We’ve owned 3 GT’s now, and really TRIED to go with the EcoBoost on the last one….

[Kevi]

You're probably going to lose more in trade in value with the 4 banger than it would have cost to pony up for the GT to begin with.

That's why you can't afford the GT now. Buying cheap cars = no equity when you trade them in. In 5 years the GT will be worth 25-30k and you will be lucky to get 10 for the ecoboost.

If your trade in was 25k the GT would only cost you 20k.

Sponsored

 

[AZ_Ryan]

Nope. Boss 429 ran in the 14s. Ecoboost still beats it in a drag race.

Are you responding to yourself?

 

[Junkyard Dog]

Are you responding to yourself?

Yes.



I assumed that a Boss 429 would beat a modern 4 cylinder Mustang, but, after I posted, I looked up the quarter mile time. A lot of these old icons are not as fast as we thought they were.

The 4 cylinder Ecoboost is impressive.

The Coyote even more so. None of the old muscle cars were 500 horsepower, and certainly not from little 5 liter engines. This modern Coyote is an impressive engine. If this Mustang was produced in the late 60s we would be listening to classic songs about it.

 

[AZ_Ryan]

Yes.



I assumed that a Boss 429 would beat a modern 4 cylinder Mustang, but, after I posted, I looked up the quarter mile time. A lot of these old icons are not as fast as we thought they were.

The 4 cylinder Ecoboost is impressive.

The Coyote even more so. None of the old muscle cars were 500 horsepower, and certainly not from little 5 liter engines. This modern Coyote is an impressive engine. If this Mustang was produced in the late 60s we would be listening to classic songs about it.

For sure. A Nissan Altima is faster than the legendary 289 hipo Mustang from the 60s.

 

[Starship Enterprise]

A 1970 Boss 429 was rated 375 hp, but many believe that was conservative, and many muscle cars at that time were rated conservatively to beat high insurance rates. Some say it was closer to 500 hp, but then you have to play the net/gross…. At the flywheel/at the wheel game….so who knows? But all that power was transferred to skinny bias ply tires and ancient suspension design.

My 2006 GT was rated at 300 hp. (even with Flowmasters, JLT intake, SCT tune I might have bumped it to what….330hp…tops?). Ecoboost is 315 hp and power going to modern tires and modern IRS. Hell, a new Ecoboost would probably have embarrassed my 06 GT.

My Wife’s Nautilus 4 cyl puts out a respectable 250 Hp, which was a big deal for a 1980’s era Mustang GT. But her Lincoln 4 cyl makes a putt-putt sound which offends me…lol. I haven’t heard the Ecoboost, so I can’t comment on how it sounds…probably sounds at least a little better.

So if someone likes the Ecoboost, that’s cool. I don’t judge as much as I don’t want to be judged for not having a manual in my GT. My lower back is trash and constant clutch shifting would aggravate the hell out of it. I ain’t young either anymore.

 

[GT7 Mayhem]

My Wife’s Nautilus 4 cyl puts out a respectable 250 Hp, which was a big deal for a 1980’s era Mustang GT. But her Lincoln 4 cyl makes a putt-putt sound which offends me…lol. I haven’t heard the Ecoboost, so I can’t comment on how it sounds…probably sounds at least a little better.

I bought my wife a Nautilus as well, absolutely gorgeous car, the interior is like a friggin spaceship. But yea, she's not winning many races in that car and the engine is obviously tuned to be as quiet as possible. I love both the Mustang and the Nautilus but for very different reasons.

 

[Junkyard Dog]

A 1970 Boss 429 was rated 375 hp, but many believe that was conservative, and many muscle cars at that time were rated conservatively to beat high insurance rates. Some say it was closer to 500 hp, but then you have to play the net/gross…. At the flywheel/at the wheel game….so who knows? But all that power was transferred to skinny bias ply tires and ancient suspension design.

They were all SAE gross and at the flywheel in 1969 (the change to net came in 1972).

As for "underrated," it can be argued that the engines from that period were often optimistically rated for marketing proposes.

Today's ratings are net, so it is arguable that the 1969 ratings, with no air cleaner or accessories and so on, is very optimistic compared to what it would do today.

For example, the mighty Hemi at 425 gross horsepower in 1971 was humbled to 350 horsepower in 1972 by the "net" measurement.

The likelihood of 500 horsepower claims are directly correlated with the nostalgic feeling of the speaker and the number of beers consumed.


"Some Super Chevy readers must have been stunned to see that an LS6 Chevelle SS, with 450-hp rating, put down 288 rear wheel hp in the dyno test. That would have put a net hp rating at around 350 hp for that legendary big block."

https://www.hagerty.com/media/archived/horsepower/#:~:text=Jim Koscs,in.


