Ecoboost Comparisons, Analysis, and Opinion
05-17-2015, 08:55 AM
#11
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: GA
Posts: 19
I'm keeping my GT and looking at an EB as a DD. If I get one I will do some lite mods to enhance longevity - larger intercooler, oil catch can & possibly a tune. The tune would only be if it did not negate the drive mode programing in the premium option pkg. I test drove one last week and like the updates Ford has offered.
05-23-2015, 03:51 PM
#12
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Texas
Posts: 20
Some interesting observations about this path:
1. The engine in my Mustangs has been decreasing over the years. I wonder in 10 years what it will be...the 1.0L Ecoboost? Gads.
2. Except for the 3.8L the HP and Torque has been increasing even though power and torque have been going up.
3. Fuel economy is getting better with each iteration as well.
4. This Ecoboost Mustang, being criticized as 'not being worthy of carrying the Mustang badge' by self-proclaimed experts is going to be the highest performance Mustang I have owned so far. In fact, this car outperforms the two V8's quite handily. Ah, no fair I hear people claim; those are old and stock they were slow but easily modified.' Yup, and so is the 2.3L easy to modify. Very interesting predicament.
Back in 1979 the new platform had the (then) 2.3L I4, 2.9L V6, and the GT had the 2.3L I4 Turbo. By 1982 the 5.0L was reintroduced as an optional engine as the GT came with the 2.3L Turbo. The SVT for 1984 and 1985 had a 2.3L Turbo as well. I guess none of these people have real Mustangs either according to these self-proclaimed experts. My opinion is yes, it is a real Mustang and for crying out loud, based on my previous cars, you better hold on tight!
1. The engine in my Mustangs has been decreasing over the years. I wonder in 10 years what it will be...the 1.0L Ecoboost? Gads.
2. Except for the 3.8L the HP and Torque has been increasing even though power and torque have been going up.
3. Fuel economy is getting better with each iteration as well.
4. This Ecoboost Mustang, being criticized as 'not being worthy of carrying the Mustang badge' by self-proclaimed experts is going to be the highest performance Mustang I have owned so far. In fact, this car outperforms the two V8's quite handily. Ah, no fair I hear people claim; those are old and stock they were slow but easily modified.' Yup, and so is the 2.3L easy to modify. Very interesting predicament.
Back in 1979 the new platform had the (then) 2.3L I4, 2.9L V6, and the GT had the 2.3L I4 Turbo. By 1982 the 5.0L was reintroduced as an optional engine as the GT came with the 2.3L Turbo. The SVT for 1984 and 1985 had a 2.3L Turbo as well. I guess none of these people have real Mustangs either according to these self-proclaimed experts. My opinion is yes, it is a real Mustang and for crying out loud, based on my previous cars, you better hold on tight!
I agree..... this type of engine is very modern and appropriate for the times and is here to stay.
Bob
05-23-2015, 04:37 PM
#13
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: MI
Posts: 37
Its very good. The V8 is more good. Just a matter of whether a person wants to pay more up front and for gas for more HP. Mine isn't a 2015, isn't a daily driver and I bought used so the V8 makes sense.
My first GT was an 85 manual with the last of the carburetors, it seemed crazy fast at the time but probably had 75 HP less than todays EcoBoost or V6. I suspect a stock 2015 4 banger Camry would be only slightly behind it 0-60 and a V6 Camry would destroy it. Times have changed.
The EcoBoost guys need to stop thinking they have to justify their decision. You don't, its a very good power plant for this now almost modern platform. I'm not a fan of any turbocharged car really, the lag and abrupt power delivery just don't do it for me (I like my abrupt power more accessible I guess) but for 85% of driving the Ecoboost is just fine and since its lighter the car is more balanced.
My first GT was an 85 manual with the last of the carburetors, it seemed crazy fast at the time but probably had 75 HP less than todays EcoBoost or V6. I suspect a stock 2015 4 banger Camry would be only slightly behind it 0-60 and a V6 Camry would destroy it. Times have changed.
The EcoBoost guys need to stop thinking they have to justify their decision. You don't, its a very good power plant for this now almost modern platform. I'm not a fan of any turbocharged car really, the lag and abrupt power delivery just don't do it for me (I like my abrupt power more accessible I guess) but for 85% of driving the Ecoboost is just fine and since its lighter the car is more balanced.
