RSS Followup: Americans will get a four-cylinder Ford Mustang after all? [w/poll]

[Ringo64]

Filed under: Coupe, Performance, Ford

Ask and you shall receive. Remember that previous report suggesting that the 2015 Ford Mustang getting a four-cylinder EcoBoost engine, and that it would be sold in Europe only and not the United States? Well, according to Road & Track, the rumor is only partially true - The Mustang will get the engine, but it is indeed coming to America.

Additionally, according to RT, the 3.7-liter V6 will continue to serve as the base engine, and since it offers up a stout 305 horsepower in its current form, it's likely that the 2.3-liter four-cylinder EcoBoost will produce a bit more than that. At the top of the range, the Mustang GT will continue to soldier on with a V8 engine, which should continue to send over 400 horsepower to the rear wheels.

Finally, while we agree 100 percent with RT's heartfelt request for a paddle-shift automatic, we certainly expect that the EcoBoost 'Stang will be offered with a manual transmission as standard equipment. This is a Mustang, after all...

View Poll

Americans will get a four-cylinder Ford Mustang after all? [w/poll] originally appeared on Autoblog on Sat, 09 Mar 2013 19:08:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments

/>http://feeds.autoblog.com/~r/weblogsinc/autoblog/~3/1ILp5tZKoME/

[Ringo64]

Agree wholeheartedly with Top Gear on this, who wants a 4 Cylinder Mustang or "muscle car" for that matter?

[havoc1482]

I have a feeling that a 4-banger Mustang isn't going to get any traction in the US. Especially for gearheads. Maybe idiots that buy cars because they have money and not because they know anything about cars, but definitely not purists or muscle advocates

Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF300T using Tapatalk 2

[Ringo64]

Yeah, I'm actually a little surprised I haven't heard more on the uproar in the Mustang community about a 4-banger. I know even when people were hypothetically discussing if GM did this with the Camaro, the OP would get flamed then everyone would lose it over a 4-banger Which I certainly agree with, a 4-banger isn't a "muscle car"

[Young gun]

I want more turbo 6's screw 4 bangers

[bricooper78]

wasn't it late 70's the Mustang II , the style they used on CHiPs 4 bangers?

[Young gun]

wasn't it late 70's the Mustang II , the style they used on CHiPs 4 bangers?

Idk what you are talking about but I don't know jack about mustang II's but the fox body's came with a turbo 4...

[havoc1482]

Idk what you are talking about but I don't know jack about mustang II's but the fox body's came with a turbo 4...

Fox Body mustang.

[Young gun]

Fox Body mustang.

ehhhh nah. I used to hate mustangs period but now I generally like mustangs ( I didn't say the owners ) but the fox body was the first I started to like

[bricooper78]

Okay, I'll steal from wikipedia

Engine choices included the 88 hp (66 kW) 2.3 L Pinto I4, 109 hp (81 kW) 2.8 LCologne V6 (made by Ford of Europe), and the 140 hp (104 kW) 302 cu in (4.9 L) Windsor V8. All were carried over from the Mustang II line. Supplies of the 2.8 L proved inadequate leading to it being replaced in late 1979 with Ford's 85 hp (63 kW) 3.3 L straight six. A new 132 hp (98 kW) 2.3 L turbo four-cylinder, debuted, which offered similar horsepower to the V8. Ford had high hopes this engine would usher in a new era in performance. The 2.3 and 2.3 Turbo and V8 models could also be optioned with the newly developed TRX handling suspension

That Pinto I4 motor (we had a 79 pinto panel wagon, btw) is what I was thinking of, but it must have been a bit older models, this was talking about 83..

ChiPs, an old tv show about the California Highway Patrol.... Ponch, John.... wow I am apparently getting super old. Anyways the used some of the mustangs in there, some of the 77 body vintage and then the newer 78 79 body. Doesn't really matter, I just figured someone knew something about them. lol

[Young gun]

I remember chips. I have an older family (youngest by 10 years) So I know of alot of cultural things most of my friends have no clue about

[bricooper78]

I dunno why most of the post was black, but yea..

There was some awesome shows back in the day, Chips was just on syndication for so long, it was actually on when I was born lol but it just kept going, that and Gilligan's Island..

But, if they made a 4 banger that was all wigged out and hammered out 250hp and got like 25 mpg, why would they put that in a 'stang, just make a gnarly focus or something. I don't mind little turbo or supercharged motors, but there are things you don't do that too.. Imagine someone putting a Turbo'd 3.8 in an, idk, an old Cuda or something, it may still fly, but it just ain't right lol

[markpetersonii]

I dunno why most of the post was black, but yea..

Yeah, anytime you copy something onto here it does that. You have to code it all white when you post it.

I wish it didn't do that... JIM.

[Ringo64]

Yeah, anytime you copy something onto here it does that. You have to code it all white when you post it.

I wish it didn't do that... JIM.

It is part of the WYSIWYG editor, it copies what the text looks like from the source so if you copy black text it will input as black text, same with red, white, blue, etc... Nothing I can do

You can always toggle out of it to paste things by hitting the light switch looking thing in the top left of the editor but you won't be able to style or use anything till you switch back.

[havoc1482]

ehhhh nah. I used to hate mustangs period but now I generally like mustangs ( I didn't say the owners ) but the fox body was the first I started to like

I think the first Fox body Mustangs look like absolute shit. The SN-95 is when they started to look good.

[Young gun]

I think the first Fox body Mustangs look like absolute shit. The SN-95 is when they started to look good.

ugggggghhhhhhh I hate the SN-95's lol. Agree to disagree?