06-07-2016, 10:05 PM | #1 |
Drives: 2016 F150 Join Date: May 2014
Location: Iowa
Posts: 2,196
|
Ecoboost Mustang getting slower?
Did Ford send a ringer early on? (I'm only poking fun at the ringer part as I know the blue oval camp would have a field day if a GM representative said the excerpt below).
"A Ford communications representative noted that the quickest manual transmission Mustang EcoBoost we tested (the second car) was a pre-production model and speculated that it may have had a “different calibration.” He did not elaborate." The best trap speed I've seen has been from C&D.. They had it at 102 and 103 from what I recall. I believe the rest have been under 100 mph. Interesting read.. Trap speed is about the same in all of the tests. This thing weighs more than an ATS v6 coupe. A bit of a diet and maybe Focus RS power-plant and it would be a decent improvement. To me, the 1/4 are all fairly close from the tests they had. Seems like the 0-60 is what really took the hit. I don't know if they recalibrated it or something to protect drivetrain. http://www.motortrend.com/news/ecobo...etting-slower/ |
06-08-2016, 12:52 AM | #2 |
Chief Bief
Drives: Nightfall Gray Camaro 1SS Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Norfolk, Virginia
Posts: 208
|
There's quite a few ways to take the test of turbos that they did. Most will think it's a straight comparison which it really isn't. The EcoBoost is better equipped as it should be, seeing as that's what they want as the middle ground option. Still its alarming to see just how they won the competition. Even with the power advantage, it still lost quite badly in the quarter. It did shine everywhere else, which I feel was the point of the stance in the lineup of that model.
Still, seeing that just tires for the Camaro would make that much more of a difference shows what lightness really equates to.
__________________
2016 NFG 1SS M6 JLT Intake, LT2 Manifold, LT5 TB, CSP 2" headers, AWE Catback Exhaust, Apex ARC-8 Wheels. 426whp/434wtq |
06-08-2016, 08:18 AM | #3 |
Drives: 16 Camaro SS, 15 Colorado Join Date: May 2009
Location: Jefferson City, Missouri
Posts: 13,949
|
Wow. Chef you are exactly right. If someone/anyone remotely affiliate with GM said the same thing about tuning calibrations being different for an early test car versus a later one, the MG6 crowd would be raking GM over the coals, calling them evil, and thePill and his minions would go on a 12 page rant about it.
Instead, I'm betting they are attacking MotorTrend for posting up such an article. Frankily I'm a little surprised myself that MT did post the article. I don't see anything coming from it, except questions and negativity. The cars are all trapping similarly, so peak HP seems to be the same. But yeah, 0 - 60 seems to be suffering, so perhaps it is something in the tune to protect the driveline? Anyways...whatever it is, is interesting. I can't believe that I feel like the Mustang EB is over-weight, but there you have it. It is. The Camaro turbo 4 has a good 200 pound advantage on it. If you were to equal it out at the same 3,600 lb weight, that would be like the Camaro having about 300HP and 320 TQ, very similar to the Mustang, but the Camaro puts the power down better.
__________________
2016 Camaro 1SS - 8-speed - NPP - Black bowties
2010 Camaro 1LT V6 (Sold. I will miss her!) |
06-08-2016, 08:46 AM | #4 | |
Drives: Current Camaro-less Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 3,242
|
Quote:
Does anyone here have access to a Ford service database to see if the tunes have multiple revisions? |
|
06-08-2016, 08:57 AM | #5 | |
Drives: 2016 F150 Join Date: May 2014
Location: Iowa
Posts: 2,196
|
Quote:
|
|
06-08-2016, 09:04 AM | #6 |
Drives: Current Camaro-less Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 3,242
|
|
06-08-2016, 09:54 AM | #7 |
|
Wow did not know each EB they have tested has been slower than the last. This is as bad as the ZO6 cooling issues.
__________________
Current: '17 2SS Hyper Blue, A8, MRC, NPP
Past: '99 SS Camaro A4, '73 Camaro 383 A3 "Voices in your head are not considered insider information." 3800 Status - 6/16/16 (Built!) 6000 status - 6/29/16 (Delivered!) |
06-08-2016, 09:56 AM | #8 |
Drives: 99z28 with bolt-ons and a mwc fab 9 Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,277
|
Does it come with a smaller input shaft or everything is the same?
__________________
I like my woman like my milk shakes, THICK!!!!
|
06-08-2016, 09:57 AM | #9 |
Drives: 2016 SS M6, NPP Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Hawthorne, CA
Posts: 1,957
|
|
06-08-2016, 09:59 AM | #10 |
Drives: Current Camaro-less Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 3,242
|
|
06-08-2016, 10:01 AM | #11 |
Drives: 2016 F150 Join Date: May 2014
Location: Iowa
Posts: 2,196
|
|
06-08-2016, 10:02 AM | #12 |
Drives: 2016 SS M6, NPP Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Hawthorne, CA
Posts: 1,957
|
|
06-08-2016, 10:09 AM | #13 |
Drives: 2016 F150 Join Date: May 2014
Location: Iowa
Posts: 2,196
|
I feel like my MT82 is getting worse. I see myself getting locked out of gear at redline when I try to shift fast when it didn't use to happen when I got the car.. Maybe I just need to slow down. Lol.
|
06-08-2016, 10:10 AM | #14 |
Drives: Current Camaro-less Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 3,242
|
|
|
|
Post Reply
|
|
|