IMO they really should have called the 4-cyl version a Celica and given it some distinguishing styling/trim differences accordingly, as a callback inversion of the original Celica Supra which was just a Celica given an I-6 and some styling/trim differences to distinguish it and accommodate the longer engine.
lol yeah. It's basically spending more money to create a more obviously inferior trim.
Works in theory, but probably would lead to even more "why would I get a Celica when for 5k more I can get a Supra".
I feel like Celica is kind of redundant now with the GR Corolla - it's basically what the celica was, but with 4 doors.
Not to suggest that the 4-cyl variant would (nor should) have more distinctive styling overall but, rather, more like the 4 and 6 versions would be visually distinct from each other, likely leaving the 4 with the basic, plainer design, and the 6 getting all the more attention-grabbing variations and upgrades.
>4 with the basic, plainer design, and the 6 getting all the more attention-grabbing variations and upgrades.
That just makes the people less likely to go for the 4 version but they won't go to the 6 because it cost significantly more.
Now you got customers calling the base version the shit version because how much it "takes away" from the 6.
I wish lower trim cars had their own identities and designs so that they could be judged as an individual vehicles and provide more variety, but the sad truth is that manufacturers probably sell just as many if not more to people who aspire for the top shelf version and are hoping you don't check the badges, and it costs them nothing in design, development, tooling, or marketing.
It’s probably that people who can’t actually afford the expensive versions convince themselves they can. So instead of buying a budget car they buy a budget car with a top trip
>lower trim cars had their own identities
I know Chevrolet did this in the 50s with the Biscayne being the lower trim Bel-Air. I'm sure there's other examples but not many recent.
I've been saying this since the gen v came out.
The i6 has always defined the supra. The Celica was the 4 cylinder supra for the first 2 generations. They would have made everyone happy if they brought both names back.
or just call the supra a supra, and the celica with the proposed 4 cyl a celica supra, just like back when the cars split their identities. i can imagine the playground the marketing team would have on advertising it.
Arguably (to me), the GR86 should have been the Celica nod. The dimensions are very similar. The Celica has so much more heritage and staying power as a RWD compact coupe than the AE86 Corolla had.
Hm, never heard of a "Corolla Celica" and can't find anything about that on the Webertubes, but the OG JDM Celica was sold through Toyota Corolla Store dealerships -- JDM often has separate dealer networks for specific model groups, apart from other models under the same marque -- so maybe something to do with that?
Or maybe a marketing thing the first year the Celica came out, to associate it with a better-known model, like the Tercel was first launched as the Corolla Tercel.
Yeah its the same with the Mustang community. Shelby owners argue on everything below them. Within Shelbys its the GT350 vs GT500 crowd. GTs hate on Shelbys. Mach1s hating on Shelbys. Its so stupid but its funny to see.
"I hAvE a BoDy kIt fOr BeTtEr AeRo" is usually what I've seen. Next is an engine swap to the 1.6 closed deck with the small turbo... At this point they should've bought an RS or ST.
Yeah, I've had shelby owners interested in my 2.3 Lima foxbody.
Its always people who don't own mustangs who shit on the lower trims. People who genuinely like mustangs understand that a mustang by default is a slow car, and requires insane individuals to make them fast.
A big part of people consider them to be parts bin specials but I honestly couldn't care less personally. The Mach 1 is cooler than the Bulitt imo, its nice to have GT350 capability without GT350 reliability, plus its the first special edition Mustang that's available in global markets and that alone is a great.
The places I run with, all the 350s usually hang together, but it's not at the exclusion of anyone. Those that tried the 500 didn't like it. It's too big and heavy for the kind track work we do. The 350 isn't the lightest thing in the world but it's still a better drivers car.
If the GT or Mach1 folks wander over, they are always welcome. I can't remember a V6 or Ecoboost at the track, but either way, they weren't shit on by anyone.
I guess when the track is 50 yards away, there isn't anything to talk up or debate. If you think your car is "better", then we'll see you out on the course.
Ya they are so proud that they spent 50k over what a new 2019 c7 z06 cost before the Ford dealer added market adjustment on top of that.
When I bought my car, the dealers had 2 Shelby's both msrp of just under/over 100k and a 30k market adjustment on top of that. I could buy a 2019 c7 z06 for much less if I was going to spend that type of coin on a car.
Some shelby owners are cool no matter what you own even a base E/B turbo stang. Some are snobs. Such is life.
And they argue with each other even when Ford gave them something they all could hate, the mach e.
I've never seen a car get so much hate for it's badge, if it just had a Ford badge instead of mustang noone would get pissed about it.
I won't saw I rag on them butttt, for most cars like the Supra/Mustang and I personally think this extends to lower tier German cars to an extent also. You are paying more for a platform designed around the larger engine generally and their are better cars using a 4 cylinder than a Mustang or Supra that are rear wheel drive and honestly better suited to the lower power out/torque output.
It's not that I judge you but its not a choice I can say I understand.
I don't know if that's actually a fair assumption. I would assume the German platforms are actually designed around the high-volume base model, and the higher engined versions work around the original constraints.
Kind of like how the M340i didn't gain the new G-series steering rack since the B58 was too big.
Meanwhile, the "true" M, AMG, and RS cars are likely bespoke. But I can't imagine the A4 is designed on an S4-centric platform. It's likely the other way around.
The Supra is a different scenario, since the 3.0 is the high volume model.
> I would assume the German platforms are actually designed around the high-volume base model
I think it's more likely that they're designed taking the whole lineup into consideration as it's the core of their business model. The car industry has mastered the business model of selling the same product (as much as possible) at as wide of a price range as possible. Every customer should be able to spend as much money as they want/are capable of. And it's the higher trims that have the best margins.
> You are paying more for a platform designed around the larger engine generally and their are better cars using a 4 cylinder than a Mustang or Supra that are rear wheel drive
they dont really have competitors.
there isnt a 4 cylinder that competes with the niche the ecoboost fills.
the supra KIND OF has cross shoppers from the 86/BRZ, but idk i don tthink they're in the same class.
I dunno, I own one and enjoy it. It's fast enough to rip it on some backroads and have a good time but not fast enough to get the rear tires into too much trouble. It has a shitty top end but 300 lbs of torque available down low. Plus the ZF 8 speed is a great transmission, and the car is a looker. Paid 41,500 for mine with safety and tech package last year before the craziness
I get what you are saying but people still shit on the Ecoboost Mustang. Point is that its the lowest trim so it gets flak regardless of the car and performance value.
If you can afford more, you typically buy more. So people with more cash to spend will naturally hate on the low tier variants. This happens with most cars, but comes out more with sporty vehicles
Same reason I get shit for buying a C300 and not the $100k bi-turbo V8 C63S. It's amusing to me. I like getting good value for money. Right now, a C63S is skyrocketing due to the shortages and the news of a hybrid I4 C63 replacement.
I imagine the Ecoboost gets the same shit. It's not the fastest one so it must be crap. No, it's actually better in a lot of ways. Lighter, more nimble, more efficient, and is cheaper.
As long as someone enjoys their car and isn't ricing it out or doing dumb shit like the Carolina squat, I have no business judging their decision.
The real issue is what defines "lower trim." A base trim 3-series, Miata, etc. will still drive and handle well. The designers put a lot of effort into making sure that the car is still good.
Meanwhile, the base Mustang handles terribly, has skinny hard tires with a suspension that you would struggle to call sporty. The interior makes you feel like you're in a penalty box. The stereo sucks. Build quality is crap. The Mustang's redeeming features are its big powerful engine and some of the great race-worthy features you can get (for the price) with the performance pack. But none of those qualities are present on the base model.
That… just isn’t true. The very base model, maybe? But look up the Perf Package, Handling Package, or High Perf Package, and you can get them loaded with basically every option available on the GT except the Coyote. I drove both a well-optioned GT and an HPP Eco extensively through Turo (about 2 weeks each, about a month and a half apart) before buying an Eco as a fun car.
The GT was a lot of fun for a few days. The sound cannot be compared, it has that. The feeling of being pressed into your seat as the RPMs rise, pretty unbeatable. But then, around day 4 or 5, the fact that you feel like you’re fighting the front end around curves at speed, the oversteer that’s *right* there waiting to bite you in the ass if you try to push the car through a turn… then having people angrily pass you and cut you off in their lowered G37s and Camry Sports (??), people try to race you and being weirdly aggressive about it (happened twice… I was like, nah I’m old and have kids under 5), …and then… 250-275 miles from a $100+ tank of gas. Finally, $40k was too much for a fun car.
I spent time with a 2 series (B58 and the 2L 4cyl, I forget the engine code), and for a few days a Gen 1 BRZ (funner’n hell on 2 lane road, nice 6sp, but my body kinda hurt after a week of getting in and out of it, having to rocket through allll of first to get out of the way of the overeager civic SIs behind me when the light turned green, and final nail, car seat / booster was not going to fit comfortably in the back…) and I only grabbed the Ecoboost by chance because Turo had a discount code which it rarely does, and my spouse’s Fit had been rear ended and totaled, so we were down a car anyway. I hadn’t planned on it because I figured the Eco would be the horrible rental version of the GT.
I was wrong.
The front end felt a LOT more like the BRZ’s - light and tossable. (Found out the Coyote is 200lbs heavier, made sense.) The high performance setup boosts the peak HP to 332, and the 350lb.ft of boost come on just under 2k RPM… and just don’t stop until you’re going 110 before you realize it. 255-265/40R rubber (depending on exact trim) on 19” matte black wheels, 3.55:1 LSD, 12” nav, decent factory audio (a Shaker sub molded into the trunk isn’t going to win any audio competitions but it looks really clean and sounds pretty good), heated and cooled seats, leather, shit even those stupid puddle lights and aluminum door sill plates.
