Media Launch Reviews

[Tarrax]

Yeah, but:
"For all of its efficiency and power, the failings of Ford’s 2.3-liter inline-four are even more obvious when it’s up against the GT’s tried-and-true V-8. The turbo-four is often hesitant to respond to throttle inputs in traffic, and then feels and sounds strained even under moderate load. It just whines and moans in a way that saps your confidence to push the car harder. "

ouch!

Having test driven both cars, the response at low RPM is great in the Ecoboost, so does the difference even matter in the real world? I mean, it has 310 horsepower and 320 pound-feet of torque, which is more than the 2010 V8. That's why most reviews I've read say for a DD go for the Ecoboost and for a Track/Weekend car go for the GT. But hey, if you just must have that V8 growl, then go for it I say!

Sponsored

 

[MC]

Yeah, but:
"For all of its efficiency and power, the failings of Ford’s 2.3-liter inline-four are even more obvious when it’s up against the GT’s tried-and-true V-8. The turbo-four is often hesitant to respond to throttle inputs in traffic, and then feels and sounds strained even under moderate load. It just whines and moans in a way that saps your confidence to push the car harder. "

ouch!

That sounds like my old Celica (I actually drove it to work today for a change), and it's got absolutely no guts and you feel scared to put the foot in because of the complaining noises it produces.

I'm sure the EB Mustang is a whole lot better than that, of course. I think the writer should just accept the EB for what it is and not then jump into the GT and be surprised when it sounds and feels so much lazier.

 

[Tarrax]

We do we keep reading this? "Clearly keen to bring the spirit of its' petrol-guzzling, tire-burning predecessor's to European shores, the car has an astonishing 412bhp - while it squeals from 0-62mph in a blistering 4.8 seconds."

What have they done to our cars? Or is the 4.8 in a vehicle with world's faster shifter (and the lightest one - Richard Hammond?), launching at 3,000 rpm, with the hop fixed, on the right day with the right air temperature, nothing in the tank, and with the spare taken out of the boot ... oh, I forgot, it doesn't have one.

We probably need to dyno a couple of Aussie GTs and then compare with a few US ones. Perhaps Ford are downplaying the RHD power loss due to the more restrictive exhaust manifold, which they claim to be only a 5hp difference.

 

[MC]

We probably need to dyno a couple of Aussie GTs and then compare with a few US ones. Perhaps Ford are downplaying the RHD power loss due to the more restrictive exhaust manifold, which they claim to be only a 5hp difference.

Yes, something smells fishy. But can you really lose 0.8 of a second because of 20% smaller headers (or so that's the figure I've been told)? I'd say there are a few contributing factors.

Let's face it, our stock GTs can be beaten by stock SS-V Redlines, or XR8s. I was expecting parity. Sure, I'm not into racing people, and there's plenty of faster cars out there, but you still feel a bit pissed off about that when we were expecting the same output as US cars.

So if US V8 Mustangs are really 306kW (i.e., 324kW as they measure it), how much lower than the stated 303kW are these cars?

Couldn't one of those last Monaros (VZ) do 0-100 in 5.8 seconds, and they were (presumably) as least as heavy and (probably?) heavier than the Mustang GT, but with a 260kW LS1 (numbers off the top of my head, but there and there abouts).

 

[msweet]

We probably need to dyno a couple of Aussie GTs and then compare with a few US ones. Perhaps Ford are downplaying the RHD power loss due to the more restrictive exhaust manifold, which they claim to be only a 5hp difference.

I think street fighter dyno'd Jnr Spook's car and it came out only 10rwkw less than the US counterpart. Would need some others to complete the sample though

 

[G RUSH]

I think street fighter dyno'd Jnr Spook's car and it came out only 10rwkw less than the US counterpart. Would need some others to complete the sample though

Yeah something is fishy like I posted here

http://www.mustang6g.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1088937&postcount=14

Without same day results it's hard to tell exactly what's going on.

