BarneyPenny

Hey everyone, I'm a college student and getting rid of my FoxBody running project in favor of a newer (2015) 5.0 or EcoBoost. Provided I don't get the premium package, I have found 2015's with low mileage for about 30k and 23k out the door. I could afford either, but the better gas mileage of the EcoBoost is attractive to me. What kind of 0-60 and freeway acceleration differences could I expect to notice from the two? Would it be feasible to get an EcoBoost RELIABLY to GT speeds 0-60? How much worse is Eco suspension? How much better is Ecoboost handling?

Thanks!!!

buckethead2

The 2.3T is a great motor in a great car.
But get the 5.0. The GT is the shiznit!

krssrls

what he said...^^^^^^^^^^

Mach2

Yeah, what he said too...............

My 16 GT Premium is the most fun I've had with my clothes on.

BarneyPenny

I test drove a GT today and it was quick. Unfortunately the dealer didn't have a stick so I was only able to drive an auto. It felt powerful but there was terrible lag if I floored it, while it downshifted and revved up. I'm talking like a full 3 seconds. Is the manual that bad?

Intrepid175

Well, I don't have significant experience with either so all I can offer is an opinion based on what little experience I do have and on what I've been reading. Depending on the reviews you look at, there's at worst, slightly less than 2 seconds difference between the 0-60 times of a stock Ecoboost and a GT. Some of the comparisons I read, there was slightly less than a second between the two. But to get the Ecoboost "reliably" up to GT performance? Don't know. The more you mod an engine like that, the more likely it is that you're going to introduce reliability issues and unless you intend to go around racing everyone, I seriously doubt you'll actually notice the difference and I'm not sure it'll be worth the effort, money, and risk. I know there will be those who disagree with that. But as many like to point out, and I tend to agree, there's no replacement for displacement! Everything else being equal, I think it's a reasonable conclusion that a stock 5.0 is going to be more reliable than a modded 2.3. I'd also point out, that there's no free lunch. You mod the 2.3 to where it'll keep up with the 5.0 and you'll likely kill that fuel economy advantage you said you were interested in.

As for suspension and handling, stock for stock, every write up I've seen says the Ecoboost is the better handling car. Both cars have essentially the same suspension system, each tuned for the weight and setup of the car. I wouldn't consider one "superior" to the other. The 5.0 engine is a full 200 lbs heavier than the 2.3 turbo and that doesn't help the cars dynamics on twisty roads but that doesn't mean the GT is a bad handling car. Mustang's, IMO, aren't sport cars in the league with something like a Porsche Boxster, Nissan 350/370 Z, and others so if all out handling is what you're looking for, there are better cars than the Mustang but you could do a lot worse too!

Best of luck with whatever you decide!
Steve R.

Intrepid175

That's interesting. Don't know exactly what to tell you about that. A friend of mine has a '15 GT automatic and she let me drive it. I played around with it for about 25 miles and found it to be quite responsive. At one point, I got it up to about 25 mph steady and laid into it hard. The tranny downshifted to second immediately, laid me back in the seat and I held onto it for about a second more after it shifted to third before I let off and looked at the speedometer. I was doing over 80!! ???

redass02gt

I'll say this: while the 2015 mustang is a good car with any of the engine options, I wouldn't have purchased a 2015 mustang if I couldn't get the GT.

krssrls

When your drive the manual you are in control of the shift points not the computer. So you cant compare the two.

movielover40

I think in the long run the 5.0 will be less expensive to maintain.

Turbochargers wear out and 4 cylinder engines lose power as they get miles on them.