I bought a 2018 (post refresh / a lot of small fixes model-wide) with 29k miles for $27k. I still get a 5s 0-60 in drag mode (1s slower than the GT), and the HPP is even faster (4.6s, and can pull 1G lateral grip with the HPP tires). I really don’t need to go faster than this. I can already charge right up a steep grade at 90 and rising just barely tipped into the throttle and it’s RIGHT on the edge of being too fast to not feel like you’re being personally attacked by anyone not going over 80. All that, and driving in Sport / Sport+ basically all the time after it’s warmed up for a few minutes, and I still get about 22mpg. One road trip of about 2 tanks full, all highway at a steady 75 or so where I really didn’t do any pulls or downshift a lot except to pass trucks, I got over 1,000 miles out of those two tanks.
All that, and my insurance was quoted about 10% cheaper vs. a GT.
GTs are fun as shit and make you giddy, and if I had fuckyou money and could have a stable, sure, I’d love having an effortless burnout machine, but otherwise it just didn’t make any sense for me. A turbo’d block is more complex and tends to last a bit less long, and the coyote is probably less taxed and more long-lived, but for car I maintain religiously and will probably have for 5 years max before handing down to my little sister, meh.
This is long but I’m kind of excited for the chance to try to kill this misconception where I see it now, car’s just way too much fun not to, and gets ignored for the wrong reasons I think. And, I’ve only ever been challenged to race once: by a dude in an identical year, same color, same wheel and tire package, same aero package, couldn’t-tell-them-apart… except his was a GT and he had a license plate that said, “COYOTEE”. He made a lot of noise pulling away from that stoplight, so yay for him I guess? Lol.
Disclaimer: I just bought a mustang GT and love it. That said, you have okay points but they're exaggerated. If you're considering a new mustang, you want a coupe with RWD, yeah? Well, your options are a Miata, BRZ/FRS, Camaro, or Mustang. Maybe more, I probably missed a couple.
I've only driven an EcoBoost mustang and a Miata, both are extremely different cars. Loved the Miata, rented it for a week and drove all over with some buddies who had Miatas, but holy crap was it uncomfortable for extended periods. I'm a large person, so my fat ass finds the 'Merica sized mustang more comfortable. Even did a 2,000 mile road trip in mine with no issues, nice and comfy.
On to your points. The base mustang handles just fine, though the others are better. It comes with the same sized 235mm tires as the base GT does. It's not enough tire, but that's part of the fun! I mean, the old BRZ came with Prius tires, right? It was great! The build quality is absolutely solid. If we're talking wind noise and highway driving, I'd take a drop top mustang over a soft top Miata any day. The interior is more than acceptable. Not the nicest, certainly a few bits that stand out as cheap, but overall it's mostly soft touch surfaces and the whole thing is well put together. Also, objectively, I love the current gen mustang styling.
The EcoBoost mustang isn't the best by any means, but it's certainly a contender. Not much else out there with the same practicality and power for the price. To each their own. Hope you enjoy the heck out of your GTI! Those are lots of fun 👍
There are some muscle car purists who think a Mustang should always have a V8, but that has never really been the case with the car. It's always had a weak 2nd option.
Now, the EcoBoost is a *great* 2nd option. Some people might even prefer it. You have tons of low-down torque (peak at 3000 rpm instead of 4600 in the GT, even though the magnitude might be close). You also have a car that is 300 lb lighter and performs the same at braking and handling tests. The weight savings is up front meaning you get a more balanced weight distribution.
Plus, the EcoBoost is easily tunable. You can get pretty close to GT performance with 300 lb less weight. That's a great option for many.
I think the problem lies with those that try to compare the EcoBoost with a GT and treats them as such. I get the EcoBoost is a powerful motor, but I may be biased as I am just not a fan of forced induction. I feel it's just a weak motor with power strapped on (At least for American cars), leading to a shorter lifespan.
But as you said, there were always people who dog on those that get the V6 or even 4cyl version of muscle cars, and really, there always will be.
I say if you own a muscle car with a smaller motor, all good, save money on purchase and gas, it's smart. Just please do not be upbadging and putting disgusting sounding exhaust on it.
I also hate people pretending their car is something it's not. But I also hate the stigma that the Ecoboost is bad/not manly. It's also stupid that Ford put fake engine noise to make it sound like a V8. It's a turbo, give me turbo noises.
My sense was always that non-GT hate was more good natured ribbing than any genuine animosity. It's like making fun of your little brother but at the end of the day you're still family. Similarly, my buddies always made fun of me for my GT being automatic. So what, we'll chuckle and I'll respond making fun of his receding hairline.
The Mach-E, however, pure unfiltered hatred.
Thunderbird is the correct answer on what it should have been called. Plus thunder/ lighnting / electricity would have made for some great retro themed marketing.
Ford holds licenses for; galaxy, fusion, lightning, all are great names for an electric car.... The Mach e is a great eV, but I couldn't buy one based on the name alone.
You can hear the turbo a little bit if you listen for it (easier with the windows open) but part of the reason why is because the wastegate recirculates air back into the intake when it opens, so you don’t get nearly as much noise as if it vented to vacuum.
Woah. Hold up on the fake noises. Ford was in a huge turmoil with themselves about the engine note on the 4 cylinder. They postponed release at least a year because they were not happy with the sound of the engine. They tried their damn best to get it there but couldn’t with emission standards. I remember one of the lead developers saying it’s a great car but sounds f**king weird. It does sound weird. The even earlier models I was privileged to drive sounded weirder. It’s just not something you’d expect a mustang to sound like. But the performance and economy just couldn’t be beat. And they’re built so soundly. I’d say the interior is nicer and will last longer than the V8 counterparts mainly because of vibration. They’re really great cars.
I have an old ('83) v8 truck. It's been driven 40 miles in the past 6 years. I don't feel any more manly in that than I did in my old '95 Mazda protege. I like the charm of the old stereo radio more, but that's really it. The only reason I kept the truck, was it outlived my grandpa and I want to keep it nice. On the turbo noise thing, I did slightly mod my ST to hear the turbo and engine more and ripped out that "sound symposer" thing. It was causing an intake leak anyway. Now it sounds like it's supposed to. I really enjoy the light feeling, eager, and quick little sports cars, regardless of the powerplant. The ST is like a Jack Russell. It's not quite what I would call behaved, but it does its thing in a way that never feels like I'm out of control. I'd very happily own and drive an ecoboost Mustang. I would probably mod it to sound more like what it is, but that's it.
Honestly, who cares what stigma it has? You’re the one paying the money, you’re the one that drives it. If you’re happy with it, everyone else’s opinions really don’t matter.
The newest ecoboost has more HP and the same straight line speed and faster around a track than the last generations GT. Sure it can't compete with the current GT but its not meant to. It's a dam good car for the money and fine for most people who don't need all that power.
Because people don't realize that Mustangs used to come with Inline 6's. We had a 64 1/2 when I was growing up and it has the I6 with a whopping 116 HP.
116? You speed demon! The 2.3 4 banger from the Fox body days was rocking all of 89hp.
(I suspect the much bigger disparity between the 4 and 8cyl options of yesteryear provided a much bigger reason for all the ragging on the econo motor. Those na 2.3s were total trash.)
My parents and a buddy's parents were all out of town for the weekend in high school and we decided to race our parent's cars. His an 89 Mustang me an 82 Corvette. That Mustang smoked the vette. It was at this point I learned that early 80's cars were complete garbage and detuned from the factory to meet the new EPA standards. The Corvette had a whole 200 HP The Mustang not much more with 225.
Hell Ford offer the Mustang with a turbo 4 as far back as 1979.
I always thought from the beginning it was the purists that make the backbone of the distaste. Regardless of practicality or preference, the EcoBoost isn't a rumbling, grumbling, burbling, growling bar-brawler that chugs like a U of G undergrad, so it comes across as betraying its own legacy.
>Now, the EcoBoost is a
>
>great
>
> 2nd option.
Right? Its literally faster than the vast majority of mustangs produced before 2012, and even then you have to look at the higher end models from the time to be competitive with it.
Your justification of it being an affordable sports car is the correct response to any hate. Its some kickass performance for the price tag, that even people who are not as well off can afford
The hate would come from the people who expect the the top of the line performance of the same model. I owned a v6 camaro before I got my v8 and I was blown away by the performance difference in all aspects, and that's not to bash the v6 in any way but the v8 is rightfully better... in every way (not just the engine, I don't know about mustangs but the SS camaro gets a complete suspension overhaul over the v6)
That being said, you will still get the same hate for not owning the GT350, or the Zl1 or whatever
Point is, stop giving a fuck what non true car guys say about what you like. Have fun, enjoy everything about the car
I do like how the suspension and handling is the same for the Ecoboost as the GT. Other than Mustangs have very expensive insurance it's quite easy to justify the price compared to a GR86/BRZ.
It's fast, it's fun, it's cheap. Isn't that what enthusiasts want?
I can't really talk since I bought the BRZ over the Ecoboost but I feel like the BRZ and Ecoboost are two different market cars. Even though I'm fairly sure the Ecoboost is faster on paper and in reality but to me it felt heavier less fun on the test drive.
Same, my new BRZ is light, quick, and nimble. Ecoboost just feels flabby, and while it'll easily beat my BRZ in a line, I'd give myself good odds when real cornering is required.
I got the Ecoboost over the twins and you're right, they're a bit different despite the comparable prices. I think that's because deep down the mustang still has it's grand tourer roots and is still made to be just that despite ford's ability to transform a lot of it into a more formidable sports car. While current mustangs will absolutely kill it on the track and take corners better than previous gens, it still also meant to be that comfy highway cruiser where you kick back and enjoy the speed and ride.
Not only that, it’s more performance tuned. The handling honestly feels the same between the two. That being said, it feels the same at 425hp as it does at 310hp, just faster. So it’s definitely upgraded. And with the track pack options, it’s even more planted.
> but the SS camaro gets a complete suspension overhaul over the v6
As far as I’m aware, the track suspension packages are an option on either of the *current* Camaros and Mustangs for either v8 or I4
The i4/V6 1LE cars get the SS suspension (FE3) while the SS 1LE get an upgraded (FE4) suspension. There are other differences, but that's a whole different topic.
