I'm really excited about this car
Cobra Member
Joined: July 27, 2004
Posts: 1,292
Likes: 2
From: Bakersfield, CA
Team Mustang Source
Joined: January 30, 2004
Posts: 3,738
Likes: 0
From: Montreal
Shelby GT500 Member
Joined: September 8, 2009
Posts: 2,586
Likes: 4
From: Lithia, FL
Bullitt Member
Joined: April 21, 2014
Posts: 426
Likes: 4
From: IE, SoCal
Actually, he tells me he never can get it over 17.5 mpg, no matter how he drives on the freeway.
Legacy TMS Member
Joined: January 6, 2006
Posts: 14,053
Likes: 166
From: Bay Area, CA
My father has a '13 F-150 Ecoboost Platinum and it gets 17 mpg at 70-75 mph. It has the 3:15 axle. My '11 Mustang GT gets 24 mpg at the same speed. Perhaps that's just power to weight coming into play. Actually, he tells me he never can get it over 17.5 mpg, no matter how he drives on the freeway.
Bullitt Member
Joined: April 21, 2014
Posts: 426
Likes: 4
From: IE, SoCal
Good point about the turbos not putting out boost. I've talked to a fella who has the 3.73 rear end in his ecoboost and was able to get 20 mpg on the freeway, because of the motor is spinning enough to spool the turbos.
Legacy TMS Member
Joined: January 6, 2006
Posts: 14,053
Likes: 166
From: Bay Area, CA
Bullitt Member
Joined: April 21, 2014
Posts: 426
Likes: 4
From: IE, SoCal
It certainly is my man. Obviously you know it's the other way around with N/A vehicles, its just a trip to me because I'm so used to those taller gears being considered 'economy' gearing.
In my old '02 GMC Sierra, I had the 4.8L with 3.42 rear axle, and I obviously got better mpg than the 3.73 equipped models.
Those **** turbos man. You're damned if they're not spooling, and damned if they're boosted too much....mileage wise
In my old '02 GMC Sierra, I had the 4.8L with 3.42 rear axle, and I obviously got better mpg than the 3.73 equipped models.
Those **** turbos man. You're damned if they're not spooling, and damned if they're boosted too much....mileage wise
Cobra Member
Joined: October 12, 2004
Posts: 1,188
Likes: 7
From: Milwaukee, WI
People fail to realize that for a car to make a given hp it requires a given amount of fuel.
300hp from a 2L 4cyl turbo or 300hp from a 5L V8 is going to use the same gas. A car typically burns 1 part fuel for every 11 parts air.
People wonder why 80's cars are the king of fuel economy. Its not hard to work out. low weight. Very few cars in the 80's broke 3000lbs. Very low maximum hp. most had 90-120hp. New cars are trying to make that up by aerodynamics that the 80's cars didn't have and increasing volumetric efficiency slightly. But people fail to see that they are accelerating much faster than they were back then. Instead of taking 12-14 seconds to 60 most cars are doing 8-10 seconds.
Bottom line, key to good mileage is keep your car as light as possible and barley touch the gas and stop trying to keep up with the traffic around you. Let the car accelerate to 60 in 14 sec instead of 8-10 seconds.
Its so hard to do in a turbo car because you want to feel that rush of torque you get from the boost.
300hp from a 2L 4cyl turbo or 300hp from a 5L V8 is going to use the same gas. A car typically burns 1 part fuel for every 11 parts air.
People wonder why 80's cars are the king of fuel economy. Its not hard to work out. low weight. Very few cars in the 80's broke 3000lbs. Very low maximum hp. most had 90-120hp. New cars are trying to make that up by aerodynamics that the 80's cars didn't have and increasing volumetric efficiency slightly. But people fail to see that they are accelerating much faster than they were back then. Instead of taking 12-14 seconds to 60 most cars are doing 8-10 seconds.
Bottom line, key to good mileage is keep your car as light as possible and barley touch the gas and stop trying to keep up with the traffic around you. Let the car accelerate to 60 in 14 sec instead of 8-10 seconds.
Its so hard to do in a turbo car because you want to feel that rush of torque you get from the boost.
My ST in the city traffic where I can't get in to it often if at all, gets about the same mileage as my previous car, a 2009 Mazda 3 (not the Speed). But if I start to have some fun with it, then the MPG drops fast.
And to those that said it's tuned to the EPA test, that is definitely true. If I keep it around 65 mph I can get over the window sticker's promise of 31 mpg. But If I go up to 75 mph, I struggle to get 27 mpg. That 10 mph difference makes a HUGE difference in mpg. And with speed limits on the highways around here at 65 - 70 mph I'm not doing 65 very often. But it's worth it. This car is hoot and a half to drive!
Legacy TMS Member
Joined: March 7, 2010
Posts: 993
Likes: 2
From: Texas
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
jim010
Suspension, Brakes, and Tire Tech
31
Sep 14, 2015 08:39 PM
f1-cobra
Repair and Service Help
8
Aug 1, 2015 08:02 PM
roushcollection
Auto Shows and Events
0
Jul 28, 2015 02:08 PM