Jump to content

'20 Mustang EB HPP First Drive


Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, jpd80 said:

I really don't know, the 2.7 EB V6 would have been perfect for this application

especially since Camaro sounds to be getting the GM 2.7 I-4 T in the near future.

 

 

You’re right, the 2.7 would be great but is it really necessary when the 2.3 runs 0 to 60 in 4.5? That’s amazing for a 4 cylinder. It would demolish any V-8 Mustangs prior to the OHC 5.0. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Trader 10 said:

 

 

You’re right, the 2.7 would be great but is it really necessary when the 2.3 runs 0 to 60 in 4.5? That’s amazing for a 4 cylinder. It would demolish any V-8 Mustangs prior to the OHC 5.0. 

And so does the V6 Camaro which has a decent performance advantage over the standard EB Mustang.

 

I see the HP 2.3EB as being the needed upgrade to the underperforming base 2.3 EB. Ford could have skipped that and just used F150’s 2.7 EB for better perceived value.

 

I don’t see this new package getting much sales traffic, they’re shooting for buyers that aren’t really there.

 

Edited by jpd80
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It might be better if the 3.0L EB with a hybrid option (Aviator) was a possibility. I wouldn't be surprised if it was thought about. What does the 2.7 make 335hp compared to 330 in the HP 2.3? Is the juice worth the squeeze? 

It might be just me but I would consider this option to save a bit on gas and a lot in insurance compared to the Coyote. We'll see how it plays out. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Hugh said:

It might be better if the 3.0L EB with a hybrid option (Aviator) was a possibility. I wouldn't be surprised if it was thought about. What does the 2.7 make 335hp compared to 330 in the HP 2.3? Is the juice worth the squeeze? 

It might be just me but I would consider this option to save a bit on gas and a lot in insurance compared to the Coyote. We'll see how it plays out. 

 

But it makes 380 lb-ft torque broadly spread across the power band. That's the big wow you get from the 2.7 V6 twin turbo.

Don't get me wrong though, the 2.3 is a great engine, just about the best boosted 4-cylinder out there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gurgeh said:

 

But it makes 380 lb-ft torque broadly spread across the power band. That's the big wow you get from the 2.7 V6 twin turbo.

Don't get me wrong though, the 2.3 is a great engine, just about the best boosted 4-cylinder out there.

 

I'm pretty sure it's also heavier. Which weight savings over the nose seems to really have made a difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jcartwright99 said:

 

I'm pretty sure it's also heavier. Which weight savings over the nose seems to really have made a difference.

Pretty sure there's a substantial weight difference... aluminum block Four vs iron block V6.  My 03 Mach 1 with all aluminum DOHC 32 valve V8 only makes 305 hp and 320 lb-ft torque... things sure have changed!

Edited by CoolScoop
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...