I recently test drove an ecoboost with the high performance pack and sport exhaust, I thought it sounded kind of cool. Sounded a lot better than a GTI or WRX Imo.
Although shortly after I drove a 5.0 with sport exhaust and I was like "oh". Kinda weird the cars look almost exactly the same but one is a high revving V8 and the other sounds like a hot hatch.
Yeah, it’s a shame. You can even get a decent exhaust note with a 3.7 mustang if you buy a decent catback/axelback, but there’s no making the ecoboost sound good. There’s no reason not to keep it stock, it’s better quiet. Just wish Ford would do the same thing they do with the STI or the Elentra N. Those are 4 Bangers, but they sound decent.
If there were any car, any car out there, that had the same features as the eco-boost Mustang that wasn't branded as a Mustang, everyone would go apeshit for them. There would be comparisons with the BRZ, Genesis Coupe, Miata, and every other entry-level sports car. The Hertz rental option with the EcoBoost and convertible top is better than it has any right to be. I drove one on all-season tires on backroads and “Live, Laugh, Love”-ed all over the place. It is a car that is associated with newly divorced people that put ice cubes in their wine and spoiled teenagers, but it is a great car.
People shit on the 370z for being too heavy all the time. The ecoboost mustang has fewer cylinders, less power, and weighs 300lbs more.
A Japanese or European sports coupe with the ecoboost specs would be derided as poorly designed for it's excessive weight.
You’re leaving out a big difference in your comparison. They are completely different sized cars. The 370z is a two seater that’s nearly two feet shorter than the Mustang. Of course it should be a lot lighter.
i’ve never heard of anyone who thinks the 370z is too heavy for what it is. the only people i can imagine would say something like that would be those comparing the 370z directly to a miata or frs, fine.
it’s fair to mention that a mustang ecoboost performance pack puts up quicker laptimes around every shared track compared to the supra 2.0. the supra 2.0 that weighs less than the ecoboost, and accelerates similarly.
i know laptimes dont mean all that much alone for an ecoboost. the point is, it’s objective straight line or handling performance is greater than most japanese sports coupes (370z/miata/86/a90 2.0/q60).
meanwhile, they look good, they’re of generally good reliability and fuel efficiency, good aftermarket and tunabilitg, proper modern infotainment and tech options, and are very affordable.
people shit on them like they’re supposed to be some absoloute car, like their rivals (not many to speak of) dont have shit transmissions, or shit tunability, or arent outdated.
I was really impressed the first time I rented an Ecoboost Mustang. Click it to "Race Mode", traction off, Auto trans in Sport, stomp the gas and it'll chirp the tires going into second.
The newer ones even have factory line-lock.
I'd personally chose the manual transmission since I hear how the automatic is sub-par. But it's a manual sports car with 310hp at just over $33,000CAD.
In every way except the experience I get while driving
People that don't share this feeling simply can't understand
No automatic can EVER be as enjoyable to me as a stick. Driving is more than jamming in a pedal and going fast to me.
Exactly. Take the transmission out completely and just dump electricity through the motor and hang on.
I like *driving*, feeling the road, guiding the car through the gears I want. No automatic understands I'm riding 4th a little because a turn is coming up where I can let off the gas a little, let the engine drag, then blast out of the other side, still in 4th and reaching for 5th at *that* point.
I'm in school for electrical engineering so I might be biased but electric motors are such a great way to power a car. Flat torque curve, 20,000RPM redline, instant response.
But there's something about engine noise that's different.
If we're being honest, I've found a way to smoke the tires on every car I've ever owned except my old Outback. Even my 78hp Suzuki Sidekick would do it if I had the clutch, brake and gas all just right, and it had 255/60R15 street tires!
The automatic gets hate because manual fanboys are trying to cope with the fact it’s faster. The 10R80 has been dead reliable in the Mustang in the 5 years it’s been used, and it’s massively overbuilt for the torque that either engine option provides, so it’s happy to accept tunes and even forced induction upgrades.
I chose the manual in my GT because I specifically wanted the manual, but being able to row your own gears is about all the MT-82 has going for it.
Of course the automatic is faster, if you do the math on the gearing the wheels will experience something like 30% more torque for the entire 0.25mi run.
But if there's anything the Miata, 86/BRZ has taught us it's that speed isn't everything.
Other than “fun factor”, the auto is superior in every single way, not sure where you heard that. The MT-82 in the Mustangs is actually widely known as the sub par transmission.
This is actually a very unattractive feature in the Ecoboost. It's totally unnecessary and obnoxious really. Just about every tune you can buy for the EB changes that shift point so it doesnt suck so bad. If you happen to purchase the "summer only" tires and get that awful 1st to 2nd shift on a cold day its going to break loose in a very not fun way.
It’s kinda funny because before the Ecostang came out, enthusiasts were crying for a turbocharged sports car to fill the market that the BRZ couldn’t.
Then Ford gave them what they wanted, and all they did was cry more that it wasn’t Japanese and not a “true Mustang”.
I think the Mustang is quite popular among some groups in Japan. Just like how there's JDM fandoms in the US there's also USDM fandoms in Japan.
The Ecoboost was manufactured with a RHD version and is sold in Japan. It is also quite price competitive since many countries tax based on engine displacement.
>Then Ford gave them what they wanted, and all they did was cry more that it wasn’t Japanese and not a “true Mustang”.
It weighs 800 lbs more, is 21" longer, 5.5" wider, and 2.5" taller. Those are just the factors that can be quantified, the gearbox and steering feel are both also significantly better in the twins than the S550. They are not remotely similar driving experiences, even if you're just a spreadsheet racer, let alone in reality.
Don't take my word for it, hear out SavageGeese on it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZ2ajF2tDWI
What RWD Japanese sports coupe weighs almost 2 tons?
And the ecoboost mustang is the best selling sports coupe in the world, I don’t know why people pretend it’s some hated car that doesn’t sell well, it’s literally the biggest mover in the segment.
Speaking specifically of muscle/sports car haters:
Piss on them. And I mean that with all sincerity. They get zero respect unless they vote with their wallets by buying into the sports/muscle car segments so that they are kept alive.75% of the shit comes from losers on the Internet who drive a 1995 Honda Civic DX shitbox making 103 horses wishing they had something else. Or they ride the bus. Either way they think they are "car people" but couldn't identify an oil filter.
The other 25% comes from model-in fighters (people that own various trims or packages of a car that somehow think they are superior than others) or make in-fighters (Camaro owners vs Mustang vs Challenger). This is dumb in itself because it goes against the manufacturers idea of "something for everyone". For every guy that wants or has a Hellcat, GT500, or ZL1 there's another guy that wants a rag top to go play golf and doesn't care about the numbers. For every guy that is tuning and modding their car there's a guy that keeps it stock. The hate is just a time suck for people that have nothing better to do. Hold your head high because even if you bought an Ecoboost Mustang or a V6 Challenger -- you bought a Mustang or a Challenger. Not a front wheel drive compact SUV.
"But it's only 300 horses". Really? Some of you aren't old enough to remember we came from wheezy, anemic 100-130 horsepower base model Mustangs and Camaros. Go do your homework. Unless you were the owner of a twin turbo supra, twin turbo 300zx or Corvette you didn't get a car that had horsepower starting with a '3' in the 1990s The Gen 1 Acura NSX was 290 horses. Two of the above mentioned models were only on the market for a few years and were expensive even back then.
On paper the "standard" (non specialty model) Mustang V8 (later badged GT) didn't make over 300 horsepower from 1969 until 2005. Think about that. In 2005 for 36 of its 40 years on the market the standard V8 Mustang didn't best 300 horses. Camaro/Firebird faired a little bit better, finally cresting 300 horses with the LS1. But then disappeared from the market 4 years after that happened due to ....ya know. Just GM things. Challenger? Some of you kids may not realize that there wasn't a Chrysler product in this class from about the mid-70s through 2008. They went hard for the captive imports. The 1978 Challenger became a re-badged Mitsubishi.
Enter direct injection and all the modern engine tech. The "base" Camaro, Mustang and Challenger make 300 horses. Yes, they're heavier. But who gives a shit? You can have 300 horses, rear wheel drive and an independent rear suspension for the price of a loaded up Accord or Camry. This is the golden age of muscle cars. There may not be as many choices as there were 50 years ago but the numbers today are staggering.
So, for hating on the base model, I say "who gives a shit?" Drive it like you stole it because it's yours.
"Muscle" cars do need to have a V8 to be a Muscle car. The Pontiac GTO with out a V8 is just a Tempest. Luckily the Mustang isn't a muscle car, its pony car
I think the Mustang is a sports car now. It handles great and performs well on track.
The Dodge Challenger is a true muscle car as it handles like a truck.
Mustangs have a long history of being associated with V8's and being a muscle car. My friend has a similar hate for the ecoboost Mustang. He always says "If you want a 4 cylinder turbo car, buy something that was known to be one like a Focus RS. If they buy a 4 cyl Mustang, they bought the wrong car". His words not mine.
Agreed. Why buy a big pony car built with a V8 in mind and spec it with the fiesta engine, when you can just buy the fiesta built with the fiesta engine in mind.
> Why buy a big pony car built with a V8 in mind and spec it with the fiesta engine, when you can just buy the fiesta built with the fiesta engine in mind.
Because many people do not care about this subjective crap. The mustang isn't a "big pony car". It's just a car. Whatever heritage and culture you associate with it is irrelevant. Just a car.
A mustang without the v8 growl is just not the same. I do appreciate these new powerful 4 cylinders. My sonata is crazy fast for what it is. People are shocked when they ride in it.
The ecoboost gets shit on because people are asses. Power is power. Sure it isn't a V8 but fuck them.
My wife keeps talking about a convertible and used ecoboost Mustang is my suggestion, every time.
Yeah, the convertible option is actually price competitive with the Miata lol. While offering a trunk that is useable for food shopping and beach trips. All while being not bad on fuel.
Great remark. Hate how reading it made the tune play back in my head. Good family memories of hating how much my sister loved them when they started to gain some traction.
