Almost no love for the Ecoboost

[goodlettjr]

70mph to 100mph has never taken 8 secs in my Ecoboost... a stomp on the go pedal at 70 and 100 is just a few seconds away... seems almost instant! V-8ters gonna 8...

I've driven an ecoboost as rentals when I travel. As of late I have probably rented 10 of them in the past 2 years. Carved up some roads, tested the limits. etc... Pheonix, El Paso, Charlotte, Nashville, etc...I'm not saying they are slugs, just stating factual figures that are published from a reputable industry editor in this thread. Its a quick car, mostly due to the weight difference and additionally the feeling the turbo gives it. Its a good choice for autocross. Better than the GT in some respects for balance of power and handling.

I really don't understand why there are a few ecoboost owners that have a view that they are looked down upon. I rarely ever see anyone on here downing ecoboost owners for owning an ecoboost. I do see people overstating the performance of their cars and that seems to get them in interesting conversations with people that have been around the mustang scene for years. See Saphire for example above in this thread.

Edit: I have never used my dragy on a rental. Do you have any actual data from a dragy?

Sponsored

 

[robvas]

70mph to 100mph has never taken 8 secs in my Ecoboost... a stomp on the go pedal at 70 and 100 is just a few seconds away... seems almost instant! V-8ters gonna 8...

Let's be realistic and do the math:

let's say your EcoBoost does 0-60 in 5.5 seconds

and then let's say it does the quarter mile in 13.9 seconds at 101mph

13.9 minus 5.5 is....8.4 seconds

so that means it takes your EcoBoost 8.4 seconds to go from 60 to 101 mph

so your 70-100mph time is going to be a little less than that. A good 7 seconds, total.
Of course these numbers will change on if your particular car is faster or slower than the example we used in the 1/4 mile

 

[Ducatti20]

I had a tuned 2020 Eco that was pretty fast for what it was. Autocross would be superior in the Ecoboost due to the weight and balancing and with a turbo mod and some other supporting work they can be real monsters.
I do love my GT overall for visceral power and sound, but there is nothing wrong with the Ecoboost at all.

 

[Sofa King]

I've driven an ecoboost as rentals when I travel. As of late I have probably rented 10 of them in the past 2 years. Carved up some roads, tested the limits. etc... Pheonix, El Paso, Charlotte, Nashville, etc...I'm not saying they are slugs, just stating factual figures that are published from a reputable industry editor in this thread. Its a quick car, mostly due to the weight difference and additionally the feeling the turbo gives it. Its a good choice for autocross. Better than the GT in some respects for balance of power and handling.

I really don't understand why there are a few ecoboost owners that have a view that they are looked down upon. I rarely ever see anyone on here downing ecoboost owners for owning an ecoboost. I do see people overstating the performance of their cars and that seems to get them in interesting conversations with people that have been around the mustang scene for years. See Saphire for example above in this thread.

Edit: I have never used my dragy on a rental. Do you have any actual data from a dragy?

No draggy, though tempted to get one as this car continues to punch above its weight... and above the S550 Ecoboost. Also, my car isn't a rental (base) model, so that makes a difference (HPP, FP tune). I don't see my car as anymore than it is, a fun sporty car... I don't feel looked down on and if someone does, I don't care. I have a pretty extensive car history, so try not to overstate what it is... but my goodnes it is FUN! (and definitely not 8 sec 70 - 100... just sayin).

Let's be realistic and do the math:

let's say your EcoBoost does 0-60 in 5.5 seconds

and then let's say it does the quarter mile in 13.9 seconds at 101mph

13.9 minus 5.5 is....8.4 seconds

so that means it takes your EcoBoost 8.4 seconds to go from 60 to 101 mph

so your 70-100mph time is going to be a little less than that. A good 7 seconds, total.
Of course these numbers will change on if your particular car is faster or slower than the example we used in the 1/4 mile

Well, I agree a base model is probably right about there... but as stated above, mine is not a base model (nor stock). And yes I "got" the math... I simply stated that my car is not anywhere near that slow.

Not looking for arguments...I guess I should have prefaced that statement with "not stock". Though even stock, I don’t think it was that slow 70 - 100.

 

[Kaleza]

No draggy, though tempted to get one as this car continues to punch above its weight... and above the S550 Ecoboost. Also, my car isn't a rental (base) model, so that makes a difference (HPP, FP tune). I don't see my car as anymore than it is, a fun sporty car... I don't feel looked down on and if someone does, I don't care. I have a pretty extensive car history, so try not to overstate what it is... but my goodnes it is FUN! (and definitely not 8 sec 70 - 100... just sayin).


Well, I agree a base model is probably right about there... but as stated above, mine is not a base model (nor stock). And yes I "got" the math... I simply stated that my car is not anywhere near that slow.

