NickF1011 Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 (edited) But it won't be the "base model" any more so you need a way to distinguish between the 3.7L V6 and the 2.3L EB. Why? How do you tell the difference between a 2.5L and 1.5/1.6EB Fusion SE? (pardon the edit - not up on my fusion powertrains apparently) Edited May 16, 2014 by NickF1011 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
03 LS Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 Both are "base models", but if you have to know which is base "base model", it's the V6. 2.3 EB has a Premium trim and a Performance package, while 3.7 V6 has neither. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 Why? How do you tell the difference between a 2.5L and 1.5/1.6EB Fusion SE? (pardon the edit - not up on my fusion powertrains apparently) EASY...WHEELS....LOL 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 Why? How do you tell the difference between a 2.5L and 1.5/1.6EB Fusion SE? (pardon the edit - not up on my fusion powertrains apparently) Because Fusion SE indicates it's the base model. There is no S or SE designation for the mustang - that's the problem. I guess you can just call it Mustang and Mustang GT but then if you just say Mustang you'd have to follow it up with Base or GT just to be clear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 Actually ST would be a better name for the 2.3EB model. Mustang (base), Mustang ST, Mustang GT 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 (edited) Because Fusion SE indicates it's the base model. There is no S or SE designation for the mustang - that's the problem. I guess you can just call it Mustang and Mustang GT but then if you just say Mustang you'd have to follow it up with Base or GT just to be clear. That's how it's always been with the Mustang. The base models have never really ever had their own trim designation. Look all through the 90's. The bumpers all just said "MUSTANG" on them unless it was a GT or Cobra. I'm fairly certain the order guides then simply designated them "Base" as well. Actually ST would be a better name for the 2.3EB model. Mustang (base), Mustang ST, Mustang GT That would dilute the ST name though I think, considering it will likely be the volume model. Just call it a Mustang and be done with it. Will all be moot in a few years anyway when they likely dump the 3.7L entirely. The idea of badges for the EcoBoost engines (or even marketing them as something "different") will likely go the way of putting "ABS" and "Fuel Injected" badges on cars too. Edited May 16, 2014 by NickF1011 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 But didn't the "base" mustang always have a single engine choice? If it's not a GT it's a 3.7L V6. Not a deal crusher but having a differentiator would make it easier especially if you're looking at used models down the road. And yes it's the same as a Fusion SE with 2 or 3 different engines. However, I totally disagree that calling it a ST would dilute anything considering a mustang 2.3L EB would handily outrun a Fiesta or Fusion ST both in a straight line and on the track. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 (edited) The 2.3 and 3.8 were offered simultaneously in "base trim" in the 80's, as I mentioned earlier. Just don't see why you go against everything that has ever been Mustang and go and start giving a name to what amounts to a base model now. Edited May 16, 2014 by NickF1011 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 Guys. You're arguing about the dealer guide. I doubt very much that Ford intends to promote any trim name other than "GT", "SVO" and whatever other promotional packages they put out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 The 2.3 and 3.8 were offered simultaneously in "base trim" in the 80's, as I mentioned earlier. Just don't see why you go against everything that has ever been Mustang and go and start giving a name to what amounts to a base model now. In the 80s they also had the following trim level designations: L, GL, GLX, LX, GT, Turbo GT (1983–84), SVO (1984–86), Cobra (1979–81;1989–1993) Why are you trying to go against everything that has ever been mustang by not using trim level names? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hydro Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 I wouldn't want the ST name for the same reasons mentioned before..dilution. Right now ST strictly means "performance" for enthusiast and non Ford owners. If they start strapping ST on lower end cars it will become a Joke like chebby's SS. They started throwing that name on every car and nobody really cares anymore of an SS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 (edited) Again, we're talking about a dealer guide. That's all. They have to call the trim levels something, and for reasons known only to themselves they are calling it "Ecoboost." I don't think Ford has put any trim designation hardware on sub-GT models in 20 years---not since the '94 overhaul, AFAIK---so I think it's just Friday afternoon filler to debate what amounts to Ford's internal reference for this vehicle. Edited May 16, 2014 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schpark Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 I went from a 2006 3.0L Fusion to a 2013 2.0L EB Fusion. My mileage went from 17 to 20-22 depending on driving conditions and the 2.0EB has far more power. Wow. I am getting 22 on a 2003 Taurus with the 3.0 Duratec, how does the newer 3.0 Duratec get less in the Fusion? