2015 Ford Mustang EcoBoost First Drive Review: One Stang to rule them all

[@dynasty2295]

This car is a perfect daily driver. I'm not a race car driver, not even a weekend warrior. I like to pretend like I am when I'm merging on the highway but realistically when it comes down to it, I need mpg more than hp. This engine offers a good amount of both; enough power to get a smile from your date and the gas savings to pay for dessert!

[@mikeanthonysarchives]

I do not care what anyone says.. I am most enthusiastic about the 2.3L I4 Ecoboost Mustang over the 3.7L V6 and the 5.0L V8 (of course those are awesome too) There really is no reason to hate on it. You have half the size and cylinders then the 4.6L 3v V8 GT Mustangs.. and a bit more power, and 32 mpg! You see all kinds of newer Ford vehicles with turbos (the Ecoboosts) and they lightly modify the performance, and they get some CRAZY impressive numbers. and mpg stays the same, might get a tad better too! Thats one of many reasons why i like it a lot. If you don't like the sound, then go with the other 2 available engine choices! Simple as that!

[@tinop414]

People are crazy haha. Complain any chance they can. Thats why there are 3 options. If ford would go v8 only. They would discontinue the car lol. I also dont care about speed. They are all fast lets be real. Everyday driving. Way more than enough power. Im not racing teenagers on the street to feel better about my life haha. I will def test drive all 3. But looking like 2.3. Awesome mpg. Power. And premium options. Cant wait! !

[@paulm.newitt3246]

The 2.3 Liter Ecoboost specs here are very close to those of the original Hipo 289 in the 1965 Shelby GT-350.

[@paulm.newitt3246]

Here's how this works in the big V8 world: You go to about 5 -10 car shows a year. Open up the hood, and oohs and aahs. You drive the other 355 days a year, get 20mpg out of a 5.0, sit in a lot of traffic, and get a few kicks out of the accell between gas stations. The Ecoboost 2.3 is 21st Century tech. Almost the torque of a 351C @ 31-34 mpg. It is worth it to have a 5.0, or any big block today? What if gas hits $5/gal.? The power to weight ratio of the 2015 Mustang, with the IRS is going to be a real track killer!! Just watch how it runs over the competition at Willow Springs in the next Motor Trend test with a Camaro or Hellcat. The 2.3 IS American tech at it's best!! Hello!?!?

[@tinop414]

Paul M. Newitt could not have said it better!

[@Marine475]

Paul M. Newitt But you don't get torque of 351C what you get is ONE GIANT turbo lag all the way to 3000 rpm and then all the torque and probably 10 mpg. So yeah you're going to make 31mpg as long as you use no more than 2000 rpm and 50 hp.

[@TFLcar]

Sorry about the re-upload but we incorrectly labeled the EcoBoost 2.3L as a 2.5L so we had to fix the mistake and 4K video is huge so it takes a chunk of computer processing time.

[@MrChevypower]

It's also a single turbo, not twin :)

[@erickscarreviews5243]

What is the weight for this and the gt?

[@fatboy19831]

Erick's car reviews Around 3800 pounds. The 14 was just north of 3600 pounds.

[@jamecave]

So how did you feel about the piped in engine noise in the Eco Boost? There needs to be an option to turn that off.

[@TFLcar]

jamecave Meh, it's the wave of the future. We're not too stressed because they Ford didn't fake the exceptional sharp handling.

[@Mr--_--M]

Forget the ones hating that that it's an i-4 in a mustang. This is what efficiency looks like. I have to remind myself constantly that as an everyday driver, I'd be able push this car to it's limit more than I would with a GT on normal roads.

[@bandwagon240]

The SVO Mustang was never "woefully underpowered" at all. It was only a few horsepower shy of its 5 liter brother and was blessed with far better handling and braking (also some nice 5 lug wheels). Research, research, research.

[@chivosadventures8171]

I think what he meant was the 4 cylinder Mustang not the SVO! I loved the SVO it was a great little fast 4 cylinder single turbo car that with a few hundred dollars worth of mods, you could make go faster than any stock 5.0 out there......

[@bandwagon240]

Yes, you could get a 98hp 2.3L n/a motor back then as well. However, the turbo 2.3L made almost as much power (in SVO guise) as the 5L v8 and was lighter. Not to mention it had 4 wheel discs and Recaro buckets.

