LilRoush

I'd love to know who wrote this. Nothing but opinion from someone who needs a lesson in Ford Mustang history. Poor terminology, no facts and made up info.
Sad that this is where this forum has headed.
I'm curious as to the claim the 3.7L is outdated in the car, but then praises the 5.0L. Does the author know they started in the same year in the Mustang?

NYstang

Perhaps the staff member should pipe up. Hell, If thats outdated, perhaps I could school him with my antiquated pushrod engine...

MustangInTexas

I don't think Mr. Klein means that the Cyclone motor is outdated but that the V6 in general for this car is outdated. I don't know what cars he drove but the EB I drove was a bit of a dog. And I KNOW he wouldn't have this opinion if he drove my V6. The current V6 probably doesn't feel like it should. Heavier car & lower power then in the S197 and
not geared low enough. On top of very few options it's clear that Ford is trying to push it out from under the Mustang hood.

bluebeastsrt

Because ford is pushing the Ecoboost hard and the V6 and EB were a dead heat performance wise. If they would have left the 7K red line the V6 might have been faster than the EB stock. And for people not looking to mod. Why buy a 4 banger that sounds like a pissed off weed wackier when you can get the V6 for less money. Back to this smackers opinion that wrote the article. I don't understand how you can represent the Mustang community and then say that an Engine that is in a bunch of our cars on this forum sucks. 4 years ago every magazine out there was telling you what a great little engine the 3.7 was in the Mustang.

PNYXPRESS

Unfortunately i see the v6 engine dissapearing from the mustang line up, again.
Ford did the same thing with the fox mustangs and it appears to be happening again.

Chromeshadow

I've always loved V6s, from the first 2.8L Capri that I had. They are smaller and lighter than V8s and easier to work on than V8s and turbo 4s. I have one turbo 4 (Solstice) and rented the 15 turbo Mustang, would not trade either for my 2012 V6. I like the fact that the 3.7 is NA, I don't have to worry about the complexity of a turbo and inter-cooler. I waited 12 years between Mustangs (went from 2000 V6 to the 3.7. I may get a spare 3.7 and trans and keep this car for 20 years.

pascal

It always go back to test driving the car you're interested in vs basing your opinion on ignorant writers.
When we bought our Fusion, I tried all the models sporting the different engines and while the 2.0L EB isn't a furious beast, it is the best mill and it moves that car quite nicely so that was the winner.

Overcast451

So.. I just joined here, and I just got a 2015 3.7L

I totally disagree. The Ecoboost may not be a bad motor, but the V6 easily won for me.

Why?

I drove a Dodge Dart for the last 3 years - it was a fun little car and good on gas... but I couldn't tell you how often the Turbo lag let me down. When you need the power the MOST - the 'too weak to run Normally Aspirated' engine in the dart would let me down. Sure, I could downshift faster, but naaa. And the Ecoboost - there may be some small mods - ECU, Exhaust and such - maybe tweak out a few extra horses..

But - in my humble opinion - the 3.7 in my car now - has no Turbo on it.. Yet.

So I can see the "V8 vs. V6" debate as legit, I suppose - to some purists.

I couldn't find the HD audio on any of them - even the expected 2016's coming in - none of them had it. But.. Alpine has a wonderful head unit, and to be frank - it's less than the HD Audio option from the factory.

He mentions in the article..

But why not? I've had enough of the V8 daily driver.. just a waste of fuel and money. I've had a 4 cylinder turbo-boosted daily driver also.. when you need to apply power to the wheels like *NOW* - you have to get over 2300 RPM's to even have a chance at that. Plus, I found out with the Dart - that sure.. Dodge says those Iridium plugs in the turbo will do 100,00 miles... ROFLMAFO!!!!! No way - after 30,000, they were DONE. I had to replace them. Dunno how the Ford engine is on those, but the turbo is running hotter, faster, and with more compression in the cylinders - makes sense it'll burn plugs faster. V6 is perfect for my niche right now.

I suppose.. as long as some of us keep buying them - Ford would be silly to stop making them.

Really in the end - it's completely subjective. I love the power of the V8 - but you know, I don't want to leave this car at home, while I drive our second car for fuel economy. I wanted a Daily Driver to replace that Dart - and the V6 Mustang won. Just love this car. 300 HP is more than adequate - if you consider what your buddies would say in 1965 if your 'stang had 300HP... yeah.. I'll be just fine.

LilRoush

Funny part is the author doesn't use terms correctly - something an automotive author should do if they want to be taken seriously. The Mustang was never and still isn't a MUSCLE CAR (American made full size, seating for 5 with a V8). It has always been a pony car (2 door, 4 seats with a long nose and short trunk).

My understanding of the turbo 4 in the Mustang again was to test the market for a smaller motor turbo car as well as meet the new over all gov't fuel standards they have to comply with. I would venture a guess that we will see the EcoBoost 6 show up as the entry level Mustang rather than the N/A V6 continue.

bluebeastsrt

A boosted 6 would be awesome. They are already 11 second stock turbo 4 banger bolt on EBs out there.