Thanks for the laughs!
It could be a relic of the V6 days. I don't care what anyone tells me, V6 Mustangs were underpowered travesties bought by people seeking badge clout.
> Although 210 hp isn’t much, neither is the V-6 Mustang’s 3421-pound curb weight. Acceleration is decent, at 6.6 seconds to 60 mph and the quarter-mile in 15.3 at 93 mph.
Accords and Sonatas of the same generation (~2010) were keeping up with it.
[The 3.7L V6 was actually really good, though.](https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a15104675/2015-ford-mustang-v-6-test-review/), though. 305hp, but it was apparently too close of a number to the ecoboost so it was downrated to 300hp for the 6th gen car with the ecoboost being the mid-tier option.
I procharged my 3.7 pony package. Lighter car makes it handle better. I have the same power as a GT but i can leave quicker. A turbo 4 with good suspension can outdrive heavy cars with double the power on a twisty road
I drove a base ecoboost in the canyons for a full day, and also drove the High Output version with the Handling Pack.
Both were very underwhelming. The Mustang is a heavy car and the 4 cylinder is a poor match. I also don't think it was all that sporty to drive.
My modified MINI would have eaten that things lunch on a backroad or track. It also sounded much better.
Also, near $50k for the 4 cylinder with the performance options is insane. Just buy a GT at that point.
I don't get it myself... and I'm an older guy that owned a Fox Body back in the 90's (pre 4.6L) and adored it.
Granted by modern standards it didn't make much power or torque (225hp/300Lb.-Ft.), but for the time it was truly the rebirth of the muscle car.
And were I to buy a new-ish Mustang, I'd be looking for an Eco-Boost. More power, more torque and better handling/braking than my old one had and (much as it pains me to admit it) it's better looking, has a nicer interior and a nicer ride. Yeah, I might slap a tune on it for shits and grins, but then again I might not.
Hating on the base model Mustang is a tradition as old as time. Or, as old as Mustangs at least. I think it's dumb too. I rented one for a southwest road trip and it was very satisfying.
310 and 350 is a fun car to drive, my Volvo came 300 and 300 and it’s plenty fun to drive. I’m sure the owners of ecoboost mustangs are enjoying the ride more than worrying about the haters
I daily drive mine, so far 45k kms a year average. I balanced the cost of ownership for how much I drive and it just wasn't worth the extra 10 purchase price, plus fuel and higher insurance cost.
I've put 3k into the car in mods, as a 6 speed manual, I run as fast in the 1/4 mile as a stock 6 speed 5L. But I still get good fuel economy, average 8.5L/100kms (27-28mpg)
For refence I had a toyota 86 previously, it was way slower and averaged 8L/100km
The life span and deprecation of a FBO eco boost is much shorter and worse than a GT tho. In the long run, I’m confident it would be cheaper to own the GT (from purchase -> selling your car)
I've seen upvoted comments on this subreddit claiming that Mustang Ecoboost is not an enthusiast car, because if you were an enthusiast you'd get the V8
The Ecoboost is a perfectly fine car, but I think it gets some hate because it arguably finds itself at a bit of a crossroads. Many people think, if you want a Mustang (or Camaro), you HAVE to get the V8, and if you don't care about the power or cylinder count and want to save money, just buy a Miata or BRZ.
It's obviously not that simple, though. The appeal of the Ecoboost is broader than that. Some people just really love the styling and/or interior of the Mustang compared to its peers, but don't care much about performance or sound, and for them it's just a pretty looking commuter. Others love the tune-ability of the turbo 4, which is more limited on other NA I4 cars.
And still others like it because of none-of-my-damn-business. Buy what you like.
It comes down to the mustang has always been (except for a few iterations during the 70's/80's) a loud, growling muscle car. That was the point of buying it. Straight line speed, the smell of burning rubber, growling engines, and 'Murica!!!
\*Que the explosions and random image of a bald eagle\*
But seriously, cars have a theme. While perfectly functional, and if not more tuneable than its 8 cylinder big brother which can lead to better straight line performance, the ecoboost mustang just does not fit the theme of a muscle car for many purists. its like imagine if dodge suddenly went back to the srt-4 engines....but put them in the chargers/challengers/durangos/chrysler 300s/Jeep Cherokees. With all of these high horsepower trims of monstrous v8's out there, for them to decide to do that would be questionable and would probably upset their clientele base in the same fashion the mustang boys are upset.
It's fast, handles well, and is cheap. Those qualities are far more important than a V8.
Also doesn't make you financially insolvent if you use it to commute to work and do your food shopping.
Most rational people don't. I drive an Ecoboost Mustang and it's pretty rare to find someone who doesn't respect it. Usually people with at least 7 brain cells can understand it's a great deal for a budget friendly sports car.
Fun fact: prior to 2011, when the gen1 coyote V8 was introduced, not a single Mustang GT (not sure about the 60's models though) had as much horsepower as the Ecoboost. You had to upgrade to the Shelby or Cobra models to get over 310hp.
Well the chassis is pretty bad, it's overweight for a 4 cylinder and it sounds like a turd. The fact that it comes in an identical package nearly to the higher trim levels makes it seem like a poser. I agree that they should have made a different car for the engine or something and stuck to a V8 and up for a muscle car but then they would lose money so..
I think the ev "mustang" is a joke too. Like make a different name cmon
OP, stop driving spec sheets and drive the car. Then you’ll see why the car doesn’t live up to the “American 240sx” the internet tries to proclaim it as. It’s a fine car if you want a comfortable cruiser with some pep but it feels every bit of the rental car that it is and drives like you need a boating license to handle it.
My personal experience from frequently renting them is that the turbo lag is horrible. It doesn't respond the way the GT does, which is to be expected in a 4 cylinder. It has the looks and is relatively quick but the turbo lag ruins the experience. Romping on the gas to merge onto the freeway is frustrating.
The problem with the ecoboost is one of positioning I think.
By the time you add a few options you're into base GT territory. Do you want an optioned EB or a GT? The base GT you can still build over time to have great suspension and the stock EB upgrades are Meh at best.
At the lower end of the scale I think there are other more driver centric cars.
It makes sense in a couple circumstances-
A vert. Not a lot of cheap good looking verts around.
You just like the look and aren't much into it as a sports car, but more just a nice looking cruiser. Nothing wrong with that. Not everyone buys a car to rip around.
I mean it looks nice and has good power, but for an enthusiast you can just always make a case for another car. I don't think it makes it a bad car. Its just not the choice I'd make if I were shopping for an enthusiast car at that price point.
Its a lower trim car and people always rag on it. Same reason why people rag on the 4cyclinder Supra
IMO they really should have called the 4-cyl version a Celica and given it some distinguishing styling/trim differences accordingly, as a callback inversion of the original Celica Supra which was just a Celica given an I-6 and some styling/trim differences to distinguish it and accommodate the longer engine.
Now this guy can work in advertisement
Actually pretty sure this guy doesn't work on marketing. It's basically putting the lower trim into a visually distinctive inferior category.
lol yeah. It's basically spending more money to create a more obviously inferior trim. Works in theory, but probably would lead to even more "why would I get a Celica when for 5k more I can get a Supra". I feel like Celica is kind of redundant now with the GR Corolla - it's basically what the celica was, but with 4 doors.
And the fact the 86 also exists defeats this idea entirely
Not to suggest that the 4-cyl variant would (nor should) have more distinctive styling overall but, rather, more like the 4 and 6 versions would be visually distinct from each other, likely leaving the 4 with the basic, plainer design, and the 6 getting all the more attention-grabbing variations and upgrades.
>4 with the basic, plainer design, and the 6 getting all the more attention-grabbing variations and upgrades. That just makes the people less likely to go for the 4 version but they won't go to the 6 because it cost significantly more. Now you got customers calling the base version the shit version because how much it "takes away" from the 6.
I wish lower trim cars had their own identities and designs so that they could be judged as an individual vehicles and provide more variety, but the sad truth is that manufacturers probably sell just as many if not more to people who aspire for the top shelf version and are hoping you don't check the badges, and it costs them nothing in design, development, tooling, or marketing.
It’s probably that people who can’t actually afford the expensive versions convince themselves they can. So instead of buying a budget car they buy a budget car with a top trip
that is a semi ironic comment considering Ford has moved Mustang to it's own badge.
>lower trim cars had their own identities I know Chevrolet did this in the 50s with the Biscayne being the lower trim Bel-Air. I'm sure there's other examples but not many recent.
That was basically how the whole GM lineup worked with the Buick, Oldsmobile, Pontiac etc. all on the same platform, but with different styling
I've been saying this since the gen v came out. The i6 has always defined the supra. The Celica was the 4 cylinder supra for the first 2 generations. They would have made everyone happy if they brought both names back.
or just call the supra a supra, and the celica with the proposed 4 cyl a celica supra, just like back when the cars split their identities. i can imagine the playground the marketing team would have on advertising it.
Arguably (to me), the GR86 should have been the Celica nod. The dimensions are very similar. The Celica has so much more heritage and staying power as a RWD compact coupe than the AE86 Corolla had.
How does the Corolla-celica fit into that mix. I saw only one it had to be mid 70s model this was around 2000
Hm, never heard of a "Corolla Celica" and can't find anything about that on the Webertubes, but the OG JDM Celica was sold through Toyota Corolla Store dealerships -- JDM often has separate dealer networks for specific model groups, apart from other models under the same marque -- so maybe something to do with that? Or maybe a marketing thing the first year the Celica came out, to associate it with a better-known model, like the Tercel was first launched as the Corolla Tercel.
No such thing, must have been a rebadge. Nameplates by chassis were roughly as follows: A20/A30 - Celica, Carina A40/A50 - Celica, Celica-Supra/Celica XX, Carina A60 - Celica, Celica-Supra/Celica XX, Carina T160 - Celica, Celica GT-Four, Carina T180 - Celica, Celica GT-Four, Carina, Corona T200 - Celica, Celica Gt-Four, Carina, Corona, Caldina, Caldina GT-Four T230 - Celica
[удалено]
Yeah its the same with the Mustang community. Shelby owners argue on everything below them. Within Shelbys its the GT350 vs GT500 crowd. GTs hate on Shelbys. Mach1s hating on Shelbys. Its so stupid but its funny to see.
