[Tralmix]

Can someone point me to a good valid source for 1975 Mustang II 2.3L fuel economy numbers?

Thanks in advance.

[74stang2togo]

Well, what MPG you should get with it would depend on which package it was.

The Mustang II MPG was rated at 29mpg highway (2.79:1 gears, radial tires, no A/C, 2.3L engine, 4spd manual tranny, manual steering), the regular Mustang II coupes and hatches would've been rated lower.

The factory EPA fuel economy ratings from 1975 don't really mean much now. They were rated on a completely different system from todays cars, using a different quality of gasoline, different oils and fluids, different kinds of tires, etc.

Not only that, but a '75 Mustang that hasn't had a full rotissere restoration has a lot of wear and tear on every part in the car, and wear and tear has a negative effect on fuel economy.

If your car is getting better than 20mpg highway, it's probably pretty close to where it should be considering age and all the other factors mentioned.

[Tralmix]

Thanks for the info.

Any solid sources for this info. for back-up?

I work for a company that does training for Ford dealers and we are working on some stuff for the new 2.5L I-4 that is replacing the current 2.3L. We are making a "then and now" comparison between power and economy from two engines with the same displacement. To satisfy the Ford legal staff, I would need back-up for any Mustang II FE numbers that I show.

I know the numbers will vary depending on equipment, etc. like you stated, but we can take care of thet.

Thanks again.

[1978CobraII]

My fuel mileage is about 25 mpg around town, that's with No A/C, Manual steering,3.08:1 gears,crappy fiberglass tires with flatspots,and a automatic, coupled with half a tank of old stale gas the rest of the tank is 89 octane with Lucas Fuel Stablizer, which on a side note helped with the pinging from the stale fuel.

[74stang2togo]

Originally Posted by Tralmix

Thanks for the info.

Any solid sources for this info. for back-up?

I work for a company that does training for Ford dealers and we are working on some stuff for the new 2.5L I-4 that is replacing the current 2.3L. We are making a "then and now" comparison between power and economy from two engines with the same displacement. To satisfy the Ford legal staff, I would need back-up for any Mustang II FE numbers that I show.

I know the numbers will vary depending on equipment, etc. like you stated, but we can take care of thet.

Thanks again.

That's still comparing apples to oranges, lol

The original 2.3L I4 engine started it's life in 1974 as a SOHC 4cyl with a points-triggered distributor and a carburetor. Along the way it gained electronic ignition (1975) optional turbocharging (1979) fuel injection (1987 or 1988) roller cam followers (late 80s/early 90s) dual-plug heads and distributorless ignitions (1990s), and was then replaced by the 2.5L I4 (just a bored and/or stroked 2.3) and even that was replaced by an all-new 2.3L DOHC engine in the Ranger/B-series.

Not only that, but in the 80s there was a 2nd 2.3L Ford 4-cylinder that was called the HSC that used TBI (throttle-body-injection) and powered Tauruses and Tempos.

Then there's the 2.3L Mazda-sourced engine in the current Fusion/Milan/6...

There have been a lot of 2.3L Ford engines over the years, including an inline 6-cylinder in the 1960s. All of them except the HSC had/have good reputations for reliabilty (even the HSC's wasn't horrible), and all of them have been good on fuel economy.

[1978CobraII]

Kudo's to 74stang2togo for knowing his ****.