Ford Mustang ECOBOOST

Here in FL all you see are Ecob*tch Stangs w/ exhaust and plastidipped wheels, bottom-of-the-barrel Camaros "TRYING" to haul-a$$, and Crowd Controlling 5.0's. Now don't get me wrong, Mustangs are great cars (if i could afford the insurance on 5.0 i would have one), but when every 16-17 year-old drive their automatic pony-stang mommy and daddy bought them and try to race (hit) every moving object they see, you lose respect for the car.
Ijs

I'm near Detroit and it's Mustangs everywhere, so I guess they seem pretty boring to me. I will always like the classic ones though.

MrAwesome said:

Here in FL all you see are Ecob*tch Stangs w/ exhaust and plastidipped wheels, bottom-of-the-barrel Camaros "TRYING" to haul-a$$, and Crowd Controlling 5.0's. Now don't get me wrong, Mustangs are great cars (if i could afford the insurance on 5.0 i would have one), but when every 16-17 year-old drive their automatic pony-stang mommy and daddy bought them and try to race (hit) every moving object they see, you lose respect for the car.
Ijs

Click to expand...

I used to be a big mustang fan knew everything about the car until they started with the retro stuff the shaker hood the Mach one and worst of all the bullitt naming a car after a movie imo forest green is for pickup trucks and explorers I know it’s really fast but it’s a ford I had quite a few. I’m sure with fords new venture building trucks only I’ll bet they’ll dump the mustang car and come out with a mustang truck almost like that dodge rumble bee

got a non op 65 in the back yard would like to put a 2.3 in it. will never happen tho.

Gotta admit... Its a great time to be a car enthusiast! It's great seeing more turbo 4 bangers out there, all with displacement/hp ratios at or around 100hp/litre!

I recently raced an EcoBoost mustang and that thing definitely beat me not once but three times. My SI is not stock either, I had full bolt ons and a tsp stage 1 tune. We were even until 3rd gear... that's when the bigger stronger motor/turbo pulled away. Since then I've installed the w1 turbo and it should be a different story now!

Who knows what that guy had but I have to give props where it's due

jakdotdot said:

Eco's are actually 3,532 to 3,642 lbs. 3800 lbs is an optioned GT. Also, you rented a vert, auto, non pp, eco-stang and expected a sports car?

Click to expand...

The base curb weight of an Eco (Auto) Convertible is just shy of 4300lbs. Plus, you would need to be using 93Oct in order to get max power and have the engine even respond (the way Ford claims).
The fact that it was both a Convertible and a rental (that was/is abused by everyone who rented it) is not a good mix for comparing.
In stock form, the 2.3L Ecoboosts are pretty stout and have just as strong of a block. Ford does produce just as good a product as compared to Honda; granted the owner does maintain and not abuse the vehicle. Each attracts different buyers.

IMO (and, as a caveat.. I have never owned a muscle car nor do I have plans to in the future...) the only mustang worth having would be the 5.0... or some performance oriented V8 variant. That's the engine that makes the right noises. It's iconic... even if it's a totally different engine than the old 302. A muscle car without it's big V8 is missing it's soul.

Fords ecoboosts seem outstanding. In the trucks, the 2.7 blows the NA base V6 out of the water in towing from what I understand (I've got a buddy with one that raved about it to me once) and even the 5.0 variant it gets is outperformed by the 3.5 in towing because of the torque advantage. I've seen where mechanics favor the 5.0 long-term however.

Still... a turbo 4 in a muscle car just seems wrong. I know it matched up will vs the old NA 3.7 stock in performance and there were add-ons available with the ecoboost to make the car much better overall... and it's easy to make more power by raising boost. I just... I don't know. It seems wrong to me. Change or die... but when it comes to a muscle car, the small stuff just holds zero allure to me and any i4/V6 Camaro/Mustang/Charger/Challenger/etc just seem unimpressive.

I'll probably never own a muscle at all... but I'll be damned if I'll own one with the 'little' engine. If they offered it with the 3.5, I could maybe fathom giving up an iconic engine for a more power/capable car.

Hollywoo0220 said:

The base curb weight of an Eco (Auto) Convertible is just shy of 4300lbs.

Click to expand...

Nope, 3712 according to their dealer sourcebook.

https://www.mustang6g.com/2018-Mustang-eSourceBook.pdf

jakdotdot said:

Nope, 3712 according to their dealer sourcebook.

https://www.mustang6g.com/2018-Mustang-eSourceBook.pdf

Click to expand...

Good Catch! My bad. 3700lbs is not a bad weight for a convertible....