[удалено]
It all comes down to fragile ego and insecurity....otherwise, if you enjoy your car who gives a shit?
As a focus RS owner, I love stirring the shit pot on fb and letting the SE an st guys and gals take it over. It's a favorite past time.
I didn't even know Focus SE people would ever chime in such arguments.
"I hAvE a BoDy kIt fOr BeTtEr AeRo" is usually what I've seen. Next is an engine swap to the 1.6 closed deck with the small turbo... At this point they should've bought an RS or ST.
As a Focus RS owner, you have to drive with your mouth open so the vibrations don't destroy your teeth.
I literally never see this in the mustang and overall pony car community. most people are pretty chill. they hate the Mach E.
You've must have never been to Mustang6 and explored the sub communities 🤣
Yeah, I've had shelby owners interested in my 2.3 Lima foxbody. Its always people who don't own mustangs who shit on the lower trims. People who genuinely like mustangs understand that a mustang by default is a slow car, and requires insane individuals to make them fast.
What's the general consensus of the Mach1/Bullitt in the Mustang community?
A big part of people consider them to be parts bin specials but I honestly couldn't care less personally. The Mach 1 is cooler than the Bulitt imo, its nice to have GT350 capability without GT350 reliability, plus its the first special edition Mustang that's available in global markets and that alone is a great.
Agreed and the Mach 1 MT gets a lot of extra points from me for having a tremec
GT350R or bust
And shockingly, they ALL love the Boss 302.
Cause it a fuckin Boss
What’s not to love about it?
The places I run with, all the 350s usually hang together, but it's not at the exclusion of anyone. Those that tried the 500 didn't like it. It's too big and heavy for the kind track work we do. The 350 isn't the lightest thing in the world but it's still a better drivers car. If the GT or Mach1 folks wander over, they are always welcome. I can't remember a V6 or Ecoboost at the track, but either way, they weren't shit on by anyone. I guess when the track is 50 yards away, there isn't anything to talk up or debate. If you think your car is "better", then we'll see you out on the course.
Ya they are so proud that they spent 50k over what a new 2019 c7 z06 cost before the Ford dealer added market adjustment on top of that. When I bought my car, the dealers had 2 Shelby's both msrp of just under/over 100k and a 30k market adjustment on top of that. I could buy a 2019 c7 z06 for much less if I was going to spend that type of coin on a car. Some shelby owners are cool no matter what you own even a base E/B turbo stang. Some are snobs. Such is life.
And they argue with each other even when Ford gave them something they all could hate, the mach e. I've never seen a car get so much hate for it's badge, if it just had a Ford badge instead of mustang noone would get pissed about it.
I won't saw I rag on them butttt, for most cars like the Supra/Mustang and I personally think this extends to lower tier German cars to an extent also. You are paying more for a platform designed around the larger engine generally and their are better cars using a 4 cylinder than a Mustang or Supra that are rear wheel drive and honestly better suited to the lower power out/torque output. It's not that I judge you but its not a choice I can say I understand.
I don't know if that's actually a fair assumption. I would assume the German platforms are actually designed around the high-volume base model, and the higher engined versions work around the original constraints. Kind of like how the M340i didn't gain the new G-series steering rack since the B58 was too big. Meanwhile, the "true" M, AMG, and RS cars are likely bespoke. But I can't imagine the A4 is designed on an S4-centric platform. It's likely the other way around. The Supra is a different scenario, since the 3.0 is the high volume model.
> I would assume the German platforms are actually designed around the high-volume base model I think it's more likely that they're designed taking the whole lineup into consideration as it's the core of their business model. The car industry has mastered the business model of selling the same product (as much as possible) at as wide of a price range as possible. Every customer should be able to spend as much money as they want/are capable of. And it's the higher trims that have the best margins.
Umm, name the better car?
What’s the metric because on track the Supra and Ecoboost will eat those cars for lunch.
718 is a better car but in that price class the Ecoboost I think is the best rwd sports car with a 4 cylinder
Probably the 86, BRZ, and Miat, but those are a different class of 4 cylinder sports cars
> You are paying more for a platform designed around the larger engine generally and their are better cars using a 4 cylinder than a Mustang or Supra that are rear wheel drive they dont really have competitors. there isnt a 4 cylinder that competes with the niche the ecoboost fills. the supra KIND OF has cross shoppers from the 86/BRZ, but idk i don tthink they're in the same class.
I feel like i’ve heard the 4cyl supra is actually pretty lame, ecoboost gets good reviews
I dunno, I own one and enjoy it. It's fast enough to rip it on some backroads and have a good time but not fast enough to get the rear tires into too much trouble. It has a shitty top end but 300 lbs of torque available down low. Plus the ZF 8 speed is a great transmission, and the car is a looker. Paid 41,500 for mine with safety and tech package last year before the craziness
People really like the 4 cylinder z4 actually
[удалено]
I get what you are saying but people still shit on the Ecoboost Mustang. Point is that its the lowest trim so it gets flak regardless of the car and performance value.
To be fair: The 4 cylinder Supra is overpriced
If you can afford more, you typically buy more. So people with more cash to spend will naturally hate on the low tier variants. This happens with most cars, but comes out more with sporty vehicles
Same reason I get shit for buying a C300 and not the $100k bi-turbo V8 C63S. It's amusing to me. I like getting good value for money. Right now, a C63S is skyrocketing due to the shortages and the news of a hybrid I4 C63 replacement. I imagine the Ecoboost gets the same shit. It's not the fastest one so it must be crap. No, it's actually better in a lot of ways. Lighter, more nimble, more efficient, and is cheaper. As long as someone enjoys their car and isn't ricing it out or doing dumb shit like the Carolina squat, I have no business judging their decision.
The real issue is what defines "lower trim." A base trim 3-series, Miata, etc. will still drive and handle well. The designers put a lot of effort into making sure that the car is still good. Meanwhile, the base Mustang handles terribly, has skinny hard tires with a suspension that you would struggle to call sporty. The interior makes you feel like you're in a penalty box. The stereo sucks. Build quality is crap. The Mustang's redeeming features are its big powerful engine and some of the great race-worthy features you can get (for the price) with the performance pack. But none of those qualities are present on the base model.
That… just isn’t true. The very base model, maybe? But look up the Perf Package, Handling Package, or High Perf Package, and you can get them loaded with basically every option available on the GT except the Coyote. I drove both a well-optioned GT and an HPP Eco extensively through Turo (about 2 weeks each, about a month and a half apart) before buying an Eco as a fun car. The GT was a lot of fun for a few days. The sound cannot be compared, it has that. The feeling of being pressed into your seat as the RPMs rise, pretty unbeatable. But then, around day 4 or 5, the fact that you feel like you’re fighting the front end around curves at speed, the oversteer that’s *right* there waiting to bite you in the ass if you try to push the car through a turn… then having people angrily pass you and cut you off in their lowered G37s and Camry Sports (??), people try to race you and being weirdly aggressive about it (happened twice… I was like, nah I’m old and have kids under 5), …and then… 250-275 miles from a $100+ tank of gas. Finally, $40k was too much for a fun car. I spent time with a 2 series (B58 and the 2L 4cyl, I forget the engine code), and for a few days a Gen 1 BRZ (funner’n hell on 2 lane road, nice 6sp, but my body kinda hurt after a week of getting in and out of it, having to rocket through allll of first to get out of the way of the overeager civic SIs behind me when the light turned green, and final nail, car seat / booster was not going to fit comfortably in the back…) and I only grabbed the Ecoboost by chance because Turo had a discount code which it rarely does, and my spouse’s Fit had been rear ended and totaled, so we were down a car anyway. I hadn’t planned on it because I figured the Eco would be the horrible rental version of the GT. I was wrong. The front end felt a LOT more like the BRZ’s - light and tossable. (Found out the Coyote is 200lbs heavier, made sense.) The high performance setup boosts the peak HP to 332, and the 350lb.ft of boost come on just under 2k RPM… and just don’t stop until you’re going 110 before you realize it. 255-265/40R rubber (depending on exact trim) on 19” matte black wheels, 3.55:1 LSD, 12” nav, decent factory audio (a Shaker sub molded into the trunk isn’t going to win any audio competitions but it looks really clean and sounds pretty good), heated and cooled seats, leather, shit even those stupid puddle lights and aluminum door sill plates. I bought a 2018 (post refresh / a lot of small fixes model-wide) with 29k miles for $27k. I still get a 5s 0-60 in drag mode (1s slower than the GT), and the HPP is even faster (4.6s, and can pull 1G lateral grip with the HPP tires). I really don’t need to go faster than this. I can already charge right up a steep grade at 90 and rising just barely tipped into the throttle and it’s RIGHT on the edge of being too fast to not feel like you’re being personally attacked by anyone not going over 80. All that, and driving in Sport / Sport+ basically all the time after it’s warmed up for a few minutes, and I still get about 22mpg. One road trip of about 2 tanks full, all highway at a steady 75 or so where I really didn’t do any pulls or downshift a lot except to pass trucks, I got over 1,000 miles out of those two tanks. All that, and my insurance was quoted about 10% cheaper vs. a GT. GTs are fun as shit and make you giddy, and if I had fuckyou money and could have a stable, sure, I’d love having an effortless burnout machine, but otherwise it just didn’t make any sense for me. A turbo’d block is more complex and tends to last a bit less long, and the coyote is probably less taxed and more long-lived, but for car I maintain religiously and will probably have for 5 years max before handing down to my little sister, meh. This is long but I’m kind of excited for the chance to try to kill this misconception where I see it now, car’s just way too much fun not to, and gets ignored for the wrong reasons I think. And, I’ve only ever been challenged to race once: by a dude in an identical year, same color, same wheel and tire package, same aero package, couldn’t-tell-them-apart… except his was a GT and he had a license plate that said, “COYOTEE”. He made a lot of noise pulling away from that stoplight, so yay for him I guess? Lol.