Back to the 429 Boss, no way it had 500 horsepower. Ford was simply sticking it in enough cars to qualify for racing programs. The street versions had a 735 cfm carburetor (smaller than the carburetor on the Boss 302!) and small, restrictive log exhaust manifolds that fit between the narrow shock towers (which had to be pounded to fit on the assembly line even then). Most had a small hydraulic lifter cam (they did have a solid lifter version for the street as well).

 

[GrabThatBlue]

I would reply in kind, but have consistently chosen not to…..I am getting close though…..

I do understand now that you are 73+ but please look carefully who is replying to who.

You are fighting literally everybody, just because you think people are replying to you while they are in a conversation with somebody else.

If you see text in dark grey, that's the part where people reply to. If your name is not in the dark grey section, but you see a different name there, then that's who they are replying to.

I see you are stressing out too much just because you don't know how forums work.

 

[Junkyard Dog]

Now tear down that Boss 429 engine, balance and blueprint everything to detailed specifications, with higher compression pistons to take up that semi-semi chamber, run only high octane racing fuel, stick in a huge solid lifter camshaft, long tube headers, and a massive intake and carburetor with a free flowing air cleaner, and now you are easily 600 plus horsepower.

The Nascar version of the Boss 429 in 1969 was spec'd at 750 bhp, but these engines did not really have a lot of resemblance left to what you would drive off of the Ford dealer lot.

That car ran 14.09 at 103 mph.

Somewhere on the internet is a Motor Trend article where they went through a Boss 429 and blueprinted everything meticulously and ran in the 12s afterward. I cannot find it. But then you did not get meticulous blueprinting detail from the factory in 1969.

 

[Junkyard Dog]

Today, the car is revered in most circles, and yet most of us know that as constructed, the biggest Boss was something of a dud in terms of performance. Leading up to the car's introduction, the automotive press was drooling with great anticipation of a "12-second Mustang," but in reality, a stock Boss 429 Mustang never even broke into the 13s in any period test we've seen.

https://www.motortrend.com/features/mdmp-1002-fords-boss-429-mustang

 

[Junkyard Dog]

A 1970 Boss 429 was rated 375 hp, but many believe that was conservative, and many muscle cars at that time were rated conservatively to beat high insurance rates. Some say it was closer to 500 hp, but then you have to play the net/gross…

Car Craft went on to review separate performance efforts being made by Foulger Ford, Dave Lyall, and Wayne Gapp, and ended with a telling Boss 429 test session on the engine dyno at Crane Cams. When the best pull yielded 386 hp at 6,000 rpm with Ford's updated mechanical cam and dyno headers, Car Craft concluded "the Boss 429 is touted as a performance engine, but dyno figures don't support this claim to date." Ouch!​

Source is same as previous link.

That was after Car Craft's tweaking, trying to squeeze some power out of it, with, at a minimum, a solid roller camshaft and dyno headers (much less restrictive than headers designed to fit in a car).

 

[Junkyard Dog]

"Some Super Chevy readers must have been stunned to see that an LS6 Chevelle SS, with 450-hp rating, put down 288 rear wheel hp in the dyno test. That would have put a net hp rating at around 350 hp for that legendary big block."

https://www.hagerty.com/media/archived/horsepower/#:~:text=Jim Koscs,in.

Ecoboost Mustang already lays down 255 whp and 330 wtq. Livernois tune puts it at 297 whp and 380 wtq.

Given its weight (much lighter than the GT or my Dark Horse), it might beat the Chevelle LS6 even without a tune.

 

[Junkyard Dog]

 

[Allanrock59]

I own a Eb 2024 and I was lucky to be able to get it premium plus the performance pack, the active exhaust system and magnaride. All these option were removed for the 2025.

From 0 to 60 driving it doesn't make that much of a difference with the 5.0. Sound is perfect, acceleration are great and the pleasure of driving is the same. Per some site you get .5sec faster with the 5.0 (not the dark horse or the Shelby)

Where the major difference is, it's over 60. This is where the V8 has everything to offer that the EB doesn't have.. But IMHO, for me it doesn't matter. To get all I have with my EB would have cost me 12k more for the V8 not including, insurance, plate and gas.

Maybe you could try and find an EB 2024 that has all the extra. But I do believe that they are rare.

 

[AZ_Ryan]

Today, the car is revered in most circles, and yet most of us know that as constructed, the biggest Boss was something of a dud in terms of performance. Leading up to the car's introduction, the automotive press was drooling with great anticipation of a "12-second Mustang," but in reality, a stock Boss 429 Mustang never even broke into the 13s in any period test we've seen.

https://www.motortrend.com/features/mdmp-1002-fords-boss-429-mustang

With all due respect, the boss 429 was quite fast by the standards of the day. Calling it a dude is quite niave and silly. Getting off the line with all that power and no traction control in a 4 speed top loader was a skill few people in these times can appreciate.

Besides, I'm not really sure where you are going with all this anyway. The ecoboost, or any modern engine, cannot be fairy compared to 50 year old iron old big block technology.

Sponsored