Turbo or Not Turbo, that is the Question

[DGS49]

Rumor has it that the geniuses at Ford intended the "new, revolutionary," 2015 Mustang to have either a 2.3L turbo ("EcoTech") four, or the outstanding 5L V8. The 3.7L six was going to be left off the options list.

But the bean counters insisted that the base engine be the V6 in order to ensure a 'reasonably priced' option for first-time buyers. The turbo is $1,570 more, according to published reports.

To the casual observer, the presence of both engines seems a bit odd. They spec out very close to one another. The Turbo has a few more ponies and a bit more torque, and it is rated at a couple mpg better (300/270 vs 305/300, 23mpg vs 25), but in the real world, the differences in performance and economy will be negligible. And I'm not certain about this, but the turbo probably requires at least 89 octane - 91 if you want all those ponies, so the difference in fuel economy may be illusory anyway.

What about durability? Turbo's tend not to last as long as normally aspirated engines, and require a bit more maintenance. Is Ford to be trusted to make a turbo that will last "the life of the car"? Would you buy a used Mustang turbo with 75 thousand miles on it?

Seems like the ice cream shop that sells "Vanilla" alongside, "French Vanilla."

Would you pay the extra fifteen hundred clams for the turbo? Why?

 

[OnePercenter]

Rumor has it that the geniuses at Ford intended the "new, revolutionary," 2015 Mustang to have either a 2.3L turbo ("EcoTech") four, or the outstanding 5L V8. The 3.7L six was going to be left off the options list.

But the bean counters insisted that the base engine be the V6 in order to ensure a 'reasonably priced' option for first-time buyers. The turbo is $1,570 more, according to published reports.

To the casual observer, the presence of both engines seems a bit odd. They spec out very close to one another. The Turbo has a few more ponies and a bit more torque, and it is rated at a couple mpg better (300/270 vs 305/300, 23mpg vs 25), but in the real world, the differences in performance and economy will be negligible. And I'm not certain about this, but the turbo probably requires at least 89 octane - 91 if you want all those ponies, so the difference in fuel economy may be illusory anyway.

What about durability? Turbo's tend not to last as long as normally aspirated engines, and require a bit more maintenance. Is Ford to be trusted to make a turbo that will last "the life of the car"? Would you buy a used Mustang turbo with 75 thousand miles on it?

Seems like the ice cream shop that sells "Vanilla" alongside, "French Vanilla."

Would you pay the extra fifteen hundred clams for the turbo? Why?

If you were buying a performance car why would the MPG's be an issue. After all, you're not going to buy it to drive like a little old lady.

 

[Mr. H.]

If you were buying a performance car why would the MPG's be an issue. After all, you're not going to buy it to drive like a little old lady.

Nikola Tesla Was A Woman | Thought Catalog

 

[Jarlaxle]

Rumor has it that the geniuses at Ford intended the "new, revolutionary," 2015 Mustang to have either a 2.3L turbo ("EcoTech") four, or the outstanding 5L V8. The 3.7L six was going to be left off the options list.

But the bean counters insisted that the base engine be the V6 in order to ensure a 'reasonably priced' option for first-time buyers. The turbo is $1,570 more, according to published reports.

To the casual observer, the presence of both engines seems a bit odd. They spec out very close to one another. The Turbo has a few more ponies and a bit more torque, and it is rated at a couple mpg better (300/270 vs 305/300, 23mpg vs 25), but in the real world, the differences in performance and economy will be negligible. And I'm not certain about this, but the turbo probably requires at least 89 octane - 91 if you want all those ponies, so the difference in fuel economy may be illusory anyway.

What about durability? Turbo's tend not to last as long as normally aspirated engines, and require a bit more maintenance. Is Ford to be trusted to make a turbo that will last "the life of the car"? Would you buy a used Mustang turbo with 75 thousand miles on it?

Seems like the ice cream shop that sells "Vanilla" alongside, "French Vanilla."

Would you pay the extra fifteen hundred clams for the turbo? Why?

Personally...I'd go for the V8!

I'd buy a 75K turbo car in a second, just about any make.