03-19-2010, 09:55 PM
|
#1 (permalink)
|
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: northern california
Posts: 1,365
Thanks: 331
Thanked 183 Times in 127 Posts
|
2011 Mustang V6 305 hp and 31mpg
LA Preview: 2011 Ford Mustang V6 makes 305 HP, gets 30 MPG — Autoblog
some interesting comments on how they did it........basic ecomodding actually.
"That impressive fuel economy figure isn't just the result of the new engine – a suite of new pieces have been developed in order to maximize performance, including a revised air intake, a pair of new six-speed transmissions (both automatic and manual), electric power steering, and even some aerodynamic tidying, including a revised front fascia, deeper front air dam, rear-wheel tire spats, different underbody shields, and a new rear decklid seal."
say it ain't so Joe!
|
|
|
|
|
03-19-2010, 10:12 PM
|
#2 (permalink)
|
|
...beats walking...
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 3,355
Thanks: 56
Thanked 331 Times in 250 Posts
|
...begs the question: "...WHY didn't they do this YEARS ago?"
__________________
• 2011 Chevrolet Cruze LTZ 1.4LT 6A
• 2009 Pontiac Vibe 1.8L/SFI 4A
• 2004 Pontiac Vibe 1.8L/MFI 4A
• 2003 Ford Focus ZX5 2.0L/Zetec 4A
• 1971 Dodge Charger 318 3A
• 1970½ Plymouth AAR 'Cuda 340/6BBL 4M
• 1968 Dodge Charger 383 3A
• 1967 Plymouth Barracuda Formula S 383 4M
• 1965 Plymouth Barracuda Formula S 273 4M
|
|
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Old Tele man For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
03-19-2010, 10:39 PM
|
#3 (permalink)
|
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Madison AL
Posts: 1,121
Thanks: 28
Thanked 38 Times in 35 Posts
|
HOLY ****! Decreasing aerodynamic drag lowers fuel consumption? NO WAY!
...After looking at all the specs also that's really not impressive at all.
|
|
|
|
|
03-20-2010, 01:01 AM
|
#4 (permalink)
|
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Lancaster Ca
Posts: 326
Thanks: 51
Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts
|
Not that impressice because Ford Had those plans for as long as Chevy did with the 304 HP V6 Camaro which looks waaay less aerodynamic but gets 29 MPG also
__________________
Tank:
(No actual EPA numbers for car just used F/E numbers when i first got it)
|
|
|
|
|
03-20-2010, 01:33 AM
|
#5 (permalink)
|
|
Moderate your Moderation.
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Troy, Pa.
Posts: 8,382
Thanks: 955
Thanked 324 Times in 273 Posts
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Domman56
Not that impressice because Ford Had those plans for as long as Chevy did with the 304 HP V6 Camaro which looks waaay less aerodynamic but gets 29 MPG also
|
When dealing with aero, there is a big difference between "looks" and "is".
Technically, a brick is more aerodynamic than the GM SunRaycer. Why? It's got approx 1/100th the frontal area, regardless that the Cd is something like 20x higher.
__________________
"¿ʞɐǝɹɟ ɐ ǝɹ,noʎ uǝɥʍ 'ʇı ʇ,usı 'ʎlǝuol s,ʇı"
|
|
|
|
|
03-20-2010, 01:35 AM
|
#6 (permalink)
|
|
Moderate your Moderation.
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Troy, Pa.
Posts: 8,382
Thanks: 955
Thanked 324 Times in 273 Posts
|
They should just give the new Mustang the EcoBoost V6, and to hell with "traditional power".
Seriously, it's about time they stopped sacrificing the rest of the product line to keep the Mustang as their "exotic" offering. Either step up and build up the line, or step aside and let someone else into the ring.
__________________
"¿ʞɐǝɹɟ ɐ ǝɹ,noʎ uǝɥʍ 'ʇı ʇ,usı 'ʎlǝuol s,ʇı"
|
|
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Christ For This Useful Post:
|
|
|
03-20-2010, 01:46 AM
|
#7 (permalink)
|
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: northern california
Posts: 1,365
Thanks: 331
Thanked 183 Times in 127 Posts
|
Actually, they should repeat history.
The 64-66 mustang offered a 200ci straight 6 w/ a 2.89 rear end and no a/c.
13 inch rims I think. a real FE model.
At the top the had the 289 4bl with a 4.10 rear end and a 4 speed.
They could, IMHO, really stake a claim with a eco model. Look how lexus has a hybrd on the IS model...and that is their boy racer model.
|
|
|
|
|
03-20-2010, 01:59 AM
|
#8 (permalink)
|
|
Pokémoderator
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 5,724
Thanks: 385
Thanked 459 Times in 315 Posts
|
mcrews -
I looked at the pix, but mostly saw engine stuff. I wanna see a belly shot.
CarloSW2
|
|
|
|
|
03-20-2010, 11:58 AM
|
#9 (permalink)
|
|
Driving the TurboWeasel
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Steuben County, NY
Posts: 458
Thanks: 14
Thanked 16 Times in 15 Posts
|
31 MPG from a 305 hp pony car is nothing to sneeze at. I bet we could see 40 MPG easily with the manual transmission version. I bet when Chevy ups the Camaro's mileage they come out with a 33 MPG version.
__________________
2012 Chevrolet Cruze Eco 6MT
|
|
|
|
|
03-21-2010, 01:27 AM
|
#10 (permalink)
|
|
Master EcoModder
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: california
Posts: 1,145
Thanks: 9
Thanked 98 Times in 78 Posts
|
Call me when they give an independent rear suspension and it loses 500 lb.
|
|
|
|
|
