Time to update the 2001 stang

[gov cheese]

Have been looking at the 3.7 and the EB. This will be my DD and i am looking for reliability and lower cost, plus decent MPG's. The 2001 i have DD'd since new with very few problems, but it has over 200k miles and it is time for something new. I will not be modding car and i am not tuner. I have driven both and they are very close in performance, butt dyno really didn't feel different on the test drives. Leaning toward the 3.7

EB = New engine with no history, 93 octane costs, but better MPG,s more up front $$
What the the highest miles someone has on the EB?

3.7 = some history, 87 octane and only slightly lower MPG,s and less $$

GT = not worth the extra up front cost, plus if you are going big HP go GT350 or go home.

Sponsored

 

[bluebeastsrt]

Good luck with your purchase.

 

[bigspoondude]

Highest odometer reading or highest MPG?

*EDIT* At 4600 and highest I've seen is 36 or so cruising highway.

 

[EcoSwag1990]

I'm at 12,000+ miles with no engine probs at all. I've been running the Livernois 93 tune for about 6,000 miles also

 

[gov cheese]

Highest odometer reading or highest MPG?

*EDIT* At 4600 and highest I've seen is 36 or so cruising highway.

Highest mileage. Unlike most here i keep my vehicles for 10-15 years. This means i need to factor in longevity. How are the 3.7 and EB engines going to fair at 50k, 100K and beyond.

 

[Edwin]

Just in case you didn't know, if you're not worried about performance you can run 87 in the EB. It's the "recommended" fuel in the owner's manual, but you'll lose power and a little MPG. Subaruwrxfan on YouTube is around 19,000 miles on his ecoboost with no issues. I've had one of the trip computers running since I picked my car up. Here's a pic of it. No issues so far.

 

[Ecoboosted]

Do you want premium? Performance package? If so you can't get them in a V6. If those aren't important to you either car will serve you well.

 

[Apwrx]

If you don't need the fluff get the 6.

 

[Banjo]

The number one thing that drove me to the ecoboost was the performance pack. If the V6 had that I likely would have ended up going that way.

 

[04SloSnake]

You're not going to get the answers you want. Nobody knows how these motors are going hold up over the long run. Looking historically there are some pretty high mileage FoSTs running around so there is no reason to believe the 2.3 would be any different. This motor is still less then a year old so it is too early to know about longevity. That said, I would not be worried about it.

 

[jjsotolongo]

If you're not modifying it will come down to creature comforts. If you're ok with the base interior it's hard to argue against the V6 from a cost saving standpoint. If I were you I'd get the 3.7.

 

[04SloSnake]

Also, this is like the third thread about this in the past week.

http://www.mustang6g.com/forums/showthread.php?t=27080

 

[Rogues Gambit]

If you're like me, you want the creature comforts, and thus will end up with the EBM

If not, V6

 

[Joe_Stang]

Either choice will suit you well. V6 can be cheaper but ecoboost would be more luxurious if getting premium package. I believe both would last a very long time since your not modding them. I bought the v6 mainly because it was cheaper.

 

[zackmd1]

From a purely mechanical standpoint I would expect the NA V6 to last longer then the EB. From what I have heard the turbos on all Ford EB's are only designed to last 150,000. That is not to say it will fail at 150,000 but that it is not designed to last much longer then that. A non boosted NA engine is going to be under much less stress then a ~20 psi boosted engine.

Another thing to consider is carbon buildup. Because the EB is direct injected the values no longer get oil cleaned off from fuel. This oil burns and creates the carbon buildup. Over time this could cause misfires and drivability issues. This is a problem with any DI engine.

Sponsored