Not looking for arguments...I guess I should have prefaced that statement with "not stock". Though even stock, I don’t think it was that slow 70 - 100.

maybe this helps the debate, this is when i had eco, the car was stock and no performance pack and before i tuned the car. 50-100 8 sec, 50-115 13 sec. Im 100% sure that that fp tune shaved off at least like 1 second. Also mph are above kmh. So whatever robvas said he is off at least by 1-1.5 sec. For comparison I also have a video in my gt with pp and i did 60-120mph in 9 sec.

 

[robvas]

maybe this helps the debate, this is when i had eco, the car was stock and no performance pack and before i tuned the car. 50-100 8 sec, 50-115 13 sec. Im 100% sure that that fp tune shaved off at least like 1 second. Also mph are above kmh. So whatever robvas said he is off at least by 1-1.5 sec.

im just quoting what the car magazines publish

do you have a dragy time? I trust their equipment to be more accurate than the in car timer or whatever you're using to meausre

even their ringer 2024 car (the one road and track tested was much slower in the 1/4) took 7.5 to do 60-100

here's an older model as well to compare (9.2 60-100)

 

[Kaleza]

im just quoting what the car magazines publish

do you have a dragy time? I trust their equipment to be more accurate than the in car timer or whatever you're using to meausre

even their ringer 2024 car (the one road and track tested was much slower in the 1/4) took 7.5 to do 60-100

here's an older model as well to compare (9.2 60-100)

I dont, and dont have car anymore. But i didnt use anything to measure except length of the video, which u can check if u watch it.

 

[porterhousestk]

maybe this helps the debate, this is when i had eco, the car was stock and no performance pack and before i tuned the car. 50-100 8 sec, 50-115 13 sec. Im 100% sure that that fp tune shaved off at least like 1 second. Also mph are above kmh. So whatever robvas said he is off at least by 1-1.5 sec. For comparison I also have a video in my gt with pp and i did 60-120mph in 9 sec.

This is a good real world example. @robvas I think you are relying too much on the magazine results. I have some suspicion they skew results to tempt their audience into buying a GT instead. Also I am wondering if they did tests with a BRAND NEW car and wonder if there are any safety precautions tuned in for the first few hundred miles? or if they did tests in normal mode? Even the original factory tune is way stronger in sport/race/drag mode. Just throwing out opinions and ideas, because 8 seconds 70-100 is absolute BS in the real world.

 

[Kaleza]

This is a good real world example. @robvas I think you are relying too much on the magazine results. I have some suspicion they skew results to tempt their audience into buying a GT instead. Also I am wondering if they did tests with a BRAND NEW car and wonder if there are any safety precautions tuned in for the first few hundred miles? or if they did tests in normal mode? Even the original factory tune is way stronger in sport/race/drag mode. Just throwing out opinions and ideas, because 8 seconds 70-100 is absolute BS in the real world.

Also what type of gas they used. If they used less then 93 they wont get maximum from the car

 

[robvas]

This is a good real world example. @robvas I think you are relying too much on the magazine results.

Remember all the EB owners bringing up that C&D 2024 Ecoboost review because it was much faster than any other model? That 7.5 60-100 is not right then?

Is my 1/4 mile and 0-60 math earlier is wrong? And the car magazines testing equipment is wrong?

Do all cars run faster than the magazines test, then? Is the Dark Horse they tested actually faster than what they got, which was a 12.0 @ 118mph?

A camera and a speedometer are not accurate. There's a margin of error there. Sure, some cars are a little faster than others. And how do we know when a private owner tests a car that it doesn't have any modifications, etc? Something is up if one car goes 50-100 in the same time that another car of the same model goes 70-100, don't you think?

I have some suspicion they skew results to tempt their audience into buying a GT instead.

You uncovered the conspiracy the big car companies don't want you know!

 

[porterhousestk]

Remember all the EB owners bringing up that C&D 2024 Ecoboost review because it was much faster than any other model? That 7.5 60-100 is not right then?

Is my 1/4 mile and 0-60 math earlier is wrong? And the car magazines testing equipment is wrong?

Do all cars run faster than the magazines test, then? Is the Dark Horse they tested actually faster than what they got, which was a 12.0 @ 118mph?

A camera and a speedometer are not accurate. There's a margin of error there. Sure, some cars are a little faster than others. And how do we know when a private owner tests a car that it doesn't have any modifications, etc? Something is up if one car goes 50-100 in the same time that another car of the same model goes 70-100, don't you think?



You uncovered the conspiracy the big car companies don't want you know!

At this point I think you are just arguing for fun. Nobody is questioning your math or their math. All I'm saying is that better results ARE possible even with a 100% stock EB.

 

[robvas]

Nobody is questioning your math or their math.

But you said those numbers are BS and you also accused them of skewing the numbers.....

 

[LouG]

I haven't driven an EB. But, as a comparison, my last car was an smallish SUV with 300hp through a 7 sp DSG and AWD and did not feel slow at all. (4.7 to 100kmh)
So I can imagine another 40 or 50hp plus more torque in a similar weight car with RWD won't be lacking in zip.
But, I fell for the siren song of that damn V8.

Sponsored