new mustang ecoboost

[logix]

ford refreshed the mustang ecoboost for 2018 it claims 21 city / 32 highway from the EPA. Thats 1 /2 mpg more than its predecessor. Im thinking bout getting one torn between that and the civic si drove both loved the mustang trying to justify mpg difference. I gotta say for being RWD and 500 pounds more (because of that) its actually not a big hit over a SI for MPG. The old model owners claimed they could get 40 mpg if they were being good. Any Thoughts?? Has anyone ecomoded one of these here?

[Taylor95]

If mpg really is more important, then you should get the Honda. Getting 20% above epa mpg estimates for a Mustang sounds pretty unrealistic. In reality your highway mpg would be about the same as the epa estimate within a few mpgs depending on the speed you are driving at.

[logix]

Originally Posted by Taylor95

If mpg really is more important, then you should get the Honda. Getting 20% above epa mpg estimates for a Mustang sounds pretty unrealistic. In reality your highway mpg would be about the same as the epa estimate within a few mpgs depending on the speed you are driving at.

Lord I know!but the test drive killed me the turbo lag of the 1.5 in the si and touch screen display lag made me kind of hate it . That extra 120 hp and almost litre motor make a large difference

[Hersbird]

I disagree with you can't beat the EPA by a lot in the mustang. Get a manual even if the auto has a better EPA. Two things the EPA punishes with how they do the test, horsepower and manuals. They make the manuals shift at the wrong points for economy and they make the higher HP cars actually use their horsepower in the testing. If you drove with the same acceleration rate as say a Mirage automatic is allowed in the test and shift early and often, you will beat the EPA easy.

[Ecky]

Most new manuals have very significantly shorter top gearing than automatics. I'd still take a manual 9 times out of 10, but the gearing difference is really significant.

I believe Balto had an auto Civic with turbo 1.5 for a while and was seeing 50-60mpg with it.

[logix]

Originally Posted by Ecky

Most new manuals have very significantly shorter top gearing than automatics. I'd still take a manual 9 times out of 10, but the gearing difference is really significant.

I believe Balto had an auto Civic with turbo 1.5 for a while and was seeing 50-60mpg with it.

That's actually good info I guess i could get on the clutch more. Loll

[roosterk0031]

Do a little searching on ecoboost running higher ethanol blends E30 mainly, they respond well. Read one today on a fiesta 1.0 picking up 1 second on 30-90mph 5th gear WOT run over E0. F150 3.5 ecoboost picked up 50 hp or ft'lbs on E30 vs regular in another test. Less timing retard = more power with minimal loss in MPG.

[hayden55]

I don't believe anybody can get 40 mpg out of a v6 mustang unless they are going 55 mph. The 11-14 v6 mustangs got more like 16 around town and 28 on the highway for the auto.

[LeanBurn]

OP is referring to the 1-4 Ecoboost powered model

Get the mustang in manual.

Make it your goal to beat EPA and enjoy the driving dynamics of RWD.

If you get the Civic turbo you will be thinking the whole time what life would've been like with the mustang. If you get the mustang you won't give it a second thought.

[logix]

Originally Posted by LeanBurn

OP is referring to the 1-4 Ecoboost powered model

Get the mustang in manual.

Make it your goal to beat EPA and enjoy the driving dynamics of RWD.

If you get the Civic turbo you will be thinking the whole time what life would've been like with the mustang. If you get the mustang you won't give it a second thought.

Ugh your telling me brother I decided to give them both a longer test drive. But I feel that way and yes always in manual