Topic: CD Article: 2008 Ford Mustang V6 convertible

[Cord]

Should Ford put the new 2.0 EcoBoost as an option for the Mustang?? 65HP more and 40 lb-ft more than the V6 and I would bet it's way less addicted to gas than the 6 cyl.

I wouldn't be surprised to see the 2.0 Ecoboost as the Mustang base engine, the 3.5 Ecoboost as the "GT" engine, and the upcoming 6.2 V8 as the halo engine.

[Seafoam]

Personally after this last redo it looks too big to me. I much prefer the older Fox bodied cars from 1986 -1993 with the 302 V8.

Really? I owned an '87 GT and even though at the time I thought it was great, I look at pictures now and can't believe how ugly it was. I'm too lazy to look up the numbers but I'd bet that if a current V6 isn't quicker to 100km/h, it's very very close.

That is probably true but the 302 was definately faster than the 2.3 litre 4
cylinder base engine that powered the lower trim level. That 302 can be made to go much quicker .Originally the first mustangs of this vintage came
with 6 cylinders but switched to the 4 because they couldn't get enough 2.9
V6 's ,they were being used in the Ist Bronco 2's and Explorers.

It's the larger size of the newer Mustang that i don't like,it's getting heavy.

[Cord]

That is probably true but the 302 was definately faster than the 2.3 litre 4
cylinder base engine that powered the lower trim level.

Ya think? That 2.3 was rated at 88HP!

The engine in the Tempo of the day was rated at 90 hp.

First demo I ever had in the car biz was a '90 Mustang LX. 4 cyl 5 spd, red velour interior and wire wheel covers. Acceleration in that car was grim.

[airbalancer]

It is still small compare to a '72

[Seafoam]

That is probably true but the 302 was definately faster than the 2.3 litre 4
cylinder base engine that powered the lower trim level.

Ya think? That 2.3 was rated at 88HP!

The engine in the Tempo of the day was rated at 90 hp.

First demo I ever had in the car biz was a '90 Mustang LX. 4 cyl 5 spd, red velour interior and wire wheel covers. Acceleration in that car was grim.

Oh yeah it was slow.Just think if it was equipped with the 3 speed automatic.
My Fit is a rocketship compared to that combo.
The old 302 in the GT had about 215 hp so that would probably compare to the power output of the newer mustangs V6.The 302 had a great exhaust note compared to the newer V8's in my opinion. Sorry for the nostalgia.

[The Mighty Duck]

I wouldn't be surprised to see the 2.0 Ecoboost as the Mustang base engine, the 3.5 Ecoboost as the "GT" engine, and the upcoming 6.2 V8 as the halo engine.

Depends on who Ford targets with the Mustang in the future.  The retro styling would seem to target people who wanted a classic Mustang but never bought one.  The sort of people who would see (and did see!) a four-pot Mustang as a disgrace, and think a "real" Mustang needs a V8.  IMO it would be a mistake to go with a four/six combo, even if they make great numbers.  It's a perception thing...

Of course, if they just want to sell cars, I'm sure lots of automatic four-pots would still sell.  Maybe skip the six-cyl and just replace it with the high output EcoBoost 4...

[Seafoam]

I wouldn't be surprised to see the 2.0 Ecoboost as the Mustang base engine, the 3.5 Ecoboost as the "GT" engine, and the upcoming 6.2 V8 as the halo engine.

Depends on who Ford targets with the Mustang in the future.  The retro styling would seem to target people who wanted a classic Mustang but never bought one.  The sort of people who would see (and did see!) a four-pot Mustang as a disgrace, and think a "real" Mustang needs a V8.  IMO it would be a mistake to go with a four/six combo, even if they make great numbers.  It's a perception thing...

Of course, if they just want to sell cars, I'm sure lots of automatic four-pots would still sell.  Maybe skip the six-cyl and just replace it with the high output EcoBoost 4...

I think this is why they still sell so well for Ford. If they only had the high output model probably sales would tank,like i said previously about the Camaro. A real mustang probably should have a V8 but a lot of people like the mustang styling on a smaller budget. For this reason I don't think the new Camaro or Challenger will sell like the Mustang they will only have V8's.