[@hartsickdisciple]

1.) It's a single turbo. Twin-scroll, SINGLE turbo. 2) There was a turbo 4-cylinder engine that you could get in the Mustang SVO and Turbo GT in the 80's. That wouldn't be fast by today's standards, but it wasn't underpowered back then.

[@2001bmwm3e46]

I also noticed the mistake calling it a twin turbo the mustang II was the first mustang with a 4 cyl. it was a 2.3L that made about 90hp although the mustang two weighed ALOT less than current mustangs it was underpowered for its time

[@hartsickdisciple]

2001bmwm3e46 Yes, I know the Mustang II had a 4-cylinder as well. He was referring to the "last time" a Mustang had a 4-cylinder option, which would be the foxbody cars. He showed his lack of knowledge on the subject by calling the new engine a "twin turbo," and also by not mentioning the 2.3 turbo used in the foxbodies. He made it sound like this is the first decently powerful 4-cylinder available in a Mustang. Maybe that's just how it came across to me.

[@Evilliboba]

2001bmwm3e46 I've had two 1989 2.3L Mustangs. They are 88hp of extreme slowness. Reliable as all heck though.

[@tiberius1701]

The 85 1/2 SVO was rated at a very conservative 215HP. If you had ever driven one, you would change your opinion.

[@2001bmwm3e46]

tiberius1701 not sure who your talking to but I was referring to the n/a 4 cyl. which was a very slow car. the turbo 4 cyl on the other hand had similar performance to the 5.0L at the time

[@98SST]

Here is what I predict will happen. The 5.0 will always kick ass. However, This ecoboost engine has so much potential. I know that tuning companies will crack the code and develop tunes that'll probably bring it up to 360-370hp and even greater torque figures and it'll then keep up with the 5.0, get phenomenal mpg, and be cheaper.

[@kriscamp608]

Let's hope so

[@g3nesisprime183]

you'll have to wait until someobody brings out a custom turbo manifold since the turbo and manifold are one in the ecoboost engines :/

[@The1stMoRice]

THEN they'll do the same thing with the 5 oh and we'll just be right back where we started.

[@98SST]

Tuning the 5.0 which is NA will not net the same gains of which the ecoboost will.

[@oldtwins]

jm14918 You would have to add a turbo system to the 5.0 which is enormous amount of $$ and introduces a great deal of reliability issues. It's so much easier to do minimal upgrades on a stock turbo yet get bucketloads of more usable power that you'll feel driving right off your driveway.

[@Ryukachoo]

1:26 holy cow, look at all that free engine bay space this thing will be super easy to work on, nothing in the way

[@daniel55645]

which is somethign you cant usually say about newer cars anymore

[@evilpeach2]

Its easy if you have a college degree on working on cars. So much electronics an average Joe cant even compute.

[@Dexter_Solid]

You would think, but being a Ford they will probably put everything in an illogical design, so you need to take 10 things off the engine to get at one part.

[@evilpeach2]

***** You clearly havent tried working on a modern car. haha

[@evilpeach2]

***** You just made my point. lol. Dont need a comp-sci degree to work on cars but the person at the tuner shop does.

[@narutofire332]

The ecoboost is seriously perfect enough for cruising.

[@85MasterV]

So many complaints about the Ecoboost price or the sound etc.. let's be real, if you came here to say that you couldn't afford it or weren't going to get it anyway. The Ecoboost premium is comparable (and probably more reliable) than a base model Audi A5 with more power and features. Don't try to say 'but it's an Audi' because you aren't impressing anyone with a base model A5.

[@reyperez3424]

I can't believe how much hp you can get out of this 2.3 L , cheaper than the 5.0 too

[@BIendtecc]

Rey Perez ikr it's crazy

[@177SCmaro]

I'm probably going to to get the ecoboost as a daily driver but the 5.0 does have way more potential. You slap even a small turbo on one and you're looking at over 600hp.

[@BenReillyUK]

I'd like to own this. Finally a Mustang that is still fast that we can afford to own in the UK. V8s don't mix with the crazy cost of fuel over here. $1.87 per litre.

