Notices
2.3L Eco-Boost Tech This section is for technical discussions pertaining specifically to the Eco-Boost variation of the 2015+ Ford Mustang.

Any info or guesses on the combined fuel economy for the 2.3 Ecoboost engine?

Old 08-22-2014, 07:18 PM
  #31  
omelet1978
Thread Starter
 
omelet1978's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: NV
Posts: 15
Default

I'm pretty happy with the numbers that they released and it's what i expected with the weight and power.

From looking at the V6 auto vs the V6 manual it seems the auto gets better fuel economy. My guess would be the ecoboost auto is going to be Ford's bread and butter, so I'm guessing a 27mpg combined for the 2.3 ecoboost auto?

Thoughts?
omelet1978 is offline  
Old 08-22-2014, 08:44 PM
  #32  
jz78817
4th Gear Member
 
jz78817's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,329
Default

Originally Posted by omelet1978
I'm pretty happy with the numbers that they released and it's what i expected with the weight and power.

From looking at the V6 auto vs the V6 manual it seems the auto gets better fuel economy. My guess would be the ecoboost auto is going to be Ford's bread and butter, so I'm guessing a 27mpg combined for the 2.3 ecoboost auto?

Thoughts?
probably. With the V6 being relegated to little more than fleet/rental cars (the lack of any V6 premium trim signals that) then yeah, I'd say the 2.3 EB will be the choice for people who don't want to stump up for the 5.0. Going by the build & price on the Ford site, you can load up an Ecoboost just like you can a GT. the available options on the V6 are pretty sparse.
jz78817 is offline  
Old 08-22-2014, 08:46 PM
  #33  
99GTvert
is my username.
 
99GTvert's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Earth
Posts: 13,807
Default

Originally Posted by kawasakiguy
Damnit I was so close! Face it guys 300hp, combined with the weight it's not going to be a prius.
That is true. I was hoping it would be a couple mpg's more but I mean its making a ton of power for that engine size.
99GTvert is offline  
Old 02-21-2015, 02:09 PM
  #34  
wildsailor
 
wildsailor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Michigan
Posts: 38
Default

Yes, there is a very well defined EPA test cycle to determine the FE label of every car. There is also a modification factor to lower the rating to account for more real world driving since nobody drives as carefully as the test cycle. This is why it is easy to get a better number than published especially on the highway. The modifier is about 20%. So if a vehicle attains 20 MPG in the test then the published number is 16 MPG. The need for this modifier is especially true with the Ecoboost engines as a boosted engine seems to be more sensitive to aggressive driving practices than a non-boosted engine.

Anyway, there is no guess or debate over the label data as it is available for any vehicle here (including information on how the measured data is modified and why):

http://www.fueleconomy.org/feg/Power...ng&srchtyp=ymm
wildsailor is offline  
Old 05-28-2015, 04:40 PM
  #35  
rgingo
 
rgingo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Texas
Posts: 20
Default

New to the forums. Took del of EB/prem/auto 2 wks ago. Also have a 2011/6/auto. With same driver and roads, I was getting about 22 overall with the 6 and highest with cruise-control on hwy of about 29. With the stock EB (during break-in) I'm getting about 28 combined and 34 on hwy using regular gas.... I should get a little better with premium (and after break-in).. Not a huge difference from the 6, but much better than the 8 of course.
rgingo is offline  
Old 06-30-2015, 07:30 AM
  #36  
AtlDesigns
 
AtlDesigns's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: GA
Posts: 22
Default

Originally Posted by rgingo
New to the forums. Took del of EB/prem/auto 2 wks ago. Also have a 2011/6/auto. With same driver and roads, I was getting about 22 overall with the 6 and highest with cruise-control on hwy of about 29. With the stock EB (during break-in) I'm getting about 28 combined and 34 on hwy using regular gas.... I should get a little better with premium (and after break-in).. Not a huge difference from the 6, but much better than the 8 of course.
Just took my EB/Manual on a road trip and avg 34mpg using premium. Not sure if you will see a huge difference in fuel grades. But also I did not use cruise on my trip.
AtlDesigns is offline  
Old 06-30-2015, 08:38 AM
  #37  
rgingo
 
rgingo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Texas
Posts: 20
Default

Just for the heck of it, I tried to see what the max gas mileage might be under optimum conditions.... Instead of 75MPH I took a test trip at 60MPH and economized my driving (driving with minimum braking/acceleration and A/C off. The best I could do was about 40MPG, then I just had to put the A/C back on and MPG dropped under 40 (about 38-39). Nice numbers, but realistically, @75 MPH with A/C on and occasional spurts for passing, I've been getting about 34 pretty consistently. With sporty driving on more curvy back-roads, the 2.3T is a blast, but also MPG suffers ....MPG drops to under 30 very quickly, averaging about 26-28. It's all good.
rgingo is offline  
Old 09-10-2015, 05:58 PM
  #38  
wileec
 
wileec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: CO
Posts: 3
Default

4k into mine with 2 longer road trips and am at about 26. I noticed at 65 we got about 33 for the tank but at 85 it was closer to 25.
wileec is offline  
Old 08-13-2017, 10:14 AM
  #39  
Mustangs of Illinois
1st Gear Member
 
Mustangs of Illinois's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Illinois
Posts: 106
Default

I think it has a lot to do with how fast you are actually driving.
I just got mine delivered last week from Ohio. The person that drove it back used cruise control and was probably 65-70mph.
He got 34.3MPG !

On my last trip running at 75mph I got 31.3MPG

So if you could actually stand driving at 55MPH, the fuel mileage would be amazing !
Mustangs of Illinois is offline  
Old 08-14-2017, 12:13 PM
  #40  
rgingo
 
rgingo's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Texas
Posts: 20
Default

Originally Posted by Mustangs of Illinois
I think it has a lot to do with how fast you are actually driving.
I just got mine delivered last week from Ohio. The person that drove it back used cruise control and was probably 65-70mph.
He got 34.3MPG !

On my last trip running at 75mph I got 31.3MPG

So if you could actually stand driving at 55MPH, the fuel mileage would be amazing !
An update to my previous remarks above...

About 8 months ago I got the Ford Racing tune-up for my 2.3 (390 ft/lb torque, 100 more HP at top end)....well I LOVE IT!!!
However....how does it affect the gas mileage...big concern:

After some testing in "Normal" mode, gas mileage at highway speeds not affected noticeably, that is, still getting in low-to-mid 30's at 70mph. One thing I did notice was that at 75-80mph cruise, gas mileage was still in low 30's...my guess is the higher torque offsets the wind resistance so additional throttle not required. Any ideas on that?

Didn't do much testing above 80mph, but seems mpg still near 30 or so...not bad in my opinion.

In "Sport" mode on a twisty fun road, well no change here .. gets thirsty pretty quickly, but the smooth power is so addicting it's worth it (call it entertainment cost). Nice to have both good mpg as well as pure power on tap when I want it. Highly recommend this setup (by the way, newer 2.3 Mustangs to have this superior tune stock).
rgingo is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: Any info or guesses on the combined fuel economy for the 2.3 Ecoboost engine?



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:43 PM.