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 "depending on driving conditions" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerM Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 Again, we're talking about a dealer guide. That's all. They have to call the trim levels something, and for reasons known only to themselves they are calling it "Ecoboost." I don't think Ford has put any trim designation hardware on sub-GT models in 20 years---not since the '94 overhaul, AFAIK---so I think it's just Friday afternoon filler to debate what amounts to Ford's internal reference for this vehicle. The Mustang used to have a "Pony" model. Don't know if it was base or slightly fancier, but if you're looking for something "Pony" might be it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 Yes. But they didn't put 'Pony' badges on the car itself, AFAIK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoonerLS Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 The Mustang used to have a "Pony" model. Don't know if it was base or slightly fancier, but if you're looking for something "Pony" might be it. There's the "Pony package" interior that goes back to the early years of the Mustang, but I don't recall a "Pony" model. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerM Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 There's the "Pony package" interior that goes back to the early years of the Mustang, but I don't recall a "Pony" model. My mistake. But it does have a certain appeal (to me). Base, Pony, GT...... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackHorse Posted May 16, 2014 Author Share Posted May 16, 2014 That would dilute the ST name though I think, considering it will likely be the volume model. Just call it a Mustang and be done with it. Will all be moot in a few years anyway when they likely dump the 3.7L entirely. The idea of badges for the EcoBoost engines (or even marketing them as something "different") will likely go the way of putting "ABS" and "Fuel Injected" badges on cars too. I'm not so sure the 2.3 is going to be the volume model considering that it is supposed to be slotted higher than the V6 price wise. I think the V6 will still be the volume car. Additionally the V6 is really starting to gain popularity with the after market modification crowd as the motor is apparently full of serious potential. I've seen 475 plus horsepower 3.7 V6 Mustangs with stock internals. There is even a guy running 11 seconds with his V6 with a supercharger on it. So the modders are really starting to take a liking to the motor for its performance potential and that may keep sales of the V6 model in the "lets keep it" range. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 In rest of the world markets Mustang ST and Mustang GT / Cobra Jet / GT 350 would probably mesh better with the other products Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 I wouldn't want the ST name for the same reasons mentioned before..dilution. Right now ST strictly means "performance" for enthusiast and non Ford owners. If they start strapping ST on lower end cars it will become a Joke like chebby's SS. They started throwing that name on every car and nobody really cares anymore of an SS. perhaps, and I mentioned it on another thread, there will be two states of tune for the 2.3, 1) ecoboost, 2) SVO....YEAH BABY! ( yelled in Gary Buseys voice ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 I'm not so sure the 2.3 is going to be the volume model considering that it is supposed to be slotted higher than the V6 price wise. I'm going to go with the previous poster who noted that there are comparatively few options available on the V6 model. I don't think the volume model for this (or any other successful vehicle) is the cheapest one in the range. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 so I think it's just Friday afternoon filler to debate what amounts to Ford's internal reference for this vehicle. Bingo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoonerLS Posted May 16, 2014 Share Posted May 16, 2014 I'm going to go with the previous poster who noted that there are comparatively few options available on the V6 model. I don't think the volume model for this (or any other successful vehicle) is the cheapest one in the range. Yeah, I think there's a distinction between "base model" and "volume model." I'd expect the V6 to continue as the base, with the EB23 accounting for the largest production figures--kind of like how the D37 is the F150's base engine, but the Coyote and EB35 are the volume mills. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackHorse Posted May 16, 2014 Author Share Posted May 16, 2014 What's the current breakdown of V6 vs GT sales from 2011 on? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.