[@Ashertheawesome]

Richard Lawrence lmfao

[@dennismattson8383]

Selling my GT for a fully loaded Ecoboost... Speed, better handling, great mpg, and no more annoying Loud v8... Tired of them, Love the sound of the turbo 4 !!!!!

[@dennismattson8383]

No actually.. Have had loud V8 sticks my whole life... Tired of them... I'm either getting an Ecoboost Stang... or a V6 Camaro .. AUTO..

[@umarery]

+Dennis Mattson I'm a Mustang guy but I think I prefer the RSV6 over the Ecoboost. But I prefer the GT over the SS.

[@umarery]

+Dennis Mattson And for daily driving, get an auto. For track, weekend driving, get the manual.

[@TommyboyGTP]

Ahhh, the iconic 2.3L turbo 4-cyl is back and better than ever! The SVO, reborn!

[@Phantom096]

Too bad none of these retards know what the SVO is or was. Now it is better than ever with the new techno!!

[@Lord_Nikon]

I had an SVO as late as 2012, I would take anything on in the twisties, and I would hang with the STOCK 5.0 guys at the drag strip. I miss my car, maybe this is a replacement?

[@simonriddick]

Never been a stang guy but I like this generation. Would love a black 5.0. Ecoboost seems to haul ass too.

[@1989rs500]

Omg this Mustang corners really fast,I dont think even the Boss 302 could carve canyon roads like what the 2.3 ecoboost did, and its pricey but worth cuz its luxurious, and one can make great choice cuz barebone 2.3 eb mustang too has backup cam etc, a decently loaded one gets to 32000$

[@simonsees8]

He’s on the 5.0 the whole time. What happened to the 4 cylinder mustang? I came to see that review.

[@smithraymond09029]

Reminds me of how the SVO could run circles around a GT back in the 80's with much better handling, weight distribution, etc. But the GT was half the price, twice the cylinders, and the buyer is half as smart as a horse.

[@Godzukidan]

Looks like a fun road to drive, yes indeed. American Muscle for the win !

[@MrKeyboardCommando]

It's great to hear Ford have finally brought their suspension up to 1980's standards. Well done you guys !!!

[@1guyin10]

Not all the previous 4 cylinders were slow. The SVO with the turbo 2.3 was a whole lot of fun.

[@ryan422423]

Just seems like yesterday when I saw this review can’t believe it’s been 10 years now :(

[@ivorton23]

This is probably the first mustang i actually really like. I love that front end and that 4 cylinder dont sound bad either

[@NateLieb]

I'm REALLY excited to get behind the wheel of one

[@jetjazz05]

They should have contacted Remus to do the exhausts on these things. Remus has a way with turbo 4 cylinders, they make them sound deep and growly and wonderful.

[@daisyxfaith]

Look, it doesn't have that sexy v8 sound... not a fair comparison. But it's still a respectable car for a Mustang lover that wants a nice commuter car. I know that's absolute blasphemy to the crazy Mustang purists out there lol but I just consider them totally different cars that serve a different purpose. Still a sexy looking car.

[@metalwala]

I agree

[@jeffmorse645]

I kind of like the idea of a lightweight, athletic, turbo four Mustang.

[@ourfutureisdark]

All it needs is Louder more defined exhaust to me and its golden!

[@christians131]

Speaking as more of a chevy guy; I'm really interested in this car. Ford seems to really want the mustang to be perceived as a sports car and not just a muscle car these days, and I think they're doing well. I just see the ecoboost mustang selling as well as it should though, because people will always just see it as a four cyl mustang.

[@ElshamyWalid]

That 4 Cylinder Mustang sounded like a Corolla

[@standoffsiren0269]

5.0 or nothing.

[@ZepG]

That's what aftermarket exhausts are for, these cars are still sold for the masses and not all people want to hear the drone of a loud exhaust. Now me on the other hand love the sweet sound of an open muffler. The 6 & 8 will sound awesome with an aftermarket but I'm worried the 4 might sound ricey, only time will tell.

[@MrKeyboardCommando]

ZepG Yeah, but you get yourself an aftermarket drainpipe and every everybody and his dog have to listen to the bloody racket. This is why piped in sound is good. You're the only bugger who's deafened !!!!!

[@rudfil]

But the sound will disappear once this puppy leaves you behind....

