Comparison with new ecoboost

I have a 2008 Bullitt with 252,000 miles on it. I’m not super handy and I’ve had a rebuilt tranny put in around November so I’m a bit concerned about what’s going to go wrong next. Before Covid I was driving 500 miles a week. I love it to death and got it used with 80,000 miles on it. I’m not prepared to end my mustang love affair. I can’t afford a new gt or Bullitt. So my question is, how do the new ecoboost mustangs compare performance wise with the 2005- 2009 gt’s and bullitts. Hard to get a test drive in right now. Thanks.

I'd love to see a head to head test of an all stock '05-'10 GT and a stock '15-'17 Ecoboost PP. On paper they look very evenly matched.

I suspect the tuned 2.3EB will kill even a tuned '05-'10 GT.

I had a 2010 and a 2015 EBM; the instant power/tq of the EBM plus the upgraded S550 chasis vs the S197 chasis is not close to a fair fight; if I had to do it all over again the only mods to the EBM I would do is an upgraded FMIC and at tune.

Damn! 252k! What number is your Bullitt? I’m still curious where my ‘08 went and I feel like it’s still in Texas or maybe a junkyard..

tjm73 said:

I'd love to see a head to head test of an all stock '05-'10 GT and a stock '15-'17 Ecoboost PP. On paper they look very evenly matched.

Click to expand...

They are. Here's some road test data that I have saved on my PC (all with manual tranny):

2015 Ecoboost: 0-60 5.5, 1/4 mile 13.9 @ 102
2005 GT: 0-60 5.2, 1/4 mile 13.8 @ 103
2007 Shelby GT: 0-60 5.0, 1/4 mile 13.6 @ 104
2008 Bullitt: 0-60 5.0, 1/4 mile 13.6 @ 104
2010 GT: 0-60 4.9, 1/4 mile 13.5 @ 104

The EB required two gear changes to reach 60mph whereas the others required only one, hence the slower 0-60 time. A stage 1 tuned 2.3 EB would indeed outrun a bone stock '05-'10 GT with only a 93 octane tune, but it still wouldn't provide the aural pleasure of the 4.6 3V no matter what you did to it.
If I had a 2008 Bullitt I'd hang onto it till I die and just replace/upgrade any parts that wear out, including the engine. Mine isn't a Bullitt but it's my dream car and that's exactly what I plan to do anyway.

It’s been a while since my 2005 gt was anywhere close to stock but I just traded in an 18 ecoboost after 2 years as my daily
They are very different, the ecoboost was a 10 speed auto but I’m pretty sure outside of from a dig it would be quicker, I know raced a 300 wheel sn95 cobra and it walked it. The chassis and handling stock is amazing it’s more comfortable quieter etc so it doesn’t have the special feel (more raw and the retro look)
I would recommend holding off and test driving one with, I also think the auto kills the stick, it just is a better combo (this is coming from someone who put a 13 6060 in his 05 so I do love stick)


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

tjm73 said:

I'd love to see a head to head test of an all stock '05-'10 GT and a stock '15-'17 Ecoboost PP. On paper they look very evenly matched.

I suspect the tuned 2.3EB will kill even a tuned '05-'10 GT.

Click to expand...

It's an even match only while the EB is generating positive boost. Off boost, which I am guessing happens when you first tip into the throttle at much below about 2000 rpm, the EB is only a 2.3L NA engine.

This is definitely a bigger issue for manual transmission cars than it is for automatics.


Norm

NickD87 said:

It’s been a while since my 2005 gt was anywhere close to stock but I just traded in an 18 ecoboost after 2 years as my daily
They are very different, the ecoboost was a 10 speed auto

Click to expand...

Turbocharging is inherently better matched to an automatic for at least three reasons. For comparable power numbers, definitely to your advantage as far as straight line acceleration is concerned.

You've got torque converter low-rpm slip available to allow engine revs to initially spool up more quickly (as long as the torque converter stays out of lockup, anyway).

You inherently have no-lift upshifts, which keeps the engine seeing positive boost.

You've got pedal-commanded downshifts, which also are not lift-foot as far as the throttle is concerned.


The flip side is that throttle usage while cornering is somewhat more difficult with a turbocharger in that you have to anticipate how much power you're going to get and when it's going to come in. I'm talking MT here, not that you'd particularly want to get any throttle-commanded downshifts mid-corner.


Norm

Forty61 said:

Damn! 252k! What number is your Bullitt? I’m still curious where my ‘08 went and I feel like it’s still in Texas or maybe a junkyard..

Click to expand...

His sig says 5712, which is a black one that was totaled out and rebuilt back in 2013 according to the registry

Macman45 said:

His sig says 5712, which is a black one that was totaled out and rebuilt back in 2013 according to the registry

Click to expand...

Ah, I appreciate that, I must have signatures turned off. Mine was green, number 0152, tried to track it down a few times with no luck, really just wanna know where it went!

I had a '19 Ecoboost Mustang for about a week as a rental. Pretty good mid-range, but a lot less low-end torque. It also falls on its face above about 5k.

You could solve the latter issue with a larger turbo, but that would even further reduce the low end.

Ill go into more detail
The ecoboost changed in 18 so I’m not sure if earlier ones are the same
Boost comes in and peaks early, it is great on the street but yes it does seem to run out of steam in the higher rpm
The 10 speed auto makes it seem like you have 4.10+ rear gears while cruising at super low rpm, it feels faster then it should


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

NickD87 said:

Ill go into more detail
The ecoboost changed in 18 so I’m not sure if earlier ones are the same
Boost comes in and peaks early, it is great on the street but yes it does seem to run out of steam in the higher rpm
The 10 speed auto makes it seem like you have 4.10+ rear gears while cruising at super low rpm, it feels faster then it should


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Yes, that 10-speed auto is the shiznit.

automatics and four cylinders... terrible they are even considered

enjoy your Bullitt!

If Ford had made a 3.0 - 4.0 liter inline six ecoboost engine it certainly would have got attention from the import and Supra crowd. I know it would have raised my interest.

In Australia Ford did make the 4.0L inline six Barra engine for many years and it was legendary for its bulletproof reliability. In its final form, it was turbocharged and made 436hp.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Barra_engine

The 2.3L Ecoboost couldn't hold a candle to the Barra.

Ford Barra Straight 6 with a turbo 1500+ HP..... What is a 2jz lol?

radiodelete said:

If Ford had made a 3.0 - 4.0 liter inline six ecoboost engine it certainly would have got attention from the import and Supra crowd. I know it would have raised my interest.

Click to expand...

No, it wouldn't have, because it wouldn't be an import. The import crowd is the same crowd that says anything by a US manufacturer is garbage.

They made fun of the Mustang for having a solid rear axle, Ford finally put an independent rear in it, and it's still not good enough for the Nissondyotazda crowd.

The Aussie 4.0L Barra engine WOULD be an import. Just not a Japanese one.

The engine may be an import but the car will still be seen as U.S. Domestic. We've been through this before with the Cologne V6 that ended up in the Pinto and the Mustang II.

In this country, inline six engines have never had much of a performance image, given that it was so much easier to just start with two more cylinders. As far as I know, there has only been one US OHC inline six cylinder engine available as regular production in the last 60+ years.


Norm