Irishone

Well you have to factor in hills and wind too into your trip. I did a 8 hour trip which included it all and my 5.0 got 26.8 at 85

mSaLL150

After driving both engines in the F150, I'd say both are great truck motors. The 5.0L likes to rev, but It is tuned down for the F150 and actually is great for torque and gets better fuel mileage than the ecoboost when towing a trailer (EB gets better mpg unloaded). The EB is a rocket though, even in the heavy truck (I have friends with F150s, one is the 5.0 the other EB).

Its great to see the 5.0L getting good mileage in the mustang, even when not babied. Can't wait to get one, my lifted 5.4L F150 is not cutting it at 12mpg mixed

Frustration

This aint about the logical result of massive power. It's about stated MPG versus what people can expect to get on the road and it's the one big dissapointment about the car that I have... I looked at the suggested milage and made the assumption that it would be reasonably close and it's very simply not.


There are other fairly powerfull cars don't suggest milage on paper that are this different in the real world...




I'm coming off a BMW 135 with tune that had VERY similar acceleration to my new GT. The zero to 60 was a wash...


That car got 21.5 in my daily driving which is pretty close to what BMW would estimate for the combination driving I do.

That car also dyno'd at the wheels very close to what they state the power to be (both before and after tune), rather than the ford suggesting 420 and delivering in the 360-370's...


\
The ford MPG numbers seem overyly optomistic even in best case scenario where BMW gave you all of the power and all of the gas milage that it suggests it does... The same with the 335 before it... Same with the M coupe before that and same with the Audi S4 before that.


I love the new GT, but one of the reasons I bought it was that all of the power was suggested to come with relatively similar MPG to the BMW.


The reality is a 3-4 MPG bullsh!t zone...

Grn95GT

what would be a way to get better milage with a 95 GT. im getting 17-19, am i getting the best i can, or can it be better

Slowbra302

My .02 cents. My 1995 cobra got 12-14 city and 15-17 highway with 3.73 gears and a blower =)

Mishri

advertised HP for all auto manufacturers is always Crank horsepower, what it puts out at the engine. WHP is always 15-20% less than that, except in the case of the 2011 mustang, it's about 10% less that is due to drive train loss being less by using electric water pump and power steering, no manufacturer can get around that.

There is an exception in the 1998-2002 camaro, they put the corvette 350bhp engine in the camaro and advertised at like 300hp, so what happened is it dyno'd at 300whp and really made about 350bhp. it was a more common practice back then to under-rate an engine, modern SAE certified testing doesn't allow for such under-rating. or in the case of that cobra that was advertised at 300bhp but made more like 280bhp, there was a lawsuit and Ford had to increase engine performance, that was around the same time.

You simply don't understand whats involved. and if you aren't getting reasonably close MPGs to the EPA estimates it's because of the way you drive. it's the easiest/fastest way to change MPGs is with your right foot, some people get quite a bit more than the advertised EPA estimated MPG.

I keep saying EPA because they set the test standards and they take test data from Ford and they do their own tests as well.

http://www.epa.gov/fueleconomy/data.htm

also which BMW 135 did you have? because I'd have to say no, your car didn't have the horsepower or acceleration of a new 5.0.

the other thing that heavily influences MPG is stop and go driving, especially in a relatively heavy car, the mustang at 3600lbs compared to a bmw 135 at 2800lbs, getting that mass moving takes more power.

Anyone in this thread who isn't getting the EPA estimated MPG rating simply isn't driving it like the testing requires or has modifications done. A tune and no other mods can have a huge effect on gas mileage. Also as stated, you should use 91 or 93 for better mpg, that wasn't the case in older cars with a stock tune, but these will know/adjust for it.

Nuke

Case in point:

I drive 25 miles to work. With the exception of getting out of my development, it's all 40, 45, 55 and 60 MPH zones with 17 traffic lights. I leave the house at 5:45 am and often make every light in the morning but hit most of those lights coming home and I average 24.5 MPG with my SUV (DD). The mornings I leave later and hit most of the same lights going in to work that I do coming home and I average 22 MPG.

I use the cruise control, even in traffic (all the fools racing from one light to the next make using CC in traffic quite easy). And those days that I DO take the Stang to work I average 26 MPG except when I have a tendency to get on it. 22 MPG or less on those days...

Oh, and toss ethanol-laced fuel in the mix and everything goes down the chitter even more...

Enochius

My 5.0 does what I expected it to fuel economy wise and probably better. I average 20-21 mpg every tank of gas. That's a mix of both highway and city driving and also me giving it 3rd gear pulls at least twice a day. If I was constantly WOT then I'm sure I'd be lucky to get 16 MPG. You can't 400+ hp without giving the engine the fuel when it needs it.

Mishri

yep 17 city 26 hwy for the manual with base 3.55 gearing, and highway is assuming a constant 65mph with the cruise control set with equal up/down hill. and the city is assuming you are using a light touch to accelerate and not stopping every block for a light. people are doing 80mph and/or accelerating to pass on the highway and idling in traffic for extended periods or doing some healthy acceleration and wondering why they aren't getting the best mileage. you can actually get better, like i followed my bro-in-law who drives 55mph on the highway and I got like 28mpg on that trip. normally i was also averaging 20mpg, but i know it depended on my driving habits. now with my mods im averaging more like 15 city and 22 hwy, 4.10s kill the hwy mpg.


yes, remember everyone,

the 26 Hwy is for 3.55 gearing, not 3.73.

Frustration

a bit of twisting on what im saying

I understand crank HP versus wheel HP etc...


The differences in suggested MPG and HP are very simply a lot further off with the GT than any of the last 5 cars I've had on exactly the same Dyno and exactly the same roads driving exactly the same way...


The claimed 420 and fairly high actual HP has nothing at all to do with overstating MPG as some folks above are posting...

"you should expect X milage because we drive a big bad *** car, you should go drive a prius if you want milage" is just about as Dumb / ignorant as you can get...


You shouldnt be told that the milage is X when it's very simply not, regardless of the size of the motor.

If Ford decided to also measure theoretical MPG at the crank, they should mention that...


I dont really mind the actual MPG and love the car, but my ego isn't so tied to my car that I can't call the MPG claim for this rig over stated / just not as good as claimed.