[@3rdGenGuy]

Rudy F it runs a 14.2 1/4. Not fast lol.

[@Bergstaller01]

300+ HP on a 4 banger isn't something to laugh at. It wasn't too long ago that it was the V8 put out the same amount of power albeit with more torque.

[@GD3Media]

There were actually 3 4cylinders offered in the 80s, The 4, the turbo 4 and the SVO 4.

[@JimF1981]

More than likely not the only person to point this out, but the 2.3 isn't a twin turbo. And the SVO mustang actually made more power than the V8 at the time. Its power delivery was the real issue with that motor. It had lag.

[@242HP]

At 2:29, you say that you've got the EcoBoost, yet the video clearly shows hood scoops (heat extractors). The EcoBoost doesn't have hood scoops, only the GT does.

[@grahamrothphotography]

I seriously would consider the turbo 4 banger!

[@stephanietorres9275]

Car looks amazing in blue. I won't sell my '13 Boss 302, but I certainly wouldn't mind adding an eco boost '15 to the stable ;-)

[@MontraleHammonds]

I'm in love all over again. I can't wait to replace my '02 with the Eco.

[@dreadnoughtprime6301]

I'm not a fan of anything less than a V8, but I like this, despite that fact.

[@Sleepygrinder]

You can count on Ford to tune an engine note right, even in a 4 cylinder. The Focus ST sounds amazing and from what was heard in this video, that musting also sounds great.

[@justhes]

That is a nice mustang. I'd totally get the 4 bang ecoboost!

[@kimoykalinago4154]

Looool that guy in the passenger seat looks uncomfortable when he was going fast haha 😂😂😂😂

[@azraelmalice7275]

Camera man deserves a bonus great shots

[@Clesarie]

Man fords been kicking so much ass. They've constantly kept my attention away from imports for the recent years. Focus St, Fiesta St, Mustang Ecoboost, Tarus SHO. Plenty of other models too. I really like the sfe fiesta 1.0 eco boost too.

[@FastRedPonyCar]

Incredibly disappointed that ford didn't revive the SVO name for the ecoboost model :( Still excited though to see what sort of numbers that engine is capable of making with mods.

[@KoolCatCurtis]

Be honest and keep an open mind; don't discriminate against me because I'm trying to be honest with myself as I write this: Since the debut of the Ford Falcon-inspired Pony Car in the 1960's, what have Mustangs been known to the greater public for? A.) Fast and Agile on the Track B.) The Pony Logo; Ford's Flagship Sports Compact C.) Loud and Erotic Exhaust Sounds D.) That Badass, Classic, American Muscle Look. E.*) V6s and V8s that chug gas like gragas. Ford has countered this problem with the new Ecoboost with the turbocharged 2.3L I4. Now the new generation mustang: A.) Is Fast (not as fast as the V8, but seriously, in the city? You can still burn those slow grandmas with 310HP. Hell, you could burn them with 200HP.) B.) Pony Logo is bright and shiny as ever C.) Whoooosh, that throaty and high=pitched whinny from the turbocharged I4 sounds orgasmic. D.) This thing looks fricking amazing. And the same as the GT... E.) They fixed it! The new generation of mustang has 32MPG, so you can stay eco friendly (guess what? ironically, V8s are bad for the economy, and bad for the wildlife. THOSE V8s ARE KILLING ACTUAL MUSTANGS. Man what will Ford do when Mustangs are extinct? The Ford... Donkey?) F.) SO MUCH SPACE. These were built for, yes, a V8 to stick under the hood; but, with all the space cleared out by sticking the smaller ecoboost engine in, these is PLENTY of room to put new parts in and pack more punch under the hood. AKA: this beauty is unchained; the possibilities are tuner-friendly. (ex. racing headers? air intake system upgrades? etc.) I love the way Ford has made a premium version of the 2.3L Eco evailable. THIS is what defines the 2015 Mustang as all-new, and next-gen, compared to last year's models and those of yesteryear. (the v8 is... basically the same as last year's...)

[@SwPiotrek]

Great car, great review! Mustang is one of my dream cars :)

[@ab121bswag9]

wait the ecoboost is v4 right? why the 5.0 is on the side of the car? I'm confused!