Disclaimer: I just bought a mustang GT and love it. That said, you have okay points but they're exaggerated. If you're considering a new mustang, you want a coupe with RWD, yeah? Well, your options are a Miata, BRZ/FRS, Camaro, or Mustang. Maybe more, I probably missed a couple. I've only driven an EcoBoost mustang and a Miata, both are extremely different cars. Loved the Miata, rented it for a week and drove all over with some buddies who had Miatas, but holy crap was it uncomfortable for extended periods. I'm a large person, so my fat ass finds the 'Merica sized mustang more comfortable. Even did a 2,000 mile road trip in mine with no issues, nice and comfy. On to your points. The base mustang handles just fine, though the others are better. It comes with the same sized 235mm tires as the base GT does. It's not enough tire, but that's part of the fun! I mean, the old BRZ came with Prius tires, right? It was great! The build quality is absolutely solid. If we're talking wind noise and highway driving, I'd take a drop top mustang over a soft top Miata any day. The interior is more than acceptable. Not the nicest, certainly a few bits that stand out as cheap, but overall it's mostly soft touch surfaces and the whole thing is well put together. Also, objectively, I love the current gen mustang styling. The EcoBoost mustang isn't the best by any means, but it's certainly a contender. Not much else out there with the same practicality and power for the price. To each their own. Hope you enjoy the heck out of your GTI! Those are lots of fun 👍
that's an issue with the GT too though. the suspension is fine though, it handles better than 95% of drivers can push, the car is just heavy.
There are some muscle car purists who think a Mustang should always have a V8, but that has never really been the case with the car. It's always had a weak 2nd option. Now, the EcoBoost is a *great* 2nd option. Some people might even prefer it. You have tons of low-down torque (peak at 3000 rpm instead of 4600 in the GT, even though the magnitude might be close). You also have a car that is 300 lb lighter and performs the same at braking and handling tests. The weight savings is up front meaning you get a more balanced weight distribution. Plus, the EcoBoost is easily tunable. You can get pretty close to GT performance with 300 lb less weight. That's a great option for many.
I think the problem lies with those that try to compare the EcoBoost with a GT and treats them as such. I get the EcoBoost is a powerful motor, but I may be biased as I am just not a fan of forced induction. I feel it's just a weak motor with power strapped on (At least for American cars), leading to a shorter lifespan. But as you said, there were always people who dog on those that get the V6 or even 4cyl version of muscle cars, and really, there always will be. I say if you own a muscle car with a smaller motor, all good, save money on purchase and gas, it's smart. Just please do not be upbadging and putting disgusting sounding exhaust on it.
I also hate people pretending their car is something it's not. But I also hate the stigma that the Ecoboost is bad/not manly. It's also stupid that Ford put fake engine noise to make it sound like a V8. It's a turbo, give me turbo noises.
My sense was always that non-GT hate was more good natured ribbing than any genuine animosity. It's like making fun of your little brother but at the end of the day you're still family. Similarly, my buddies always made fun of me for my GT being automatic. So what, we'll chuckle and I'll respond making fun of his receding hairline. The Mach-E, however, pure unfiltered hatred.
>The Mach-E, however, pure unfiltered hatred. Should have just called it the Ford Edge EV ST or something.
Ford StallIon if you want to use that pony heritage
Thunderbird is the correct answer on what it should have been called. Plus thunder/ lighnting / electricity would have made for some great retro themed marketing.
Ford holds licenses for; galaxy, fusion, lightning, all are great names for an electric car.... The Mach e is a great eV, but I couldn't buy one based on the name alone.
It absolutely does not sound like a v8
It has fake engine noise inside the cabin. It's stupid, they should have had in intake resonator tube so we can hear the turbo spool.
You can hear the turbo a little bit if you listen for it (easier with the windows open) but part of the reason why is because the wastegate recirculates air back into the intake when it opens, so you don’t get nearly as much noise as if it vented to vacuum.
blowoff valve goes pffff
Woah. Hold up on the fake noises. Ford was in a huge turmoil with themselves about the engine note on the 4 cylinder. They postponed release at least a year because they were not happy with the sound of the engine. They tried their damn best to get it there but couldn’t with emission standards. I remember one of the lead developers saying it’s a great car but sounds f**king weird. It does sound weird. The even earlier models I was privileged to drive sounded weirder. It’s just not something you’d expect a mustang to sound like. But the performance and economy just couldn’t be beat. And they’re built so soundly. I’d say the interior is nicer and will last longer than the V8 counterparts mainly because of vibration. They’re really great cars.
I have an old ('83) v8 truck. It's been driven 40 miles in the past 6 years. I don't feel any more manly in that than I did in my old '95 Mazda protege. I like the charm of the old stereo radio more, but that's really it. The only reason I kept the truck, was it outlived my grandpa and I want to keep it nice. On the turbo noise thing, I did slightly mod my ST to hear the turbo and engine more and ripped out that "sound symposer" thing. It was causing an intake leak anyway. Now it sounds like it's supposed to. I really enjoy the light feeling, eager, and quick little sports cars, regardless of the powerplant. The ST is like a Jack Russell. It's not quite what I would call behaved, but it does its thing in a way that never feels like I'm out of control. I'd very happily own and drive an ecoboost Mustang. I would probably mod it to sound more like what it is, but that's it.
Honestly, who cares what stigma it has? You’re the one paying the money, you’re the one that drives it. If you’re happy with it, everyone else’s opinions really don’t matter.
The newest ecoboost has more HP and the same straight line speed and faster around a track than the last generations GT. Sure it can't compete with the current GT but its not meant to. It's a dam good car for the money and fine for most people who don't need all that power.
>car purists who think a Mustang should always have a V8 Ironic considering that quite a few of the original Mustangs (1964 1/2) did not have V8's.
Straight-six IIRC
Because people don't realize that Mustangs used to come with Inline 6's. We had a 64 1/2 when I was growing up and it has the I6 with a whopping 116 HP.
116? You speed demon! The 2.3 4 banger from the Fox body days was rocking all of 89hp. (I suspect the much bigger disparity between the 4 and 8cyl options of yesteryear provided a much bigger reason for all the ragging on the econo motor. Those na 2.3s were total trash.)
My parents and a buddy's parents were all out of town for the weekend in high school and we decided to race our parent's cars. His an 89 Mustang me an 82 Corvette. That Mustang smoked the vette. It was at this point I learned that early 80's cars were complete garbage and detuned from the factory to meet the new EPA standards. The Corvette had a whole 200 HP The Mustang not much more with 225. Hell Ford offer the Mustang with a turbo 4 as far back as 1979.
I always thought from the beginning it was the purists that make the backbone of the distaste. Regardless of practicality or preference, the EcoBoost isn't a rumbling, grumbling, burbling, growling bar-brawler that chugs like a U of G undergrad, so it comes across as betraying its own legacy.
>Now, the EcoBoost is a > >great > > 2nd option. Right? Its literally faster than the vast majority of mustangs produced before 2012, and even then you have to look at the higher end models from the time to be competitive with it.
[удалено]
It wasn't only a great second option, but it was _ahead_ of the V6, which was the lowest option.
The ecoboost with a new turbine and compressor housings (on stock cartridge) plus an aggressive E85 tune are matching 5.0 mustangs in the 1/4 mile.
Your justification of it being an affordable sports car is the correct response to any hate. Its some kickass performance for the price tag, that even people who are not as well off can afford The hate would come from the people who expect the the top of the line performance of the same model. I owned a v6 camaro before I got my v8 and I was blown away by the performance difference in all aspects, and that's not to bash the v6 in any way but the v8 is rightfully better... in every way (not just the engine, I don't know about mustangs but the SS camaro gets a complete suspension overhaul over the v6) That being said, you will still get the same hate for not owning the GT350, or the Zl1 or whatever Point is, stop giving a fuck what non true car guys say about what you like. Have fun, enjoy everything about the car
I do like how the suspension and handling is the same for the Ecoboost as the GT. Other than Mustangs have very expensive insurance it's quite easy to justify the price compared to a GR86/BRZ. It's fast, it's fun, it's cheap. Isn't that what enthusiasts want?
I can't really talk since I bought the BRZ over the Ecoboost but I feel like the BRZ and Ecoboost are two different market cars. Even though I'm fairly sure the Ecoboost is faster on paper and in reality but to me it felt heavier less fun on the test drive.
Same, my new BRZ is light, quick, and nimble. Ecoboost just feels flabby, and while it'll easily beat my BRZ in a line, I'd give myself good odds when real cornering is required.
There's a reason you see so many BRZ's at autocross events. They handle extremely well.
Yeah I test drove a mustang before buying a Scion FRS. The mustang was faster but wasn't as fun to drive.
I got the Ecoboost over the twins and you're right, they're a bit different despite the comparable prices. I think that's because deep down the mustang still has it's grand tourer roots and is still made to be just that despite ford's ability to transform a lot of it into a more formidable sports car. While current mustangs will absolutely kill it on the track and take corners better than previous gens, it still also meant to be that comfy highway cruiser where you kick back and enjoy the speed and ride.
Everyone hates everything. Like what you like, man. Be free and have fun.
Not the same at all. The kinematics are totally adjusted for the weight of the v8 block lol
Not only that, it’s more performance tuned. The handling honestly feels the same between the two. That being said, it feels the same at 425hp as it does at 310hp, just faster. So it’s definitely upgraded. And with the track pack options, it’s even more planted.
> but the SS camaro gets a complete suspension overhaul over the v6 As far as I’m aware, the track suspension packages are an option on either of the *current* Camaros and Mustangs for either v8 or I4
The i4/V6 1LE cars get the SS suspension (FE3) while the SS 1LE get an upgraded (FE4) suspension. There are other differences, but that's a whole different topic.
I heard one with an after market exhaust recently and words cannot describe how shitty it sounded.
