ZanatWork Posted July 3, 2014 Share Posted July 3, 2014 From this morning's Autoblog...a definite trend...! http://www.autoblog.com/2014/07/02/best-car-power-to-weight-ratios-feature/#continued Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mettech Posted July 3, 2014 Share Posted July 3, 2014 Looks like the 2015 2.3L Mustang will be on the list next year too. Rumors have that the 2.3L will be nearly 350HP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted July 3, 2014 Share Posted July 3, 2014 Looks like the 2015 2.3L Mustang will be on the list next year too. Rumors have that the 2.3L will be nearly 350HP. 350 sounds a bit optimistic, given the 2.7 EB won't make much more than that. 320-330 would be my guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted July 3, 2014 Share Posted July 3, 2014 The SHO is too damn fat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mettech Posted July 3, 2014 Share Posted July 3, 2014 http://www.tflcar.com/2014/07/2015-mustang-ecoboost-350/ "...Everyone is talking horsepower this week now that we’ve found out exactly how much horsepower the 2015 Dodge Challenger SRT Hellcat makes. But there is another muscle car debuting later this year that we don’t have horsepower numbers for, and that’s the 2015 Ford Mustang EcoBoost. According to an anonymous source close to the project, that number is 350 hp. Currently, Ford claims that the EcoBoost will make 305+ horsepower, but they haven’t detailed an official number. Our source told us that we should see a number around 350 hp. He went on to say that the official number revealed might be lower than 350, but the engine will be underrated from the factory. That’s consistent with previous forced-induction Fords that make more than their stated horsepower..." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted July 3, 2014 Share Posted July 3, 2014 (edited) Chinese whispers. I'm betting 2.3 EB Mustang's power comes in at just under 320 HP Reason being that and the torque at around 310 lb ft almost aligns with what the past 4.6 3V engines used to make in standard form. Edited July 3, 2014 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANTAUS Posted July 3, 2014 Share Posted July 3, 2014 Ford should have a few more entries. Fusion ST should be an entry and Explorer Sport should be a good bang for the buck if they up the HP, hopefully next generation will have that 3.5L pumping 400HP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZanatWork Posted July 3, 2014 Author Share Posted July 3, 2014 I'd be all for a Fusion ST, but I was told I was being impatient and a few other unsavory things when there was no mention of it when the current Fusion debuted. On this very board, in fact.I wonder if they'd have felt that way, knowing the same would be true two years later? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted July 4, 2014 Share Posted July 4, 2014 (edited) Yes, there may be a Fusion ST offered in the future but calling for one two years ago when nothing was planned really speaks of our lack of understanding with Ford's vision of growth in Fusion sales. Fusion now sells between 27,000 and 33,000 a month with no ST version in sight... And for the record, last month's sales of Fusion hybrids at just over 3,000 and energi at 1,939. sales would seem to offer far more growth potential. Edited July 4, 2014 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted July 4, 2014 Share Posted July 4, 2014 I'd be all for a Fusion ST, but I was told I was being impatient and a few other unsavory things when there was no mention of it when the current Fusion debuted. On this very board, in fact. I wonder if they'd have felt that way, knowing the same would be true two years later? No, because the fact remains that while it would be an enthusiast's dream it's simply still not a business priority. Don't forget that the most likely engines for a fusion st - the 2.3 or 2.7 EB are just now making their debut. If they do one I'd expect to see it next year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZanatWork Posted July 4, 2014 Author Share Posted July 4, 2014 No, because the fact remains that while it would be an enthusiast's dream it's simply still not a business priority. Don't forget that the most likely engines for a fusion st - the 2.3 or 2.7 EB are just now making their debut. If they do one I'd expect to see it next year. The correct answer isn't "business priority". That kind of thinking creates Camrys and Corollas. There had just been a Fusion Sport, so hoping for a sport model of the new variant was hardly pie-in-the-sky territory. I'm very, very happy that Ford is selling as many Fusions as they are, and hope that it finally breaks the Camry's stranglehold on "top selling car in the US". However, still looking 30 or more hp upward at the top engines of its competitors is not something to be proud of. I'm hoping that the MCE comes with some improvements in available drivetrain performance, and yes...the ST, Sport, or whatever the eventual "touring" model is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted July 4, 2014 Share Posted July 4, 2014 How are they supposed to put out a performance Fusion when the engine isn't ready yet? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZanatWork Posted July 4, 2014 Author Share Posted July 4, 2014 How are they supposed to put out a performance Fusion when the engine isn't ready yet? Given modern lockdowns on industrial information, how is the consumer to know what's ready or otherwise? What the consumer does have available, however, are comparisons in publications and on sites everywhere that can point out both strengths and shortcomings, information which can narrow desired test drives toward purchases. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted July 4, 2014 Share Posted July 4, 2014 (edited) Given modern lockdowns on industrial information, how is the consumer to know what's ready or otherwise? The fact that the engine production lines weren't even built? A V6 Fusion would have completely undermined everything Ford was doing with the 2.0EB. The way CAFE counts fuel economy is not linear, the thirstier V6 would have wiped out a lot of the gains achieved with the smaller Ecoboost I-4s. So in essence, adding 3,000/mth V6 would more than likely wipe out the gains achieved by 6,000 or more efficient versions What the consumer does have available, however, are comparisons in publications and on sites everywhere that can point out both strengths and shortcomings, information which can narrow desired test drives toward purchases. The lack of an ST version doesn't seem to have hurt Fusion sales but now that production is stable, maybe it's time to start fleshing out the range a bit more with valuable niche cars. I'm not opposed to the idea of an ST version, just the timing and efficiency needed to make it happen... Edited July 4, 2014 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted July 4, 2014 Share Posted July 4, 2014 Given modern lockdowns on industrial information, how is the consumer to know what's ready or otherwise? What the consumer does have available, however, are comparisons in publications and on sites everywhere that can point out both strengths and shortcomings, information which can narrow desired test drives toward purchases. It doesn't matter what effect it might have on sales - if the drive trains aren't ready they aren't ready. The 2.0eb is competitive with the Camry and accord v6. A 2.3EB ST would blow them away. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted July 4, 2014 Share Posted July 4, 2014 It doesn't matter what effect it might have on sales - if the drive trains aren't ready they aren't ready. The 2.0eb is competitive with the Camry and accord v6. A 2.3EB ST would blow them away. But then you'd still get some people complaining because Ford didn't use either of the Ecoboost V6s.. The 2.3 EB would be a fine engine for Fusion ST, more powerful than the Crown Victoria's 4.6 V8. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZanatWork Posted July 4, 2014 Author Share Posted July 4, 2014 It's nothing like unreasonable wanting "your brand's" product to have competitive engine options with the competition, and there are many with 20-40 more hp available. Not everyone cares about (overhyped and overrated) hybrids.This isn't black and white. I don't have to hate a base or Ecoboost Fusion to wish there was a sport model available. The blather about "the engine/line wasn't ready" wasn't what was said back then, it was pretty unanimously "you know they'll have an ST out soon" by the people always arguing with the performance fans on this board. It's been over two years, and nothing is even making ripples in the rumor pages...but many reports of disappointment with the mpg of Ecoboost and hybrid models have been coming in the whole time. I'll always be please when Ford succeeds, and I'm very pleased to see Fusions nearly averaging 30k units per month. I'm just hoping there's a gearhead version to go with the other STs and GTs in the showroom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted July 5, 2014 Share Posted July 5, 2014 There is a HUGE difference between saying what you would like to see versus saying what Ford should do or should have done. For some reason that distinction is lost on you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZanatWork Posted July 5, 2014 Author Share Posted July 5, 2014 There is a HUGE difference between saying what you would like to see versus saying what Ford should do or should have done. For some reason that distinction is lost on you. Actually, what's lost on you is that you've made many comments on this board that guarantee that I cannot take you seriously, or any of your "counsel", or your attempts to "explain business" to me. Or, y'know, the ability to glean driving impression from concept images. You are front and center among the people that can't grasp that it's not black and white...or, that you have no business lecturing Ford's business cases or "facts" that are among Ford's highest ranking officers...unless you can prove that you are one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted July 5, 2014 Share Posted July 5, 2014 (edited) I put it to you that Ford clearly chose to invest funds into something else over doing a Fusion ST and therefore, it is a black and white proposition where opportunity costs most likely determined that the return on investment was better in another project. Edited July 5, 2014 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZanatWork Posted July 5, 2014 Author Share Posted July 5, 2014 I put it to you that Ford clearly chose to invest funds into something else over doing a Fusion ST and therefore, it is a black and white proposition where opportunity costs most likely determined that the return on investment was better in another project. Meaningless, unless you can prove exactly which funds were moved. It's an unbackable argument, unless you're among Ford's bean counters and want to introduce company financial documents into an online automotive argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted July 5, 2014 Share Posted July 5, 2014 (edited) Meaningless, unless you can prove exactly which funds were moved. It's an unbackable argument, unless you're among Ford's bean counters and want to introduce company financial documents into an online automotive argument. You've got hat wrong way around. Which existing products is going to miss out on funds to make room for that Fusion ST? The absence of a Fusion ST proves that Ford saw no viable business case over existing projects. End of story. The burden of proof is on you to show that your Fusion ST business case holds up because Ford hasn't seen fit to fund development of that vehicle.... You don't have to be a member of Ford's inner circle to conclude that if a certain vehicle is not built then the business case didn't hold up... otherwise Ford would have built the damned thing. Use your brains.... Edited July 5, 2014 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted July 5, 2014 Share Posted July 5, 2014 (edited) I know how billion dollar business decisions are made. I've seen, created and analyzed them several times over the last 10 years. I know how corporate projects get funded (or not). How many billion dollar corporate business cases have you done? Ford has the Fiesta ST, Focus ST and Taurus SHO. They clearly have both the desire and resources to create a Fusion ST. We also know there was no engine available between the 2.0L EB and 3.5L EB until the last few months. Anyone with an ounce of common sense can put those two facts together and see that if they're going to do a Fusion ST it would have been waiting for either the 2.3L or 2.7L EB engine. They're here now so we'll either see one in the next 12-18 months or we'll know that Ford decided to spend those resources elsewhere. It's that simple. And BTW - saying that Ford should have used the 3.7L V6 in the Fusion just so you can brag that it has more power than Accord or Camry is so juvenile.... Edited July 5, 2014 by akirby Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chevys Posted July 5, 2014 Share Posted July 5, 2014 I am too lazy to look it all up but doesnt Mazda kick Fords ass and everybody else on weight? Something for you kool aid drinkers to think on. Sometimes the holy grail ainit all that holy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted July 5, 2014 Share Posted July 5, 2014 I am too lazy to look it all up but doesnt Mazda kick Fords ass and everybody else on weight? If this thread were strictly about weight, you might have a point there. 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.