[@Generikid]

I think the 2.3l is a in-line 4 while the 5l model is a V8

[@ab121bswag9]

+Generikid ahaa ok

[@MRP78]

Can't wait for the 5.0 review.

[@michaelc.6306]

Well As Roman always says... At altitude in Colorado superchargers & TURBO-chargers are very beneficial, along with the reduced engine weight. Has TFLCar driven the EcoBoost Mustang in CO?

[@coureurdebois]

the fusion looks great now *waits*

[@Dustin_JD]

The whole thing of calling it a Fusion is really getting old. Compare the cars side by side. They do not look alike. There are some similarities, but most manufacturers lineups are that way. It's called brand identity. We all get it, you don't like the new Mustang. Get over it already.

[@IsiahHD]

I actually like the new looks. It's fresh and modern. It also has the great looking fast back design like an BMW 6 Series.

[@dreadnoughtprime6301]

ghd bfb He should totally change the first letter of his last name to a "d".

[@coureurdebois]

Tyler Pritchett read my profile you fell into the "boring category" simple mind ;)

[@dreadnoughtprime6301]

justin bouche Nah, I just think you're a little butthurt.

[@jmdf7274]

I have resisted even the thought of a 4 cyl in a Mustang for years . For some reason I think this EcoBoost is going to be a big hit for many years. We have to evolve , Physics wins every time weather we like the sound of it or not .

[@kanob6440]

These are some pretty nice Ford Fusions.

[@JoshuaC0rbit]

I predict a low take rate on the 2.3 car, especially considering its more expensive than the 3.7. The v6 with the right rear gear will do 32mpg on the highway. I average 26 in mine. Call me when they offer the twin turbo 3.5 from the SHO.

[@lightbulbisbright]

wtf... $39k for the 4 cylinder?

[@J-W.-]

Key word LOADED listen some times.

[@evilpeach2]

Jonathan Washington still. $39k for a 4 cylinder? Found on Road Dead. lol

[@philtripe]

29k for the fully loaded 4 cyl prices start at 23k v6 25k for the 4 cyl and 32 for the 5.0

[@evilpeach2]

phil tripe $24,425 For the v6. $25,995 for the four cyl. $32,925 for the GT. When you go to the dealer, when is the last time you see a base price car with little options? Its too expensive for the four cylinder. Ford used the same size engine back in the 80's. Ford was looking to the past when they put the four cylinder in their new mustang.

[@dwwieb]

evilpeach2 Really? you're still hanging on to the old Ford stereotypes from the 80's and 90's? How about you take a look at their current cars and appreciate how Ford has reached and surpassed the quality of GM and Chrysler cars. Its not 1986 anymore.

[@unkindguy88]

damn now i am having a hard time deciding if I will by the mustang or focus st? help please.

[@spdrasr3]

I'm a huge fan of the 5.0L I had two of them but I am wondering how the 2.3 Ecoboost will tune?

[@victorw5796]

2016, the first front wheel drive, 4 door, 1.3L EcoBoost Ford Mustang, the future of the pony car. It gets excellent gas mileage and you can bring your family along for the ride. Does anybody notice that Ford is taking the mustang further and further away from its roots as a muscle car? No worries, I'm sure GM and Chrysler will take full advantage of this.

[@awksweat230]

Could you put an aftermarket exhaust system to make it sound more aggressive? The V8 only has that over the Ecoboost for me. The MPG and price drop is too enticing.

[@austing7254]

Why does it have 5.0 badges on the 2.3L car, or did you switch it with the V8 for the scenes showing interior and whatnot?

[@kensai69]

The car looks awesome!

[@daniel55645]

if it's an eco boost, why does it have the GT hood? I don't like the engine turned dash. I do like the axel spun that comes with the 50th anniversary package that i ordered with mine. but i will most def have the change out the exhaust as soon as i get the car

[@snort8989]

FORD can we please get this motor in the focus ST or fusion. Would be one hell of a ride.

[@strongplanted]

Nice job Roman! I haven't seen you guys at Cars and Coffee for several months, are you coming back soon? I know this month could be the last for the year, though.

[@FinneousPJ1]

Wow, the Ford Mustang has been updated to 21st century with an INDEPENDENT REAR SUSPENSION. BMW has had independent suspension for over 50 years. Good job, Ford!