Last edited by 1985GTto2013GTCSV; 05-23-2015 at 04:47 PM.
05-23-2015, 05:22 PM
#14
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Texas
Posts: 20
You're right....it isn't necessary to justify liking the 2.3 turbo: however, you are a bit off about the "abrupt power" of the turbo. The 2015 overall was a really good upgrade to not only the Mustang heritage, but to all cars in general. I mean that it is a fantastic value (with any engine choice). I was set to get the 8, but when I compared the 8 to the 2.3 at the dealer I was confused. Sure I liked the sound of the 8 better, but the near-constant power of the 2.3 was very nice (it pulls well over a broad RPM range, not just when revved). On the test drive I flipped over to the 2.3 (which I then purchased). It wasn't about a better sticker price or gas mileage (nice icing on the cake though!), but about being really fun to drive because of the always-on power, even if in the wrong gear. ( It's much quicker than the 6 or 8 if you step on the gas in too high a gear). Conclusion: 2.3 turbo and the 8 are both great choices depending on the driver.
05-23-2015, 05:26 PM
#15
Its very good. The V8 is more good. Just a matter of whether a person wants to pay more up front and for gas for more HP. Mine isn't a 2015, isn't a daily driver and I bought used so the V8 makes sense.
My first GT was an 85 manual with the last of the carburetors, it seemed crazy fast at the time but probably had 75 HP less than todays EcoBoost or V6. I suspect a stock 2015 4 banger Camry would be only slightly behind it 0-60 and a V6 Camry would destroy it. Times have changed.
The EcoBoost guys need to stop thinking they have to justify their decision. You don't, its a very good power plant for this now almost modern platform. I'm not a fan of any turbocharged car really, the lag and abrupt power delivery just don't do it for me (I like my abrupt power more accessible I guess) but for 85% of driving the Ecoboost is just fine and since its lighter the car is more balanced.
My first GT was an 85 manual with the last of the carburetors, it seemed crazy fast at the time but probably had 75 HP less than todays EcoBoost or V6. I suspect a stock 2015 4 banger Camry would be only slightly behind it 0-60 and a V6 Camry would destroy it. Times have changed.
The EcoBoost guys need to stop thinking they have to justify their decision. You don't, its a very good power plant for this now almost modern platform. I'm not a fan of any turbocharged car really, the lag and abrupt power delivery just don't do it for me (I like my abrupt power more accessible I guess) but for 85% of driving the Ecoboost is just fine and since its lighter the car is more balanced.
05-24-2015, 04:58 PM
#16
1st Gear Member
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Texas
Posts: 106
I have been driving 4 cyl cars for years. In my life I've watched things like fuel injection, ECUs, variable valve timing, etc become commonplace. Who remembers pumping the gas pedal when starting a car? Lol. Things have changed a LOT. Turbo cars are sooo much better than they used to be. They can be tuned for almost immediate response and are far more reliable.
Gas mileage and practicality isn't foremost at my stage of life. I already have another car for that. Otherwise I'd be rockin' a new Accord EX V6 or something. The sound of a high-revving V8 with a good exhaust is intoxicating and that's just what I want.
As far as trying to have the fastest car, there's always someone faster in town. Don't worry about that. I say if you like it, drive it. Enjoy the heck out of the performance, fuel economy, and $$ you saved.
Gas mileage and practicality isn't foremost at my stage of life. I already have another car for that. Otherwise I'd be rockin' a new Accord EX V6 or something. The sound of a high-revving V8 with a good exhaust is intoxicating and that's just what I want.
As far as trying to have the fastest car, there's always someone faster in town. Don't worry about that. I say if you like it, drive it. Enjoy the heck out of the performance, fuel economy, and $$ you saved.
05-26-2015, 09:42 AM
#17
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Michigan
Posts: 38
Its very good. The V8 is more good. Just a matter of whether a person wants to pay more up front and for gas for more HP. Mine isn't a 2015, isn't a daily driver and I bought used so the V8 makes sense.
My first GT was an 85 manual with the last of the carburetors, it seemed crazy fast at the time but probably had 75 HP less than todays EcoBoost or V6. I suspect a stock 2015 4 banger Camry would be only slightly behind it 0-60 and a V6 Camry would destroy it. Times have changed.
