guitar

I would to know if anyone settling for an EB over GT Is happy with their EB?

JeffreyDJ

Why would you consider it "settling"?

AlsCobra

Fuel economy, horsepower, great sound, upgrade potential.
Yeah it's settling.

JeffreyDJ

Seriously? And then you mention Fuel economy. A+ on the trolling.

AlsCobra

Absofriggenlutely! It's completely settling. For whatever reason you decide to go ecoboost, you have settled against buying the V8. You will not win any races or competitions with your ecoboost and for the same sticker price, upgrades make the V8 even better.

JeffreyDJ

I guess that's all true, obviously, because you're basing it on absolutely... well nothing, really.

I never once considered the GT for a multitude of reasons, though I could have easily afforded one. Using your logic, which is obviously massively flawed and setup only to cause an argument, someone getting a GT "settled" by not getting a GT350. If you can't have a productive conversation about it, why have it?

Anyway .. for 2-3K extra you can definitely make an EB faster than a stock GT and faster than many upgraded GTs and still have 3-4K in the bank. If you spent that extra 3-4K (so 7K total) you'd still have a car that could more than handle a vast majority GTs and still be under what you would have paid for a GT.

vs a completely stock EB with PP on stock tires and tune that ran a 12.6.


So, can you have a productive conversation or are you going to have one based on nothing more than ill informed opinion and one looking to start an argument?

TripleBlack14

After seeing the video posted today by a couple of guys who did a real world, every day comparison between the GT and an EB, I sure wouldn't call it "settling for".

typesredline

Link?

TripleBlack14

https://themustangsource.com/forums/...rt-1-a-535135/

typesredline

I'm a bit confused. You make it sound as though this EB is completely stock, including the tires and tune. However it very clearly is tuned. And if you research the particular tune it's running, it isn't designed for the stock motor to last. It is running extremely high boost and aggressive timing. They just wanted the claim to fame of having the fastest time only EB.

5.M0NSTER

In all fairness though, you're comparing a tuned (MODIFIED) EB vs a stock Coyote. You throw a tune on the V8 and the EB can suck it. Bama tuned V8 just ran 11.21 not too long ago, but it was also wearing slicks.

If you compare stock EB to a Stock Coyote it's not even close.

And once you get into the modding game the V8 can make major horsepower, and be well under 10s.

So I guess what I'm saying is there is no point in arguing over EB "performance" compared to the V8. Coyote is made for this. EB is made to replace the V6. It's a muscle car without the "Muscle" part.

AlsCobra

The EB and GT are about the same price. Give or take options. And YES you buy a GT because you can't buy the GT350. Yes you're settling. Insurance, fuel mileage, sticker price, all good reasons to "settle" for the EB. If you buy your mustang as a weekend hot rod fun car that you plan on upgrading and getting some real power out of, the the GT is the only option unless you buy even better. None of your points have any merit unless you keep your car bone stock and you are still at a disadvantage. If you're happy with your EB then great. But there is no point in saying that your car is competitive against a GT. Unless it's a fuel mileage or low insurance competition. So let's continue with this "productive conversation" without feelings getting hurt. It's not as good performance wise. Plain and simple. For whatever reason, you settled for the EB. Would love to hear the multitude of reasons for choosing the EB.

typesredline

Not sure how it's not settling based on that video. The tuned EB got roasted by both GTs on the highway and by the PP from a dig. The only reason the base GT "lost" from a dig was bc he had just pulled up and didn't have time to set up vs the EB who had been sitting there.

The EB guy, who edited the video btw, did a great job of making it seem like it was closer than it was. Like how he kept on the throttle in the first race and even said how he pulled back even after the shift to 4th. In actuality the GT had long been on his brakes. On the last dig he got a major jump. With the proof being that the computer clocked the GT at .4 faster.

Bottom line is that the EB is cute and fun. It can be modded and made cute and fast. But it will never be a GT. And the style argument about dropping X amount of money into an EB and it being equal to a GT for less is very 1998. They cost around the same.

TripleBlack14

Of course the GT outperformed the EB. But the four banger held it's own pretty well till around 60mph. We don't drive our cars on the strip or track as a rule, so in the context of real world driving the EB is no slouch. It seemed to perform quite admirably with 4 less cylinders.

It's all relative to one's wallet and requirements. I got my '14 GT 'vert right after I retired last Spring. It's a second car and a toy for all intents and purposes. It's a DD as long as the weather cooperates daily on the days I drive it. If I was still working and chose to get a Mustang as my only car, it would have been a V-6 automatic at the time. And if that were the case now, I'd have to give thought to a '15 EB.

Like a lot of folks here I had initially poo poo'd the idea of a 4 cyl Mustang. It just seemed so wrong. But it seems like it has potential as is or modified, and in my opinion it's a respectable performer.

JeffreyDJ

I did have poor sentence structure and it should have said tuned. The YouTube video title clearly says tuned, however.

Agreed, but the point is still valid. A "regularly" tuned EB can run 12.9s all day with the proper wheel/tire setup.

AlsCobra

Honestly if I was a turbo4 fan. There's better options. That Evo is one bad little vehicle. Don't get me wrong, the old SVO was way cool but not preferred by the masses. They just keep trying to force the EB motors on us and I'm not sure if it's a good decision in the long run.

typesredline

The real world element vs the track actually makes what happened worse imo. First of all, they started at 50-55 mph. So to "hold on" for 5-10 mph is nothing to get excited about. A Civic could hold on against a Viper for the first 5 mph. Second, a few tenths behind on the track is admirable. 2 car lengths on the street is embarrassing. So the context of real world where most of us spend 99% of our driving, I disagree that it held its own at all. If they hadn't stopped in those races at designated mph, the gap would have only gotten larger.

3point7

All you little GT bi**hes settled. lol



Hey forget it Jeffery. He's that guy. If he wants to measure his manhood by his motor than let him live that fantasy.

They're both great cars. There's no need to insult people who bought the EB.

JeffreyDJ

You're absolutely insane. For someone that has as many posts as you do, I can only assume you just comment to comment, not having anything really to say. You've yet to have a single post in this thread that isn't either misleading or downright false. Congrats, that takes real effort.

Do research and come back so your "feelings aren't hurt" when you've yet to be right. A GT in all configurations and spec'd the same start at 7K more than an EB.

Just because you don't have facts or reality on your side doesn't mean you can't keep arguing, I suppose.

5.M0NSTER

Admittedly these were fairly decent numbers by the EB. And I agree with what you said before. The only reason the 3.55 V8 "lost" was because the driver of that car wasn't ready to launch.

Also the Coyotes are being held back by the tires. I break my tires loose in 1st and 2nd by the time I hit 5000rpm in my Coyote if the temps are under 65F and I try to go WOT. Too much power for the tires. I think the EB has a better balance of power to tire grip. In cool weather off the line I can see this being a driver's race. The Coyote driver has to scale it back to 75% in 1st and 85% in 2nd to maintain grip.