[@iodineclip]

LOOK AT IT ! Mustang has always been my dream car :( i hope i can own one, someday. 2.3L ecoboost, such a reasonable car :) and its beautiful, and its 310hp, and its a Mustang ! listen to that sound !

[@flaviobatista2370]

And what car do you drive Jacob?😂

[@flaviobatista2370]

Well. That lawn mower is still faster than that gt 😅

[@flaviobatista2370]

+Jacob Hatzenbeller okay so an ecoboost would be easier and cheaper to tune so your point is? I seen tuned ecoboost smoke gts

[@flaviobatista2370]

+Jacob Hatzenbeller I'm not hating on your mustang I'm sure its amazing all I'm saying is don't hate on other mustangs just cause its new and different lol

[@nboy7]

Lol, 4.6L engine is a joke...2007 ? An ecoboost tuned using less money would leave that POS tractor 4.6L dead and any German turbo V8 would embarrass you even worse. But i should not laugh, youre probably poor if you drive a 2007 4.6L LMAO !

[@akadanielmaia]

That's the one I will probably end up buying. I live in Brasil and dispute the fact Ford is announcing it as a global car it probably won't be less expensive than before since it will not be produced here. The Camaro SS costs 120-150k dollars the GT will cost about the same and I hope I can get one EcoBoost for something like 90k dollars, I know it sound absurd but that's the brazilian market where the government gives the manufactures a bunch of discounts and the manufactures make the dumb consumers overpay for their products since the public transport is shit and most of the consumers don't know how overpriced the cars they are buying are. A Fusion titanium costs about 50-60k dollars so the mustang should be more expensive than that.

[@jamesroquemore2616]

The SVO was loved because of it's balance and was hated because it had half the cylinders. It had more power than the 5.0 of the same years (Sans 86 when they ditched the carb in favor of EFI). Average 4 cylinder in 1980s struggled to get over 100HP. Average 6 cylinder had 120-160 (sans the SHO with 220). Comparing cars 30 years apart takes more than oooo... today's 2.3 Ecoboost has over 300 while the crappy 80's only had 190 so it's woefully under powered. Compared to other cars in the 80's it was on target. Just like 30 years from now this 2.3 Ecoboost will be under powered. Thanks to the PlayStation generation the 4 cylinder Mustang has a better chance of making it than when my father was buying them.

[@TheExtra40414]

'MERICA! Nice car for sure. I def like these new models waay more than any of the 90's and most of the 2000's.

[@blackericdenice]

4:50 He shift to 2nd and ride the clutch just like a kid n a 95 civic.

[@Dgannt]

It's the first time I hear somebody saying that 700 hp in the Hellcat overpowers the chassis. In all other videos they say it drives just fine with good balance and the car is easy to drive and control. And some of those people are auto journalists. I always thought it couldn't be that good with 700 hp in that car, like 700 hp in a Mustang (the old one). At some point it defeats it's purpose when you add more hp. You might get a very good dragster but a very difficult car to control on roads and definitely not a drivers car.

[@Phantom096]

I would like to know how much more horsepower this 4 cylinder engine can handle. I know in order for them to run that turbo they need strong internals inside that engine. It would be interesting to see how much additional hp the tuners can get out of this 2.3 turbo combo. Good reason to keep your subscription to 5.0 magazine.

[@basiccable19]

I wanna hear this car with like greddy or apexi n1 mufflers. It'll probably sound really good!

[@rfouR_4]

Friendly FYI, Not Angel... It's Angeles... An-Jell-Ess, enunciate. ;) And to be more specific it's actually called Angeles CREST Highway, or ACH for short. Also, they showed Big Tujunga Canyon aswell.

[@rootsmanuva82]

This is completely random but I love the new side view mirrors. They look like they're from an Aston Martin. Wouldn't be the first time Ford borrowed styling cues from the British Mark. Can't blame them. And yes, I know they once owned Aston and Jaguar amongst others....

