MotorTrend Review (EcoBoost)

[petraman]

It still has around 220 hp (probably 250 at the crank) at redline. Not sure I'd call that useless.. Not only that, but the torque curve is much flatter than the ST's. Knowing it's an automatic, I'm not disappointed with those numbers at all.

Sponsored

 

[REX-RACER]

Problem is that MT had a car with PP... can't get much better than that. Really disappointed, I was hoping this would be the handling star of the group. I'll wait for more reviews but so far I'm not too impressed.

Yeah, but small displacement turbos have traditionally not matched up particularly well w/ automatic transmissions and especially w/ more aggressive rear end gearing. Like someone else said, it strikes me this particular combination is set up to appeal to the masses of folks who want something sporty to cruise around town w/ descent on ramp and highway overtaking power in the mid range. I seriously doubt Ford tuned the shift points to be "neck-snapping" firm.

I'm still holding out judgement for a car set up properly for an enthusiast which in my estimation would be a "base" / M6 / PP / Recaro car. I'd be surprised if a car w/ no added weight from all the "Premium" do-dads and the switch from a slush box to a real transmission didn't make a noticeable difference.

 

[Josh Painter]

Not very encouraging impressions. I think this model's out of the equation for me.

Cool. That means I can get mine that much sooner. Thanks!

 

[Wildcat]

Cool. That means I can get mine that much sooner. Thanks!

Thanks for your incredibly ignorant retort. You won't get yours any sooner if I don't buy one and you know it; you just wanted to impart your little cheap shot. Whatever.

 

[OH5GT 2 S550]

Thanks for your incredibly ignorant retort. You won't get yours any sooner if I don't buy one and you know it; you just wanted to impart your little cheap shot. Whatever.

Same to you with your initial post...fella!

Listen, most that are going to say they aren't going to get this new car after these reviews, probly weren't going to get one in the first place. :thumbdown:

 

[ilkhan]

Eh, keep in mind some of that might be caused by a choked off factory exhaust that had to compromise in order to keep sound intrusion under control. Rumor is this same 2.3l engine is slated for 325 - 350 in the likely upcoming Focus RS. Given that top line tuners like Cobb and Lethal performance are regularly getting 20% - 30% out of the 2.0l Focus ST I would be very surprised if the we don't see similar gains for this platform.

Possible, but I still think its turbo size rather than exhaust. We'll see how well it responds to a tune vs exhaust+tune and go from there.

 

[Wildcat]

Same to you with your initial post...fella!

Listen, most that are going to say they aren't going to get this new car after these reviews, probly weren't going to get one in the first place. :thumbdown:

How was my initial post a "cheap shot"? I was giving my opinion based on what I read. He made a snarky post directly at me personally. And how the hell do you know what I might or might not buy?

Some people on here are pure fanboys and seem awfully insecure in handling negative comments that don't feed into their idealized version of the car. If you're not capable of having an adult conversation, then you shouldn't bother replying.

That said, my opinion is changeable and I'd be open to considering it again if later reviews are more favorable.

 

[phil1336]

for comparison the 2014 v6 with PP,and automatic transmission did 0-60 in 5.8s and the 1/4mile in 14.4 at 98.5mph, so at least in this instance it seems to compare favorably with last years model, except for the trap speed, I guess.

source: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests...ng_premium_v6_performance_package_first_test/

"Well, its (not) as exciting as the V8 but on the other hand, not as boring as that Rental Car darling the naturally aspired 3.7 V6 which they allude to as being sent to the "Penalty Box"? Who are they S@#%&*G? The 2014 Mustang V6 with A/T did 0 to 60 in 5.8 seconds compared to the EB 2.3 I4 that ran it in just 5.6? 2 tenths of a second faster? the quarter mile for the 2014 Mustang V6 was 14.4 seconds at 98.5 mph and the EB 2.3 I4 runs it in 14.1 seconds and reaches 97.8 mph? The 2015 Mustang in Base V6 trim with its higher performance standard 3:15 rear gears will improve over last years Model. I`m jumping into this "Penalty Box" with a smile on my face when my 2015 Mustang Base V6 Convertible finally arrives. At $32,000 rather then an EB 2.3 Premium Convertible paying an additional 7K for what? Fancier Trim but (not) Performance!