[articsteve]

Of the 2269  2007  Mustang V6 convertibles listed in the USA autotrader, 187 are 5 speed manuals; a 12 to 1 ratio.

Close to the overall ratio of automatics to manuals in the United States.  No surprise there.

For comparison, of 38,197 Lexus IS250s sold in the United States in 2006, 1005 had five-speed manuals.  A 38 to 1 ratio.

Close to the overall ratio of automatics to manuals in the United States.  No surprise there.

   I think it's very model specific and beyond generalization.  In comparison, the number of 07 coupe V6 Stangs in the US Trader is 2877 auto and 696 in manual.  That's a tad over 4 to 1 ratio.  So it leads me to believe V6 Stang rag top buyers (12 to 1 ratio) are in it for the relaxing style of drive, not the speed thing.

[Mitlov]

I'm sure Mitlovs numbers don't consider that for the IS250 AWD a manual tranny isn't even offered.  I wonder what the breakdown would be with just the RWD IS250?

Sorry, forgot to include the link.

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Followup/articleId=121228

just 1,005 IS 250s with the manual transmission were sold in the U.S. during 2006, versus 22,090 rear-wheel-drive IS 250s with an automatic transmission and 15,102 all-wheel-drive IS 250s.

So even if you exclude the AWD IS250s, you end with a 22-to-1 ratio of automatics to manuals.

[HeliDriver]

Personally after this last redo it looks too big to me. I much prefer the older Fox bodied cars from 1986 -1993 with the 302 V8.

Really? I owned an '87 GT and even though at the time I thought it was great, I look at pictures now and can't believe how ugly it was. I'm too lazy to look up the numbers but I'd bet that if a current V6 isn't quicker to 100km/h, it's very very close.

Some crazy Ford dealer actually let me and a buddy out for a test drive in a new '87 Mustang GT. He was, of course, going to come with us, but at the last minute said that "something came up, so I can't go with you", then tossed me the keys and said "don't do anything stupid - see you in an hour." 

We headed up some of my favourite twisty roads in the orchards near Kelowna - I'm sure ovr knows them well - and somehow managed not to wrap the car around one of the many apple trees. I remember pulling out to attempt a pass in the middle of an uphill S-curve, having second thoughts that maybe things could get a little tight, then mashing the gas and finding out that I had pleeeeenty of time to make the pass.

Ahh... that was a fine afternoon.

Anyway... I agree that the styling of that old GT was a little overwrought. It was the sleeper LX with the 5.0 litre under the hood and all the GT suspension bits that I really lusted after.

[Seafoam]

Personally after this last redo it looks too big to me. I much prefer the older Fox bodied cars from 1986 -1993 with the 302 V8.

Really? I owned an '87 GT and even though at the time I thought it was great, I look at pictures now and can't believe how ugly it was. I'm too lazy to look up the numbers but I'd bet that if a current V6 isn't quicker to 100km/h, it's very very close.

Some crazy Ford dealer actually let me and a buddy out for a test drive in a new '87 Mustang GT. He was, of course, going to come with us, but at the last minute said that "something came up, so I can't go with you", then tossed me the keys and said "don't do anything stupid - see you in an hour." 

We headed up some of my favourite twisty roads in the orchards near Kelowna - I'm sure ovr knows them well - and somehow managed not to wrap the car around one of the many apple trees. I remember pulling out to attempt a pass in the middle of an uphill S-curve, having second thoughts that maybe things could get a little tight, then mashing the gas and finding out that I had pleeeeenty of time to make the pass.

Ahh... that was a fine afternoon.

Anyway... I agree that the styling of that old GT was a little overwrought. It was the sleeper LX with the 5.0 litre under the hood and all the GT suspension bits that I really lusted after.

SiRCivic which "sleeper" did you prefer the hatchback or the coupe [trunk model]? To me the coupe was more sleeper

[HeliDriver]

I had forgotten that the LX came in both hatchback and coupe. The coupe was the one I was thinking of.

[Seafoam]

I had forgotten that the LX came in both hatchback and coupe. The coupe was the one I was thinking of.

The hatchback tended to squeak more going over hard bumps.

[safristi]

"Hardback & CROUP Mountain" woz that not a MOOFIE ..i bet them squeaks were REAL