[@misegades]

THIRTY-EIGHT THOUSAND DOLLARS?!?!?!? You could take $10,000 off of that price and I'd still be hesitant. They've gone nuts, absolutely nuts. There is nothing affordable about that at all. The fact that you can get a GT specced up to $46,000 is sheer lunacy as well. Reviewer is driving me crazy, too. IRS makes the car 21st century? Get out. Nobody in their right mind has built solid rear axle "sporty" cars since the '70's. On top of that, leave it to the Americans to go IRS instead of live axle and end up making the car HEAVIER. 3,500+ pounds for a 2-door, 4 cylinder car. 3,700+ for the V8. Insanity. Please don't get me wrong, I like Ford, I really do, but this Mustang is just fail all over the price. Too big, too heavy, and waaaaaayyyyy too expensive.

[@simpsonfan13]

agreed. prices are insane. im in the market for one and will NOT be considering a 205 ANYTHING. not when iv'e seen sub 20K mile 2013 gts with track pak for under $25 on craigslist. fuck for LESS than a loaded GT I can pick up one of the many BOSSes I keep seeing.

[@jacobreed47]

Damn that 4CYL mustang looked, sounded and performed well. I want one. I thought my Mazdaspeed 3 with a turbo 2.3L was light and powerful. That Ecoboost 2.3L is way more powerful and better on gas. And doesn't require premium. Welcome to the 21st century indeed.

[@NickAm01]

I wonder how similar this 2.3L ecoboost engine is to the MazdaSpeed 3 2.3L turbo. Anyone know?

[@sburns015]

The ecoboost is an evolution of the mazda 2.3t found in the speed 3, They share the exact same bore and stroke, engine block is the same, only difference I see is the cylinder heads are different and they use a different turbo from one another.

[@ShadowFalcon]

sburns015 Eh?!? Mazda? The 2.3 Ecoboost is a development of the 2.0 Ecoboost in the Focus ST (which is a brilliant little motor, with very little turbolag).

[@sburns015]

The 2.0 and 2.3 ecoboost is a variant of the mazda L seies engine further developed by Ford under the ecoboost brand. I didn't realize their relation to each other until I started doing a little digging on the net, its amazing what you can learn about on Wikipedia.

[@ShadowFalcon]

sburns015 Actually that isn't quite correct. It is correct that the Mazda L Series Engine was used in Ford cars, but that was under the name of Ford Duratec (an engine which now sees use in cars like the BAC Mono, the Caterham 620R and some other kitcars). I agree that you could call the Duratec a Mazda engine (or atleast a Ford/Mazda engine), but not the Ecoboost (given that the internals have been redesigned and replaced, and the addition of a turbocharger).

[@ShadowFalcon]

geometricpatterns6 Which would make sense, since they're both Straight-4 turbo engines with a displacement of 2.3 liters.

[@20gravedigger11]

Hey Guys... Great channel! I love this vehicle and I was lucky enough to rent a V6 convertible while on vacation last spring. Unfortunately, I haven't driven the EcoBoost yet to compare the two. Frankly, I love the 3.7L V6... I think it's one of the best engines Ford has and (like many, I'm sure) I just can't wrap my head around a 4-cylinder Mustang. I'm curious, what engine did you guys prefer? And furthermore, do you know if it's possible to custom-order a Mustang from Ford and basically create a V6 Premium? I'm talking leather, Shaker Sound System, etc.... All the premium features with the V6 instead of the 2.3 L 4-cylinder.

[@sandraisiguzo3755]

Build & Price on the Ford Website

[@20gravedigger11]

On Ford's website, you cannot "Build & Price" a V6 with the features and options of the EcoBoost.

[@HokKan]

Is it bad for the engine to rev it like that on a cold engine? Or does that Mustang normally idle at over 1000rpm?

[@rockthesix7393]

The cool car to have in the late 80's was a Mustang GT, all 225hp of it. I wouldn't complain getting 310hp out of a 2.3. for 25k brand new. Who cares about the sound, its about HP per liter. 135hp per liter for 2.3. 87hp per liter for the 5.0. Minor upgrades plus a lighter engine would beat the 5.0 and still be cheaper.

[@evilpeach2]

Has anyone noticed that the mustang in the 80's also had a 2.3 liter turbo engine? hmmmmmm

[@naperking]

What kind of mic is that hanging out of the GoPro?

[@EdCali1]

"Angel Crest Highway" LoL. It's Angeles Crest Hwy, like in Los "Angeles". Great video/review, I'm leaning toward the Ecoboost after this and other reviews.

