MotorTrend Review (EcoBoost)

[phil1336]

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

Your funny, lots of Pickup Trucks don`t even offer Manual Transmissions anymore no less Cars.

Sponsored

 

[zen25]

It's an amusing process, and produced a best 0-60 mph time of 5.6 seconds and a quarter-mile pass of 14.1 seconds at 97.8 mph. The upsized braking hardware and P Zero tires produced a best 60-0 mph stop of 106 feet, with the other three stops hovering in the 107-foot range. Those acceleration results beat the GTI by 0.1 second, but fall short of the potential speed from a WRX launched as if you've stolen it. The Mustang posted a 25.5-second lap time around the figure eight, tying the WRX but trailing the GTI by 0.4 second. At an average 0.96 g laterally, the Mustang tied what we recorded from the GTI.

They got GTI & WRX as the benchmark.
I thought EB can trounce GTI easily and outgun WRX.

Would a non-PP be faster?

 

[petraman]

You're funny, lots of Pickup Trucks don`t even offer Manual Transmissions anymore no less Cars.

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

I wouldn't call a pickup a driver's car.

 

[OppoLock]

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.)

I think he might be referring to the lack of uniform mesh. With ACC included, the EB loses the hexagonal mesh in the lower opening.

 

[phil1336]

They got GTI & WRX as the benchmark.
I thought EB can trounce GTI easily and outgun WRX.

Would a non-PP be faster?

IMO, PP or (no) PP, the differences would be very little/insignificant. We all new the 5.0 Coyote V8 would still be "King of the Hill" but now, looks like the old 3.7 V6 and the super-dooper 2.3 EB I4 might not be far apart in both fuel economy or performance. The EB still wins by being significantly more expensive, if that counts. It also prefers Premium Gasoline too.

 

[phil1336]

I wouldn't call a pickup a driver's car.

Would you call a 2015 Ferrari California Sport Coupe a "Drivers Car"? Its only available now in the U.S. with A/T!

 

[souprmage]

I think he might be referring to the lack of uniform mesh. With ACC included, the EB loses the hexagonal mesh in the lower opening.

OK, got it. I suppose that makes sense.

For the review, it's not super compelling, but then again their GT review wasn't very good from them either. I'd be careful to base any decision on just one review, so wait until a few more EB reviews make it out before canceling your orders.

 

[REX-RACER]

They got GTI & WRX as the benchmark.
I thought EB can trounce GTI easily and outgun WRX.

Would a non-PP be faster?

Actually I thought that whole comparison point was a straw man:

Those acceleration results beat the GTI by 0.1 second, but fall short of the potential speed from a WRX launched as if you've stolen it.

So what you're telling us here is that an AWD car launches better than a roughly equivalent RWD car?

Well DUH?! Is there someone out there that really didn't know 4 > 2?!

 

[petraman]

That particular car? Based on some of the reviews I've read, no it's not.

 

[DonLafond]

"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!

I think the reviewer was comparing the 2014 V8 to the 2014 V6 when he or she indicated that the V6 was in the penalty box. Compared to the V8, it was and probably will always be.

 

[REX-RACER]

Would you call a 2015 Ferrari California Sport Coupe a "Drivers Car"? Its only available now in the U.S. with A/T!

Not to get into a pissing match here ( which yeah, probably too late ) but I'm gonna pick nits and say that I've believed for a while that dual-clutch paddle shift cars like the aforementioned Ferrari or even the Evo X belong in a third category of transmission which I personally believe to be superior to both automatic and standard shift ( lots of track tests bear this out too ) as they give the very best of both worlds. I had actually hoped that the S550 was going to have a dual-clutch paddle shift trans and if that had been the case I would eagerly opt for that over the standard shift.

 

[zen25]

One good thing, the Dyno numbers make me happy.
279bhp to the wheels.
295lbft of torque all the way.
Ecoboost Engine defintely did not dissapoint.

AWD has edge in 0-60 runs. But EB should have smoked GTI and WRX in other categories. Quarter mile and lap times are more important.

150-200lbs less this would have been a rocket.
335i does mid 13 quarter mile. EB would have beaten it with better power to weight ratio.

 

[akwal07]

"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!

I mean I have a tuned auto premium v6 with cai and an axleback in California... Almost every 11 plus mustang I see seems very stock (thanks to carb)..so I mean will people mod the 2.3l (partial void warranty) I highly doubt it especially here. I've timed my car at 5.2-5.3 (have the premium and 2.73 gears) vids of the 3.73 geared stangs are hitting 4.8-5 0-60, so it might be wise to save money and get the 6.

 

[REX-RACER]

One good thing, the Dyno numbers make me happy.
279bhp to the wheels.
295lbft of torque all the way.
Ecoboost Engine defintely did not dissapoint.

AWD has edge in 0-60 runs. But EB should have smoked GTI and WRX in other categories. Quarter mile and lap times are more important.

150-200lbs less this would have been a rocket.
335i does mid 13 quarter mile. EB would have beaten it with better power to weight ratio.

It'll be interesting to see if there are relatively easy ways to shed weight from these cars? I've heard varying things on the difference in weight between the standard seats and the Recaros? Also given that these cars already come w/ out a spare tire and tools ( and not even the "flat kit" for the PP cars ) that won't be option to dump as has been traditionally been the case. It'll be interesting to see if the aftermarket starts developing "rear seat delete" kits for these cars like the SN95?

 

[TampaBear67]

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.)

SERIOUSLY? Give Up Already... Of Course it's not going to have a "Fanged" Lower Grill. The Eco-Boost is supposed to have a Matching "Wavy Honeycomb" Lower Grill to match the Upper grill, like the Race Red Example Below, UNLESS IT HAS ADAPTIVE CRUISE CONTROL, Like the Car in their Test.

Go AHEAD... YOU CAN SAY IT... I Was Right and You're WRONG.

If You Need More PROOF...

FROM MOTOR TREND'S GT Review.

Pricewise, our 2015 Mustang GT Premium tester's $46,380 sticker represents what would happen if you rolled into your local Ford dealer and ticked every option box. Some of the more notable options include the new-for-2015 Adaptive Cruise Control with Collision Mitigation package, which retails for $1195, and the imaginatively named Rapid Spec Equipment Group 401A, which includes blind spot warning with rear cross-traffic alerts and a premium audio system, for $1795.*

Note the Adaptive Cruise Control Switches on the Steering Wheel. ..

Note the Linear (Non Fanged) Lower Grill with the Flat Blanked Off Ends on the Lower Grill...

Sponsored