Ford finally realeases #'s

[TorchredSVT]

damn, that little 4cyl is got some guts!! I can't wait to see these 4cyl get tuned and break hearts on the highways.

Nice to see they won't weight a ton either.......

http://jalopnik.com/2015-ford-mustang-435-horsepower-for-the-v8-310-for-t-1606630852/all

still not a fan of the front of the car though.

[SVT10th]

pretty impressive.

Ok Ford -- next up, make a rear-biased (or controllable-bias) AWD Mustang with this engine.

[chachee52]

damn, that little 4cyl is got some guts!! I can't wait to see these 4cyl get tuned and break hearts on the highways.

Nice to see they won't weight a ton either.......

http://jalopnik.com/2015-ford-mustang-435-horsepower-for-the-v8-310-for-t-1606630852/all

still not a fan of the front of the car though.

I'm the opposite, kind of like the front, don't like the rake of the rear.
I want to know performance # though. Those numbers have been bouncing around for a while.


pretty impressive.

Ok Ford -- next up, make a rear-biased (or controllable-bias) AWD Mustang with this engine.

Will never happen. Mustang is not a AWD car and shouldn't be. It's like the 4 door Charger. I don't think that it should be. It's just not a "retro" Charger (they were never 4 doors).

[390gtconv]

The 2015 Mustang's official horsepower/torque figures have finally been released by Ford!
3.7L V6 -- 300 HP / 280 LB-FT (down from 305 HP)
2.3L EcoBoost -- 310 HP / 320 LB-FT
5.0L V8 -- 435 HP / 400 LB-FT (up from 420 HP / 390 LB-FT)

But FYI, you'll have to use Premium Unleaded fuel for the ECO boost.

[chachee52]

I'm sorry, by performance # I meant track # not engine #.
Just curious what the track # are going to say about the difference between the 4 and the 6. Why would they keep the 6 around if the 4 is getting more HP and torque? And you would think that the 4 would be lighter as well so should have better track #.

[SVT10th]

Will never happen. Mustang is not a AWD car and shouldn't be. It's like the 4 door Charger. I don't think that it should be. It's just not a "retro" Charger (they were never 4 doors).

Mustangs aren't 4 doors and the 2015 isn't retro at all -- it's high-tech Euro if anything. So I'm not sure what your comparison with the Charger is.
You are right: The Mustang NEVER HAS been AWD. Of course, people said there shouldn't be Mustangs with IRS. Or Turbo 4s in the SVOs. Or a 4.6 liter instead of a 5.0 Or.... The list goes on.

The WHOLE POINT of the new chassis is that it's a "world car" and features can be added easily to adapt it for sales in markets around the world -- swapping out parts as necessary to make it a viable product in whatever country....

Just because something hasn't been done, doesn't mean it shouldn't. Slapping AWD under the car doesn't change it into a 4-door. It will still be a Mustang -- just one with a different powertrain. (Ford actually did have some AWD Mustang Prototypes in the 80s when they were thinking about getting into WRC. They ended up using AWD Escorts and Focuses instead. Neither of which had AWD domestically.)

Besides they'd sell a shit-ton of AWD Mustangs here and abroad. There are some places -- Europe is one, where a rear-wheel drive only, fairly crappy-handling car (face it, compared to Euro sport cars, the Mustang doesn't even compete) just isn't going to sell as anything more than a novelty. Adding AWD to make it all-year driveable and give it increased handling will make it more viable in that sales market and ours. Hell, I bet almost everyone in the club would buy an AWD Mustang so they could drive a Stang in the winter and beat up on WRXs and EVOs.

[TorchredSVT]

The 6 cyl is going to be phased out.....with in a few years I bet it wont even exsist anymore

Mark my words, once the turbo 4 outsells the 6cyl it will be gone and the next time you see a v6 inside the mustang is for some special edition that has the ecoboost in it.

and for the record, the engine numbers were just released yesterday lol

[390gtconv]

The same Eco Boost debate goes on in the truck forum.
But I hate the thought of having to spend more $$$ a year on fuel because Eco B requires PREMIUM fuel. Can run on lesser grade but loose benifits. And for many USU consummers to use car as a daily driver, sucks to spend extra $$$ on fuel.
Then as a "global car", keep in mind fuel is much more expensive in Europe.
Car will be a success, no doubt, but to what point?

[TorchredSVT]

you bring up an interesting point....BUT, will someone purchasing a 4cyl mustang care about gas mileage?

I konw the v6 ecoboost motors are gas hogs....i don't know if they 4cyl's are the same or not.

[390gtconv]

Being a "global car" not sure what Europe folks style is.

[chachee52]

Jim, my comparison with the 4 door Charger is I don't like it. The Charger was NEVER a 4 door. It's a completely different car and has lost it's identity. Is it a nice car, sure, but I don't like the Charger name. I think the same with an AWD Mustang. Never has, shouldn't in the future. Engines come and go out of all cars, but the soul of the car should survive in some way of fashion.
Ian, I understand the official # just came out, but those # have been floating around +or- a couple of HP. Like I said, I'd like to see the track # because I agree with you about weening away from the 6 if its the same power and such.
George. I agree with yo uon paying more to get better efficiency. I have that argument with Jen and her Mini all the time. How she gets about 35MPG but it's Premium so is it worth it?

[SVT10th]

Regarding the premium gas. I think you all are losing sight of the fact that the Mustang (or Mini) is not supposed to be or is it advertised as a "economy car." You want high MPG on cheap gas, go get a civic. You want 300hp with darn good mileage, the Mustang might be for you.

FWIW: When I had my Juke -- a little turbo 4 that required premium (like all turbos I've ever heard of), I tried running it on mid-grade and tracked my gas mileage. The cost of the drop in gas mileage was greater than the saving in gas price.

[390gtconv]

Regarding the premium gas. I think you all are losing sight of the fact that the Mustang (or Mini) is not supposed to be or is it advertised as a "economy car." You want high MPG on cheap gas, go get a civic. You want 300hp with darn good mileage, the Mustang might be for you.

FWIW: When I had my Juke -- a little turbo 4 that required premium (like all turbos I've ever heard of), I tried running it on mid-grade and tracked my gas mileage. The cost of the drop in gas mileage was greater than the saving in gas price.

Well, a lot of the Subaru's and VW's are premium. Most have image of econo cars. Most people don't see that at first before buying

[390gtconv]

FWIW: When I had my Juke -- a little turbo 4 that required premium (like all turbos I've ever heard of), I tried running it on mid-grade and tracked my gas mileage. The cost of the drop in gas mileage was greater than the saving in gas price.

That may not always be the case between a manual or automatic or even other brands.