The EcoBoost guys need to stop thinking they have to justify their decision. You don't, its a very good power plant for this now almost modern platform. I'm not a fan of any turbocharged car really, the lag and abrupt power delivery just don't do it for me (I like my abrupt power more accessible I guess) but for 85% of driving the Ecoboost is just fine and since its lighter the car is more balanced.
My first GT was an 85 manual with the last of the carburetors, it seemed crazy fast at the time but probably had 75 HP less than todays EcoBoost or V6. I suspect a stock 2015 4 banger Camry would be only slightly behind it 0-60 and a V6 Camry would destroy it. Times have changed.
The EcoBoost guys need to stop thinking they have to justify their decision. You don't, its a very good power plant for this now almost modern platform. I'm not a fan of any turbocharged car really, the lag and abrupt power delivery just don't do it for me (I like my abrupt power more accessible I guess) but for 85% of driving the Ecoboost is just fine and since its lighter the car is more balanced.
05-27-2015, 01:04 PM
#18
LOL...my first Mustang was a 1983 GT with a 4-speed manual. It had nothing on it....crank windows, no AC, no power locks, etc. In my mind that thing was fast...all 175 HP of it. I think by 1985 Ford was trying to advertise 225 HP or something like that and ended up in some legal battles over the real output of the engine. Fuzzy memories of all that...maybe it was the FI version that all happened on. Anyway, I didn't care, I was in Mustang heaven! Drove it for 7 years and 175,000 miles. The only reason I sold it was because I needed more reliable transportation for my 55 mile round trip commute to work, and being in rush hour stop and go for a lot of that drive I needed AC! I am spoiled rotten now....ah the memories.
05-27-2015, 01:54 PM
#19
Gentleman's Relish
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: AZ
Posts: 13,090
About carbon deposits in DI engines. They ALL suffer from it, some to a lesser degree than others.
http://www.underhoodservice.com/dire...rbon-deposits/
Overall the gist is that by the fuel bypassing the intake valves, they no longer get the gas bath to keep them cleaner so carbon naturally builds up over time. What really sucks is that you cannot do a traditional induction cleaning by adding seafoam or some other type of cleaner into the intake, especially if you have a turbo'd DI car.
The reason is that the unburnt chemicals from the treatment overheat the turbo and can cause it to seize from overheating thus destroying it. There's articles around about it including within Ford. The fix for a severely carbonized DI turbo Ford engine? Replace/rebuild the head....
http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2014/12...t-engines.html
Supposedly ford has a way of addressing the issue as part of regular maintenance but I can't seem to find the details on it.
http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2...-engines-.html
Personally, I like the fact you can get so much power these days from a motor less than half the size of a typical v8. I'll just wait until they fix that (big) little problem before I buy one.
http://www.underhoodservice.com/dire...rbon-deposits/
Overall the gist is that by the fuel bypassing the intake valves, they no longer get the gas bath to keep them cleaner so carbon naturally builds up over time. What really sucks is that you cannot do a traditional induction cleaning by adding seafoam or some other type of cleaner into the intake, especially if you have a turbo'd DI car.
The reason is that the unburnt chemicals from the treatment overheat the turbo and can cause it to seize from overheating thus destroying it. There's articles around about it including within Ford. The fix for a severely carbonized DI turbo Ford engine? Replace/rebuild the head....
http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2014/12...t-engines.html
Supposedly ford has a way of addressing the issue as part of regular maintenance but I can't seem to find the details on it.
http://www.autoguide.com/auto-news/2...-engines-.html
Personally, I like the fact you can get so much power these days from a motor less than half the size of a typical v8. I'll just wait until they fix that (big) little problem before I buy one.
06-14-2015, 01:30 AM
#20
5th Gear Member
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: CA
Posts: 2,073
Well, I went to one of the ecoboost challenge events, and while I'm not running out to buy a new mustang, I have some respect for the 2.3L turbo 4. It was definitely peppy and you could tell it was running boost. It didn't have the low rpm grunt like a V8, but it didn't take long at all for it to build boost. I also drove the Focus ST with the same engine and it wasn't as fun to drive, but the course they had layed out for it was much tighter, so it didn't really get a chance to roll into boost... but it had more than enough power to induce tire spin on the stock tires.
But the ecoboost 4 mustang is fun like a mustang should be.
But the ecoboost 4 mustang is fun like a mustang should be.