 on good tires and LCAs.

 

[04SloSnake]

Hmm, good question, I'm curious as well, do you mean basically everything but cams and heads?

we'll probably see some solid variance on it too based on the tires being ran (slick vs radial vs street tire).

Well my question would be very specific to directly compare it to good running EB cars but I honestly feel there is no real direct comparison due to all the variables.

I would say stock longblock, bolt ons, tune, on a DR.

 

[Macfarland]

Facts don't lie. My GT is faster than the Eco. If I can't afford an S550 GT PP at the moment, I take my 2010 GT premium with track pack over any whistle 4 Mustang or 6 for that matter any day of the week.

-2010 Mustang GT Manual

0-60 4.9 secs
1/4 mi [email protected] mph

-2015 Mustang whistle 4 Manual

0-60 5.6 secs
1/4 mi [email protected] mph

Both sources from Motor Trend

Sponsored