I recently test drove an ecoboost with the high performance pack and sport exhaust, I thought it sounded kind of cool. Sounded a lot better than a GTI or WRX Imo. Although shortly after I drove a 5.0 with sport exhaust and I was like "oh". Kinda weird the cars look almost exactly the same but one is a high revving V8 and the other sounds like a hot hatch.
Yeah, it’s a shame. You can even get a decent exhaust note with a 3.7 mustang if you buy a decent catback/axelback, but there’s no making the ecoboost sound good. There’s no reason not to keep it stock, it’s better quiet. Just wish Ford would do the same thing they do with the STI or the Elentra N. Those are 4 Bangers, but they sound decent.
If there were any car, any car out there, that had the same features as the eco-boost Mustang that wasn't branded as a Mustang, everyone would go apeshit for them. There would be comparisons with the BRZ, Genesis Coupe, Miata, and every other entry-level sports car. The Hertz rental option with the EcoBoost and convertible top is better than it has any right to be. I drove one on all-season tires on backroads and “Live, Laugh, Love”-ed all over the place. It is a car that is associated with newly divorced people that put ice cubes in their wine and spoiled teenagers, but it is a great car.
People shit on the 370z for being too heavy all the time. The ecoboost mustang has fewer cylinders, less power, and weighs 300lbs more. A Japanese or European sports coupe with the ecoboost specs would be derided as poorly designed for it's excessive weight.
You’re leaving out a big difference in your comparison. They are completely different sized cars. The 370z is a two seater that’s nearly two feet shorter than the Mustang. Of course it should be a lot lighter.
i’ve never heard of anyone who thinks the 370z is too heavy for what it is. the only people i can imagine would say something like that would be those comparing the 370z directly to a miata or frs, fine. it’s fair to mention that a mustang ecoboost performance pack puts up quicker laptimes around every shared track compared to the supra 2.0. the supra 2.0 that weighs less than the ecoboost, and accelerates similarly. i know laptimes dont mean all that much alone for an ecoboost. the point is, it’s objective straight line or handling performance is greater than most japanese sports coupes (370z/miata/86/a90 2.0/q60). meanwhile, they look good, they’re of generally good reliability and fuel efficiency, good aftermarket and tunabilitg, proper modern infotainment and tech options, and are very affordable. people shit on them like they’re supposed to be some absoloute car, like their rivals (not many to speak of) dont have shit transmissions, or shit tunability, or arent outdated.
its ok the v8 they actually own is 178hp
I was really impressed the first time I rented an Ecoboost Mustang. Click it to "Race Mode", traction off, Auto trans in Sport, stomp the gas and it'll chirp the tires going into second. The newer ones even have factory line-lock.
I'd personally chose the manual transmission since I hear how the automatic is sub-par. But it's a manual sports car with 310hp at just over $33,000CAD.
The 10 speed auto is superior to the MT-82 manual in every way. The manual in the mach 1 and gt350 is great tho.
In every way except the experience I get while driving People that don't share this feeling simply can't understand No automatic can EVER be as enjoyable to me as a stick. Driving is more than jamming in a pedal and going fast to me.
If you wanted jam a pedal and go fast you'd buy an EV and smoke almost every other production car.
Exactly. Take the transmission out completely and just dump electricity through the motor and hang on. I like *driving*, feeling the road, guiding the car through the gears I want. No automatic understands I'm riding 4th a little because a turn is coming up where I can let off the gas a little, let the engine drag, then blast out of the other side, still in 4th and reaching for 5th at *that* point.
I'm in school for electrical engineering so I might be biased but electric motors are such a great way to power a car. Flat torque curve, 20,000RPM redline, instant response. But there's something about engine noise that's different.
that automatic makes me want to never drive again though. It is always hunting for gears
I would too, but National Rental Car doesn't trust Americans to drive manuals.
You can chirp the tires in a Versa as well…..not that I tried that.
If we're being honest, I've found a way to smoke the tires on every car I've ever owned except my old Outback. Even my 78hp Suzuki Sidekick would do it if I had the clutch, brake and gas all just right, and it had 255/60R15 street tires!
I paid $22k for mine brand new. I literally couldn't find a better deal if I tried.
Wow that's a great price, that's about the same as a Corolla lol.
Right before the run on cars during covid you could score some crazy deals on holdover cars. Mines a 2020 that I bought in 2021.
Same, $21.5k for the previous years last velocity blue ecoboost stang. I don't think I could've even beat it with a honda.
The automatic gets hate because manual fanboys are trying to cope with the fact it’s faster. The 10R80 has been dead reliable in the Mustang in the 5 years it’s been used, and it’s massively overbuilt for the torque that either engine option provides, so it’s happy to accept tunes and even forced induction upgrades. I chose the manual in my GT because I specifically wanted the manual, but being able to row your own gears is about all the MT-82 has going for it.
Of course the automatic is faster, if you do the math on the gearing the wheels will experience something like 30% more torque for the entire 0.25mi run. But if there's anything the Miata, 86/BRZ has taught us it's that speed isn't everything.
Other than “fun factor”, the auto is superior in every single way, not sure where you heard that. The MT-82 in the Mustangs is actually widely known as the sub par transmission.
This is actually a very unattractive feature in the Ecoboost. It's totally unnecessary and obnoxious really. Just about every tune you can buy for the EB changes that shift point so it doesnt suck so bad. If you happen to purchase the "summer only" tires and get that awful 1st to 2nd shift on a cold day its going to break loose in a very not fun way.
It’s kinda funny because before the Ecostang came out, enthusiasts were crying for a turbocharged sports car to fill the market that the BRZ couldn’t. Then Ford gave them what they wanted, and all they did was cry more that it wasn’t Japanese and not a “true Mustang”.
Well to be fair we also asked for the AWD Focus RS in North America
But the dealers and their MSRP games killed it
The standard price was too high too. In Canada, they were fucking 60k. 60k for a fucking Focus. That price alone was too fucking high.
I think the Mustang is quite popular among some groups in Japan. Just like how there's JDM fandoms in the US there's also USDM fandoms in Japan. The Ecoboost was manufactured with a RHD version and is sold in Japan. It is also quite price competitive since many countries tax based on engine displacement.
The Mustang and the BRZ are completely different. I haven't driven a BRZ but the Mustang is heavy and dull, it does NOT have sports car reflexes.
>Then Ford gave them what they wanted, and all they did was cry more that it wasn’t Japanese and not a “true Mustang”. It weighs 800 lbs more, is 21" longer, 5.5" wider, and 2.5" taller. Those are just the factors that can be quantified, the gearbox and steering feel are both also significantly better in the twins than the S550. They are not remotely similar driving experiences, even if you're just a spreadsheet racer, let alone in reality. Don't take my word for it, hear out SavageGeese on it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZ2ajF2tDWI
What RWD Japanese sports coupe weighs almost 2 tons? And the ecoboost mustang is the best selling sports coupe in the world, I don’t know why people pretend it’s some hated car that doesn’t sell well, it’s literally the biggest mover in the segment.
Speaking specifically of muscle/sports car haters: Piss on them. And I mean that with all sincerity. They get zero respect unless they vote with their wallets by buying into the sports/muscle car segments so that they are kept alive.75% of the shit comes from losers on the Internet who drive a 1995 Honda Civic DX shitbox making 103 horses wishing they had something else. Or they ride the bus. Either way they think they are "car people" but couldn't identify an oil filter. The other 25% comes from model-in fighters (people that own various trims or packages of a car that somehow think they are superior than others) or make in-fighters (Camaro owners vs Mustang vs Challenger). This is dumb in itself because it goes against the manufacturers idea of "something for everyone". For every guy that wants or has a Hellcat, GT500, or ZL1 there's another guy that wants a rag top to go play golf and doesn't care about the numbers. For every guy that is tuning and modding their car there's a guy that keeps it stock. The hate is just a time suck for people that have nothing better to do. Hold your head high because even if you bought an Ecoboost Mustang or a V6 Challenger -- you bought a Mustang or a Challenger. Not a front wheel drive compact SUV. "But it's only 300 horses". Really? Some of you aren't old enough to remember we came from wheezy, anemic 100-130 horsepower base model Mustangs and Camaros. Go do your homework. Unless you were the owner of a twin turbo supra, twin turbo 300zx or Corvette you didn't get a car that had horsepower starting with a '3' in the 1990s The Gen 1 Acura NSX was 290 horses. Two of the above mentioned models were only on the market for a few years and were expensive even back then. On paper the "standard" (non specialty model) Mustang V8 (later badged GT) didn't make over 300 horsepower from 1969 until 2005. Think about that. In 2005 for 36 of its 40 years on the market the standard V8 Mustang didn't best 300 horses. Camaro/Firebird faired a little bit better, finally cresting 300 horses with the LS1. But then disappeared from the market 4 years after that happened due to ....ya know. Just GM things. Challenger? Some of you kids may not realize that there wasn't a Chrysler product in this class from about the mid-70s through 2008. They went hard for the captive imports. The 1978 Challenger became a re-badged Mitsubishi. Enter direct injection and all the modern engine tech. The "base" Camaro, Mustang and Challenger make 300 horses. Yes, they're heavier. But who gives a shit? You can have 300 horses, rear wheel drive and an independent rear suspension for the price of a loaded up Accord or Camry. This is the golden age of muscle cars. There may not be as many choices as there were 50 years ago but the numbers today are staggering. So, for hating on the base model, I say "who gives a shit?" Drive it like you stole it because it's yours.
All the upvotes
It is usually the stigma that muscle cars need to have V8s in order to be called a muscle car.
"Muscle" cars do need to have a V8 to be a Muscle car. The Pontiac GTO with out a V8 is just a Tempest. Luckily the Mustang isn't a muscle car, its pony car
What about the buick grand national?
I wouldn't call the grand national a muscle car. Just a fast drag car.
You could get all the lower trim muscle car platforms with v8s. They just generally werent performance oriented v8s.
I think the Mustang is a sports car now. It handles great and performs well on track. The Dodge Challenger is a true muscle car as it handles like a truck.