[@2001bmwm3e46]

The first Mustang with a 4 cyl also had 2.3L yet this one makes THREE times the power

[@clarence112]

39k is way off for the ecoboost model. A base premium model starts at 29k so I imagine they got the most upgraded one.. base GT is 32k. I like the new mustang a lot. But the whole 4 cylinder thing is confusing. I am a hair away from ordering mine and people say that it's not fast... It is faster than most cars in this price range, is it not? a subaru wrx for example only has about 260hp while the 4 cylinder ecoboost model still has over 300hp. And they are both the same price. I don't know how it compares to a v6 camaro or challenger, but it will still be a fast ride!

[@lsxfreak5345]

is it possible to upgrade the turbo yourself to gain more power?

[@LancelotMooreYorke]

i would get a eboboost stang, a nice exhaust, downpipe, should sound great! and oh yeah, great fuel economy :)

[@Callediceman]

WOW, I always had a soft spot for the SVO, I almost wished they named this puppy an SVO. New goal trade in the VW by feb 2015 for a 2.3 ecoboost Gaurd Green performance pack.

[@Phantom096]

U can buy it and put SVO on it. U are right history repeats itself only this time i think this with a few mods could be the V8 killer.

[@ShadowFalcon]

I had hoped they'd call it the Mustang RS. Although for Ford to put RS on the back the car should only be available with a manual, and I think that'd be a dealbreaker for some.

[@JPate33]

It's a real shame that Ford Australia chose to not export our Ford Falcon before it stops production in a few years time. My 2002 Ford Falcon xr6 turbo does 330 hp, 4 door sedan and has a huge boot, all for $15k Making it an affordable and practical fast car.

[@carnut9193]

You were hookin around those bends.

[@Slickpete83]

What is the front/rear weight distribution of the new Mustang ???

[@gaivoron]

What's the advantage of economic boost over the v6 other than few mpg?

[@robertsharples9265]

The engine will be smaller so the car will be lighter and it leaves to more room to customize. Also, the smaller engine moves the point of balance closer to the middle of the car which improves handling.

[@2001bmwm3e46]

***** also torque. you get a much flatter torque curve and your full torque at lower rpm

[@askjrvbjkrfbvhjbdjf]

2001bmwm3e46 plus you get that turbo spooling and pull....drive a turbo'd car, you'll change your mind ;)

[@gaivoron]

askjrvbjkrfbvhjbdjf I know what turbo does generally, however last gen v6 was making 315hp and 270 torque. Apparently they dumbed down v6 numbers to make i4 relevant. I would agree about advantages of 4cyl if it was making about 350hp. That would place it right in between v8 and v6. But I just don't see strong reason to go with smaller motor and pay about 4k more compared to v6. Anyone can do few mods and chip the v6 and get way better performance under 4k.

[@tinop414]

V6 comes with no premium options. And has less power and a few less mpg.

[@lotus956]

I like Mustangs but when I tried the 15 Challenger out and sat in the interior, it really is way better than the Mustangs new interior. If Dodge got something right in 15 it was the interior.

[@FirstOnRaceDayCapri2904]

Can the mustang run on 87/95 octane fuel or does it need 92/98 octane fuel ?

[@lowskeelow9301]

When I get done paying off my 2010 I think I'm going to get a 2013 gt since the price will drop a little. I like these but I love the 2004 to 14 edition of mustang

[@jamesonm62]

The n/a 4cyl from the 80s 90s fox was woefully underpowered but the svo was up with the gt

[@greathey1234]

I had one in my holiday country of Georgia. Great car apart from that persistent cel underboost thing.

[@justonp1981]

Ford should tune the Base V6 for a bit more power. Replace the 2.3 offering with the 2.7 EcoBoost. The 5.0 is perfect as is and will as usual have aftermarket parts to take HP to the stratosphere. The 2.7 is more appropriate for the Mustang and more likely to best the 2.3 in MPG due to the weight of the vehicle. 2.7 EcoBoost 2016 and an all aluminum mustang in 2016 (Please!)

[@Alexsered]

I can't to see what Cobb tuning will do to this car.

[@BrayZap]

To the people complaining about the sound it makes. Welcome to the world of "Aftermarket" , if you can't afford a good sounding exhaust, you probably shouldn't even be buying this car or watching the videos.