:shrug:

 

[Ozzistang]

A ques guys - the power comparisons between USA ratings and Aus . Wasn't that the engine power without additional load such as aircon etc whereas Aus test include ancillaries . And isn't it just the raw engine power rating test . are these tests performed on the engine pre build or in a fully manufactured vehicle

If it's pre assembly then you not not have a 5 kW power ratio rating difference in our standards but then have to add the additional performance loss on the restrictive headders

Could that account for the kW differential ?
(As I read this I'm not sure I'm making any sense lol)

 

[XR6VCT]

We do we keep reading this? "Clearly keen to bring the spirit of its' petrol-guzzling, tire-burning predecessor's to European shores, the car has an astonishing 412bhp - while it squeals from 0-62mph in a blistering 4.8 seconds."

What have they done to our cars? Or is the 4.8 in a vehicle with world's faster shifter (and the lightest one - Richard Hammond?), launching at 3,000 rpm, with the hop fixed, on the right day with the right air temperature, nothing in the tank, and with the spare taken out of the boot ... oh, I forgot, it doesn't have one.

Here is the youtube link to the Ford Europe video with the 4.8 0-100.

The acceleration and straight line performance has been the most disappointing aspect of my mustang. It only has 2000km on it, so I'm hoping it will free up a bit more, but it does not feel as fast as my old FG XR6 Turbo (270kw) did.

Going to be interesting to see what dyno results say as we get a more representative sample.

 

[OZDAZ5.0]

Here is the youtube link to the Ford Europe video with the 4.8 0-100.

The acceleration and straight line performance has been the most disappointing aspect of my mustang. It only has 2000km on it, so I'm hoping it will free up a bit more, but it does not feel as fast as my old FG XR6 Turbo (270kw) did.

Going to be interesting to see what dyno results say as we get a more representative sample.

I think turbo cars always feel faster though Even when they're not ???

 

[MC]

I think turbo cars always feel faster though Even when they're not ???

Think you are right. I remember my first time in a WRX. I wasn't driving, but the driver gave it some, showing it off to me obviously . Wow, did that thing shunt you back in the seat!

 

[Aus-MustangGT]

Here is the youtube link to the Ford Europe video with the 4.8 0-100.

The acceleration and straight line performance has been the most disappointing aspect of my mustang. It only has 2000km on it, so I'm hoping it will free up a bit more, but it does not feel as fast as my old FG XR6 Turbo (270kw) did.

Going to be interesting to see what dyno results say as we get a more representative sample.

The FG Xr6 turbo was and still is an absolute beast, a tonne of tuning potential in them cars, if only the interior wasn't so bland. I took one for a test drive and got a little sideways when boost kicked in.

Boosted cars always feel faster because of the available torque when the turbo kicks in, prior to that it felt average.

One of the reasons why I didn't like the WRX was the lack of power pre-boost and the clutch point. Then again I seem to be more attracted to instant torque and power.

A car that is turbo'd that has instant torque and power is the new C63, that thing is a wolf in sheeps clothing

 

[msweet]

A car that is turbo'd that has instant torque and power is the new C63, that thing is a wolf in sheeps clothing

Too bad they sound awful at anything less than WOT. One drove up my street last night and it sounded so odd

 

[G RUSH]

A ques guys - the power comparisons between USA ratings and Aus . Wasn't that the engine power without additional load such as aircon etc whereas Aus test include ancillaries . And isn't it just the raw engine power rating test . are these tests performed on the engine pre build or in a fully manufactured vehicle

If it's pre assembly then you not not have a 5 kW power ratio rating difference in our standards but then have to add the additional performance loss on the restrictive headders

Could that account for the kW differential ?
(As I read this I'm not sure I'm making any sense lol)

[MENTION=14535]Ozzistang[/MENTION] I'm aware of this 'official' explanation from Ford for the V8 power loss, but tell my why the EB motor hasn't lost any power on it's way over from the Pacific?

I think the header design is responsible for a lot more power loss than Ford's willing to admit.

 

[MC]

Too bad they sound awful at anything less than WOT. One drove up my street last night and it sounded so odd

One drove past me this morning. Sound is incongruous with the car's appearance. The 6.3L AMG sounded better.

 

[Aus-MustangGT]

I agree completely about the sound but it was still a great car to drive.

Sponsored