 

[TampaBear67]

Our EcoBoost was fully loaded, with heated and cooled seats, adaptive cruise control, dual zone climate control, and so on.

Note the Adaptive Cruise Control Switches on the Steering Wheel

Note the Linear Lower Grill with the Flat Blanked Off Outer Ends...

It's OK... You Can Say It....

 

[ranchero]

After reading the three reviews of the turbo four, the car (with MT though) sounds ideal for me and exactly what I've wanted for about three years.

I do not need HP at high RPM. I do want quick acceleration from 0-10 mph and I want fun on freeway on/off ramps. I want six speeds for quiet, high MPG cruising on long highway trips. And I want a nimble car around town. This car - equipped with turbo four and MT - sounds ideal.

It will replace a Focus with a 5 speed MT which fit some of my parameters but sorely lacked in acceleration and did not have enough gears for quiet, comfortable 80-85 mph freeway cruising in the west. I did not want to buy the Focus ST, though it was quick and had a six speed, because I did not like the torque steer and did not want the performance/summer tires.

A properly equipped Mustang turbo four will be fine for me and the reviews I read today confirm it for me. So, good.

- ranchero -

 

[Moderator]

Enough with the bickering and let's get back on topic.

 

[phil1336]

I`m anxiously awaiting a comparison between the Base V6 and the Base EB I4. Lets crunch the numbers both performance wise as well as "real-time" Fuel Economy City/Hwy MPG and see if that aging relic 3.7 can hold her own with some dignity left.

 

[REX-RACER]

After reading the three reviews of the turbo four, the car (with MT though) sounds ideal for me and exactly what I've wanted for about three years.

I do not need HP at high RPM. I do want quick acceleration from 0-10 mph and I want fun on freeway on/off ramps. I want six speeds for quiet, high MPG cruising on long highway trips. And I want a nimble car around town. This car - equipped with turbo four and MT - sounds ideal.

It will replace a Focus with a 5 speed MT which fit some of my parameters but sorely lacked in acceleration and did not have enough gears for quiet, comfortable 80-85 mph freeway cruising in the west. I did not want to buy the Focus ST, though it was quick and had a six speed, because I did not like the torque steer and did not want the performance/summer tires.

A properly equipped Mustang turbo four will be fine for me and the reviews I read today confirm it for me. So, good.

- ranchero -

+1!

This is exactly where I am. I had originally been looking at the Focus ST but then I discovered that the price difference between a "base" eb / M6 / PP / Recaro Mustang and Fully loaded F-ST that I was sizing up is < $1k. Given this is going to be my dd and possibly see some occasionally weekend auto-x duty I'm considering eliminating the Recaros given the reports that I've read praising the standard seats. If you do that the same car actually ends up being about $500 LESS than the F-ST. I know it's like comparing apples to oranges, a 2-door coupe vs a 5-door hatch-back but I simply can't ignore the cache of Mustang!

 

[souprmage]

Note the Adaptive Cruise Control Switches on the Steering Wheel

It's OK... You Can Say It....

sorry, but the non-fanged upper was never supposed to get the fanged lower.

If the upper was fanged, I'd concede the point. But it's not. So, try again...
(I fully expect to concede the point, this pic isn't it though.)

 

[doulos4jc]

I'm still holding out judgement for a car set up properly for an enthusiast which in my estimation would be a "base" / M6 / PP / Recaro car. I'd be surprised if a car w/ no added weight from all the "Premium" do-dads and the switch from a slush box to a real transmission didn't make a noticeable difference.

Yup, you're holding out for me! I'll never understand a auto in a driver's car.

Sponsored