2015 Fuel economy numbers leaked - Ford Mustang Forum
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #1 of 8 (permalink) Old 08-21-2014 Thread Starter
Apprentice
 
Charlotte Stang's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2013
Location: Charlotte
Posts: 127
 
2015 Fuel economy numbers leaked

2015 Ford Mustang fuel economy ratings leaked - Autoblog

For the 4 and 6 anyway. For the 4, that's what I get in real world driving with my 6. Wonder how close those numbers will be in real life especially with the turbo engaged.


2014 V6 Manual
Charlotte Stang is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 8 (permalink) Old 08-21-2014
Apprentice
 
2007GT/CS's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2012
Location: Corona
Posts: 57
 
I guess the Fusion nose isn't very aerodynamic since the 2014 V6 automatic was rated 3mpg better.

2007GT/CS is offline  
post #3 of 8 (permalink) Old 08-21-2014
Apprentice
 
bnunez00's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2014
Location: Allentown
Posts: 136
 
this is so lame, I was expecting much better from the 4, and v6 to stay the same, how is it possible with "less" HP for it to get worse mpg.
bnunez00 is offline  
 
post #4 of 8 (permalink) Old 08-21-2014
PONY Member
 
dastefster's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2012
Location: Memphis
Posts: 656
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bnunez00 View Post
this is so lame, I was expecting much better from the 4, and v6 to stay the same, how is it possible with "less" HP for it to get worse mpg.
It is very possible. Horsepower is far from the only thing that contributes to fuel efficiency. The ecoboost is turbochargered so they can not only increase the horsepower but also MPG's. The turbo can recover waste energy in the exhaust and send it back into the intake. this increases the mass of the air, and helps burn the fuel more efficiently..aka better fuel economy.

on another note...I love how all the car numbers EXCEPT the GT leaked

2015 mustang GT, Performance Pack, Recaro seats, All-weather floor mats.

Ordered: 5/20/14
VIN received: 10/16/14
ETA: 12/11/14
Delivered: 12/10/14
dastefster is offline  
post #5 of 8 (permalink) Old 08-21-2014
PONY Member
 
konabluev6's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2010
Location: Mexico City
Posts: 727
 
I don´t understand why the V6 numbers were lowered... or were they overestimated in the first place and now they are correcting?

Maybe they lowered the V6 just to make the 4 Cylinder look better.

The reality about Turbocharged cars is that the only way they offer better gas mileage is on Lab tests... in the real world these cars are not as fuel efficient.

2015 50 Anniversary Package GT
2014 Race Red Premium GT Convertible
2003 Silver GT
1981 Ford Mustang Fastback
1966 Mustang Coupe 289 4V
15 years ago 1984 Ford Mustang Hardtop
konabluev6 is offline  
post #6 of 8 (permalink) Old 08-21-2014
PONY Member
 
dastefster's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2012
Location: Memphis
Posts: 656
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by konabluev6 View Post
I don´t understand why the V6 numbers were lowered... or were they overestimated in the first place and now they are correcting?

Maybe they lowered the V6 just to make the 4 Cylinder look better.

The reality about Turbocharged cars is that the only way they offer better gas mileage is on Lab tests... in the real world these cars are not as fuel efficient.
I don't think they were overestimated I'd guess it was to put a bigger gap between the ecoboost and the V6. possibly to phase-out the v6 model in the near future? Just a guess though.

True...to an extent. "real World" numbers are different because of the unknown variable: people. It all depends on your driving habits. If you drive like a grandma and use cruise control, little turbo'd cars can get very good gas milage! But if you're flooring it at all the stop lights, of course it will be worse. My worry about the ecoboost is not the fuel economy, but the longevity of the motor...

2015 mustang GT, Performance Pack, Recaro seats, All-weather floor mats.

Ordered: 5/20/14
VIN received: 10/16/14
ETA: 12/11/14
Delivered: 12/10/14
dastefster is offline  
post #7 of 8 (permalink) Old 08-21-2014
GT Member
 
Radioguy's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2010
Location: Saint Louis
Posts: 1,569
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2007GT/CS View Post
I guess the Fusion nose isn't very aerodynamic since the 2014 V6 automatic was rated 3mpg better.
And that was with a HP rating that was 5 HP better last year???? "Back up engineering?"

2013 Mustang GT Premium Convertible
Candy Apple Red, Auto, FRPP Tune, GT500 Axlebacks, KONI Yellow Sport (adjustable dampers), FRPP Front and Rear swaybars, Custom Removable 4 Point Roll-Bar, BOSS 302 Low Expansion Brake Lines, Roush side splitters, GT500 spoiler, Redline Tuning hood struts,18" Ford Chromed Aluminum Wheels (9R3Z-1K007-A), Michelin Pilot Super Sports - 235X50X18
2011 Mustang V6 Premium Convertible - Gone
Radioguy is offline  
post #8 of 8 (permalink) Old 08-21-2014
Apprentice
 
tommy9946's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2014
Location: The North
Posts: 154
 
The V6 model's economy is down due to axle ratio change and slightly more weight. Gone is the performance hampering 2.73, which, with the automatic transmission in the current gen, yields 31 mpg on the highway. My auto vert with the 2.73 gets 30-31 on the highway. I love that part about the car, but I would have opted for a 3.31 axle if the option was there for the vert. I believe the standard axle ratio on the 15 models is 3.15.

2014 Pony Package convertible l Deep Impact Blue on Black l auto (current)

2014 Ram Big Horn Crew Cab 4x4 l White on Grey l Chrome 20"s l Navigation l Hemi (current daily driver)
tommy9946 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
 

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Ford Mustang Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a VALID email address for yourself, otherwise you will not receive the necessary confirmation email needed to confirm, validate and activate your new AFM member account.

Failure to provide a VALID email address, will result in the cancellation of your new AFM member account registration.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome
 


Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.1