That was a reality check, caddy92
That was a reality check, caddy92
There really isnt, the only Factory turbo options at this time are the Focus ST and like the WRx really. The Mitsubishi lancer Evo has 300 hp but is damn near 40k, and the ralliart only has a measly 230 or so. The dodge Dart SRT-4 "should" be coming out soon, but thats still hardly a hotly contested field.
...
... V6s were in the initial mustangs...
You are a typical Shelby owner...... :smh: Shelby was all about making a buck and thats it. He had zero to do with developing the 2013/2014 car.
... and being how Shelby had NOTHING to do with any 4 cylinder Mustang, I don't see him remotely having anything to do with one now. I could be wrong if he were still alive. ...
The GT500 would not existed without SVT. ...
My 2c worth...
Most 2.3t Mustangs don't run like Huber's or Stingers cars and very few people have the knowledge to make them run hard. But that's half the fun, any idiot can make big power on a Shelby or Coyote motor...
Really? And what makes modding an already turbocharged 4-banger any more difficult? The exact same principles apply. A four-stroke engine is a four-stroke engine. The cylinder count is virtually irrelevant. In as little as about 3 hours our Forester went from 230HP to 370HP, and it was as simple as swapping the turbo and loading a tune. It took me 3 times as long just to install my Whipple. And the same goes for my Killer Chiller.
<end of direct replies>
Some of you guys are really showing your [lack of] age with all this "a 4-banger is as good as a V8" love. A four cylinder engine will never make as much power as an equally modded V8. Yes, getting a 4-banger to spit out 500+HP is an impressive feat, full stop. But let's be real here. We have V8 cars on the market that roll off the assembly line with more power than that, even naturally aspirated! Five hundred HP isn't even a respectable goal for a V8 these days. Mildly modded GT500s immediately jump into the 700 - 800 HP range just as a jumping off point! That's why it's nothing special to talk about unless you're pushing 1,000HP! You can pretty much bank on any 4-banger putting out 700+HP to not have a single stock internal part; and in most cases not even the stock block. There are GT500s pushing 900+HP with nothing more than a blower swap and fueling upgrades. Any 4-banger making north of 1000HP is doubtful to be a real streetable car and will run like crap when not on full boil, whereas people are driving 1000HP V8 cars to and fro on a daily basis in comfort.
My 2c worth...
Most 2.3t Mustangs don't run like Huber's or Stingers cars and very few people have the knowledge to make them run hard. But that's half the fun, any idiot can make big power on a Shelby or Coyote motor. No one even gets exited about it anymore unless you have 1000+hp. But guaranteed the first person to run 10's or even 11's on a 2015 with the 2.3 Ecoboost will be in a magazine. It just something different and a challenge. Plus it will likely handle better, be cheaper to insure and get better mileage for those who care. That said, I agree there certainly isn't much more American than a big V8 sounding muscle car. And if I didn't own one I would miss it. But the sound of a turbo spooling through a free flowing exhaust & intake still sounds better than most 6cyl's I hear. Even with a turbo, most GN's and GTR's sound like shit.
I can't quite figure out how the 2.3 makes sense in the 2015 lineup. It will certainly have more performance potential vs. the 6 for most people. But I would have been happier with a bigger 2.5 or 2.7 and about 350hp/torque, and less weight on the nose. At least that would seem like a proper upgrade vs. the 6. Initial reports make it sound a little too sterile and subdued for an upgrade engine.
The Mustang SVO did make sense back in its day. Unfortunately it was expensive (for a Mustang), gas got cheap and Ford never marketed it well. But it would absolutely run circles around a 5.0 on any road course or autocross, was just as fast and got better mileage. It probably handled better than any Mustang built up until 2005. And unlike a NA 4cyl car it definitely had a soul, and the respect of most 5.0 owners back in the day. Perhaps just not to some of today's Shelby nut-swingers who just drive in a straight line, only on Sundays when the sun is out
I just want to point out the bolded part as being untrue. I'm guessing you forgot about the 2000 cobra r?
On topic, while I think it is a good idea to offer the 2.3 ecoboost, I fail to see how it will be a legitimate performance replacement for the 5.0 and/or other v8 engines this generation mustang will offer. Sure, it will be a little lighter (relatively speaking) but it will be down on power significantly compared to the 5.0.
I see nothing wrong with people like a 4 cylinder mustang but let's be realistic here.
From the other thread that just popped up on the suspension:
" The ecoboost 4 has the best power to weight ratio of any car available in the US under $50k." ... I believe that speaks for itself.
The only way I would purchase a 305hp, I-4 turbo Mustang is if it had a 2300lb curb weight...:coolman:
I see 6 cylinder GTRs run all over most of the cars in the world. But they have always been known for V6s. And I'm sure there are people out there that own one, that would never buy another one if it came with a 4 cylinder.
I stand corrected. There was the SVO, and it has it's place with a few groups out there, but I have never seen one go down the quarter. To me, I never considered it to be a REAL Mustang anyways. Bleh.
It has two limitations as I see it:
1. Direct injection. When a DI car runs out of fuel, it is hard to get more, plain and simple.
2. The integrated exhaust manifold. Once that thing chokes it will be very hard to make more power. Granted, assuming this engine is based as heavily on the 2.3L mazdaspeed3 motor as we seem to think it is, I have tuned several BT mazdas making 450 whp on the stock exhaust manifold so... maybe it wont be terrible.
I saw one at the dealership yesterday and I have never drooled over a car like that. I saw a GT at the auto show a while back, but really being able to get up close and look at this car... it really is something else.
whoa whoa whoa whoa, based on the turd MZR? i don't think so Tim. i work for mazda, and the MZR is an OLD, like T-rex OLD ford design. the new 2.3 is based entirely off the EB 2.0 engine which was an "all new" design from ford. there is zero MZR in the new 2.3.