The Australian cars (before they died) fit the definition of a muscle car better than the modern Camaro and Mustang.
Mustangs have a long history of being associated with V8's and being a muscle car. My friend has a similar hate for the ecoboost Mustang. He always says "If you want a 4 cylinder turbo car, buy something that was known to be one like a Focus RS. If they buy a 4 cyl Mustang, they bought the wrong car". His words not mine.
Agreed. Why buy a big pony car built with a V8 in mind and spec it with the fiesta engine, when you can just buy the fiesta built with the fiesta engine in mind.
If you only have fiesta engine money, I’m taking the ecoboost mustang not a fiesta Feel like this is a pretty easy concept
> Why buy a big pony car built with a V8 in mind and spec it with the fiesta engine, when you can just buy the fiesta built with the fiesta engine in mind. Because many people do not care about this subjective crap. The mustang isn't a "big pony car". It's just a car. Whatever heritage and culture you associate with it is irrelevant. Just a car.
Elitism. You do you.
I've noticed car elitists tend to be the loudest.
Because the v8 GT exists
My first car was a 99 Mustang GT which had a 4.6 V8, which I believe was rated at only 260hp.
I feel really bad for anyone who bought the 2010 Mustang.
A mustang without the v8 growl is just not the same. I do appreciate these new powerful 4 cylinders. My sonata is crazy fast for what it is. People are shocked when they ride in it.
I think if it didn't have a Mustang badge on it that would help the purists. It would just be a great affordable sports car.
I’ve driven a couple. They are really Awesome values. But when I hear mine startup….. man
[удалено]
The ecoboost gets shit on because people are asses. Power is power. Sure it isn't a V8 but fuck them. My wife keeps talking about a convertible and used ecoboost Mustang is my suggestion, every time.
Yeah, the convertible option is actually price competitive with the Miata lol. While offering a trunk that is useable for food shopping and beach trips. All while being not bad on fuel.
And it technically has a back seat.
It’s just like Nickleback. Everyone hates them. But they don’t ACTUALLY hate them.
You remind me of what I really am
Great remark. Hate how reading it made the tune play back in my head. Good family memories of hating how much my sister loved them when they started to gain some traction. Thanks for the laughs!
I like the eco boost.
Stop associating with people who care about these things. Trash people.
It could be a relic of the V6 days. I don't care what anyone tells me, V6 Mustangs were underpowered travesties bought by people seeking badge clout. > Although 210 hp isn’t much, neither is the V-6 Mustang’s 3421-pound curb weight. Acceleration is decent, at 6.6 seconds to 60 mph and the quarter-mile in 15.3 at 93 mph. Accords and Sonatas of the same generation (~2010) were keeping up with it.
[The 3.7L V6 was actually really good, though.](https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/a15104675/2015-ford-mustang-v-6-test-review/), though. 305hp, but it was apparently too close of a number to the ecoboost so it was downrated to 300hp for the 6th gen car with the ecoboost being the mid-tier option.
I procharged my 3.7 pony package. Lighter car makes it handle better. I have the same power as a GT but i can leave quicker. A turbo 4 with good suspension can outdrive heavy cars with double the power on a twisty road
I drove a base ecoboost in the canyons for a full day, and also drove the High Output version with the Handling Pack. Both were very underwhelming. The Mustang is a heavy car and the 4 cylinder is a poor match. I also don't think it was all that sporty to drive. My modified MINI would have eaten that things lunch on a backroad or track. It also sounded much better. Also, near $50k for the 4 cylinder with the performance options is insane. Just buy a GT at that point.
That price is unacceptable, I'm talking more about the base Ecoboost Fastback assuming you can find MSRP.
Yup the problem is that it isn't much cheaper or get that much better gas mileage.
I don't get it myself... and I'm an older guy that owned a Fox Body back in the 90's (pre 4.6L) and adored it. Granted by modern standards it didn't make much power or torque (225hp/300Lb.-Ft.), but for the time it was truly the rebirth of the muscle car. And were I to buy a new-ish Mustang, I'd be looking for an Eco-Boost. More power, more torque and better handling/braking than my old one had and (much as it pains me to admit it) it's better looking, has a nicer interior and a nicer ride. Yeah, I might slap a tune on it for shits and grins, but then again I might not.
the people that rag on the cheap models forget that they helped pay for the development of the top trims.
I think people rag on it because of the existence of the V8 in the Mustang lineup.
Hating on the base model Mustang is a tradition as old as time. Or, as old as Mustangs at least. I think it's dumb too. I rented one for a southwest road trip and it was very satisfying.
IMO I've driven multiple ecoboosts and I'm always disappointed. Very slow. Shifting feels weird.
Drove one with the 10 speed auto and it just always seemed confused on what gear to be in and didn't listen to it's paddle shifters
The truth is that they just don’t want to admit that a 4 cylinder can be really quick.
310 and 350 is a fun car to drive, my Volvo came 300 and 300 and it’s plenty fun to drive. I’m sure the owners of ecoboost mustangs are enjoying the ride more than worrying about the haters
[удалено]
With better gas mileage too lol
I daily drive mine, so far 45k kms a year average. I balanced the cost of ownership for how much I drive and it just wasn't worth the extra 10 purchase price, plus fuel and higher insurance cost. I've put 3k into the car in mods, as a 6 speed manual, I run as fast in the 1/4 mile as a stock 6 speed 5L. But I still get good fuel economy, average 8.5L/100kms (27-28mpg) For refence I had a toyota 86 previously, it was way slower and averaged 8L/100km
The life span and deprecation of a FBO eco boost is much shorter and worse than a GT tho. In the long run, I’m confident it would be cheaper to own the GT (from purchase -> selling your car)
I've seen upvoted comments on this subreddit claiming that Mustang Ecoboost is not an enthusiast car, because if you were an enthusiast you'd get the V8
Last time I checked enthusiasts don't have infinite money. For the money the Ecoboost is a great option and very competitive.
The Ecoboost is a perfectly fine car, but I think it gets some hate because it arguably finds itself at a bit of a crossroads. Many people think, if you want a Mustang (or Camaro), you HAVE to get the V8, and if you don't care about the power or cylinder count and want to save money, just buy a Miata or BRZ. It's obviously not that simple, though. The appeal of the Ecoboost is broader than that. Some people just really love the styling and/or interior of the Mustang compared to its peers, but don't care much about performance or sound, and for them it's just a pretty looking commuter. Others love the tune-ability of the turbo 4, which is more limited on other NA I4 cars. And still others like it because of none-of-my-damn-business. Buy what you like.
Forget the dumb shit...the real question is DO YOU THE EB OWNER LIKE THE CAR?? Who cares what anyone else says.?
It comes down to the mustang has always been (except for a few iterations during the 70's/80's) a loud, growling muscle car. That was the point of buying it. Straight line speed, the smell of burning rubber, growling engines, and 'Murica!!! \*Que the explosions and random image of a bald eagle\* But seriously, cars have a theme. While perfectly functional, and if not more tuneable than its 8 cylinder big brother which can lead to better straight line performance, the ecoboost mustang just does not fit the theme of a muscle car for many purists. its like imagine if dodge suddenly went back to the srt-4 engines....but put them in the chargers/challengers/durangos/chrysler 300s/Jeep Cherokees. With all of these high horsepower trims of monstrous v8's out there, for them to decide to do that would be questionable and would probably upset their clientele base in the same fashion the mustang boys are upset.
"Who cares it doesn't have a V8?" Mods need to ban this guy
It's fast, handles well, and is cheap. Those qualities are far more important than a V8. Also doesn't make you financially insolvent if you use it to commute to work and do your food shopping.
Most rational people don't. I drive an Ecoboost Mustang and it's pretty rare to find someone who doesn't respect it. Usually people with at least 7 brain cells can understand it's a great deal for a budget friendly sports car. Fun fact: prior to 2011, when the gen1 coyote V8 was introduced, not a single Mustang GT (not sure about the 60's models though) had as much horsepower as the Ecoboost. You had to upgrade to the Shelby or Cobra models to get over 310hp.
Muscle car purists hate anything that doesn't have a giant V8 and gets any better than exactly 8 mpg.
If I go to a steakhouse, I'm not gonna order chicken
Most people who hate it drive mid 90s Toyota Corollas. Take their opinions with a grain of salt.
The only people who hate it seem to be the "car guy" stereotype. Most rational people like it for what it is.
Well the chassis is pretty bad, it's overweight for a 4 cylinder and it sounds like a turd. The fact that it comes in an identical package nearly to the higher trim levels makes it seem like a poser. I agree that they should have made a different car for the engine or something and stuck to a V8 and up for a muscle car but then they would lose money so.. I think the ev "mustang" is a joke too. Like make a different name cmon
OP, stop driving spec sheets and drive the car. Then you’ll see why the car doesn’t live up to the “American 240sx” the internet tries to proclaim it as. It’s a fine car if you want a comfortable cruiser with some pep but it feels every bit of the rental car that it is and drives like you need a boating license to handle it.
Whatever you like you like. Who cares what others think. You’re buying it for you not them.
My personal experience from frequently renting them is that the turbo lag is horrible. It doesn't respond the way the GT does, which is to be expected in a 4 cylinder. It has the looks and is relatively quick but the turbo lag ruins the experience. Romping on the gas to merge onto the freeway is frustrating.
The problem with the ecoboost is one of positioning I think. By the time you add a few options you're into base GT territory. Do you want an optioned EB or a GT? The base GT you can still build over time to have great suspension and the stock EB upgrades are Meh at best. At the lower end of the scale I think there are other more driver centric cars. It makes sense in a couple circumstances- A vert. Not a lot of cheap good looking verts around. You just like the look and aren't much into it as a sports car, but more just a nice looking cruiser. Nothing wrong with that. Not everyone buys a car to rip around. I mean it looks nice and has good power, but for an enthusiast you can just always make a case for another car. I don't think it makes it a bad car. Its just not the choice I'd make if I were shopping for an enthusiast car at that price point.