Ford Mustang Ecoboost Forum banner

1 - 20 of 106 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I've seen several vids of dyno tests putting the 2.3 in the 250-280 range of horsepower. Why such a difference from the factory claim?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
217 Posts
This question comes up a lot on every forum out there. When you see horsepower and torque numbers on cars, that is with the engine OUT of the vehicle, on a stand, with all accessories attached. However, once put into a vehicle, depending on what transmission it has (manual, auto, cvt) and what drivetrain configuration (front wheel drive, rear wheel drive, all wheel drive, four wheel drive) and whether it is a live axle or an independent setup, will determine how much power actually makes it to the tires. In the mustang, with a manual transmission, you can expect to lose about 15%. This can change with upgrading to an aluminum driveshaft and flywheel with a lighter weight clutch. Then you may only see a 12% loss. You didnt actually MAKE more power, your just losing less in the drivetrain. For an automatic, due to torque converter and the transmission design itself, you are losing about 20%. However, upgrading the torque converter to a higher stall, smaller diameter unit will actually cost you more in the loss but give you up to a half second off your ET at the track. And make it an insane blast to drive on the street!

Does that help or did I go overboard?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
This question comes up a lot on every forum out there. When you see horsepower and torque numbers on cars, that is with the engine OUT of the vehicle, on a stand, with all accessories attached. However, once put into a vehicle, depending on what transmission it has (manual, auto, cvt) and what drivetrain configuration (front wheel drive, rear wheel drive, all wheel drive, four wheel drive) and whether it is a live axle or an independent setup, will determine how much power actually makes it to the tires. In the mustang, with a manual transmission, you can expect to lose about 15%. This can change with upgrading to an aluminum driveshaft and flywheel with a lighter weight clutch. Then you may only see a 12% loss. You didnt actually MAKE more power, your just losing less in the drivetrain. For an automatic, due to torque converter and the transmission design itself, you are losing about 20%. However, upgrading the torque converter to a higher stall, smaller diameter unit will actually cost you more in the loss but give you up to a half second off your ET at the track. And make it an insane blast to drive on the street!

Does that help or did I go overboard?
Thanks! I have since learned from the ever most trustworthy internet that you do lose 40 hp or so from premium gas to regular gas. If this car did have 310HP at the rear wheel it would be scary!
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
1,557 Posts
Its just money. With endless amounts of it you can make anything fast
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
217 Posts
agreed. take my G for example, Nelson Motorsports sells a twin turbo kit for it. $20,000 and you can go from 330hp to 500. I may be cheap but I can do the same thing with a $600 nitrous kit.

Once these cars become mainstream and more want to modify them and say the hell with warranty, companies will make parts, they will be cheap, and it will be the 80s all over again! Wheeeeeee !!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
149 Posts
Who if anyone here always makes it appoint to only run the higher octane gas in their Ecoboost?

Can you tell a power difference, I mean real power, not imagined seat of the pants power.

Does the MPG improve any with running the higher grade fuel?

How many miles does it take the computer to recalibrate to the higher octane when changing from regular gas to the more expensive octane choice?

Thanks in advance,
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
309 Posts
Please read up on OAR and look at other topics covering this.
http://www.mustangecoboost.net/threads/question-about-cobb-accessport-and-oar.14193/

To answer your questions.

Most people with a tune will be running only premium or e85.

It’s a 30-40peak hp difference with premium fuels.

The mileage will get worse with premium fuel due to the tuning of the car and ability to run more timing.

It’s not miles that start increasing the OAR, read up on how to raise OAR on ecoboost.
Some will say drive partly into boost for 10-15 sec. Doing that a few times will raise your OAR if you have premium fuel in. Each part throttle pull will slowly increase OAR -0.10-0.15, until you reach the optimal -1.0 OAR.

Hope this helps.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,124 Posts
The owners manual states you may use 87 octane. If this car is your daily commuter and you're looking at mileage and savings over performance, that would be the way to go.
On heavy acceleration you may experience some knocking / pinging...

If you decide to do a tune, there are minimum requirements with each tune. At least with the Ford Performance, 91 is the minimum. I run 91, if I were still in an area that had 93 I would use that. Likewise with my GT.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
3,113 Posts
After burning out the tank full of 87 that the dealer put in my car, I've only ever refilled with 93. I've had a few turbo motors over the years and they always do better with premium fuel. I have a heavy foot, and don't really care about the gas mileage as much as the fun factor. Of course I'm also running an aftermarket tune that requires 93 octane, so...
 
  • Like
Reactions: jonrjen

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
6,085 Posts
Who if anyone here always makes it appoint to only run the higher octane gas in their Ecoboost?
I do. Most especially since I run mine on the track.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
6,085 Posts
If you're driving a Mustang ecoboost on 87 octane you might as well be driving one of these.


Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk
Those have an ecoboost ... tuned, they will smoke your ass for breakfast.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,603 Posts
Those have an ecoboost ... tuned, they will smoke your ass for breakfast.
Yes, the Escape EB's have a soft tuned version of the Focus ST motor, Livernois has been playing with a few of them.
A few bolt ons and a tune and you'll surprise the hell out of few sports cars at the lights.


Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,779 Posts
FWIW, Ford actually published the peak HP difference on the 2.0 Ecoboost motor in the Focus ST. There was 9 HP difference between 87 and 93 but the peak torque stayed the same. That tells me that from idle to the torque peak at 4xxx rpm the engine was making the same HP and you lost power above that rpm. When I had a Focus ST I did switch back and forth until I tuned it and the seat of the pants confirmed my assumption. The 2.3 Ecoboost is reported to have closer to a 20 HP difference in peak HP between 87 and 93.

When I took delivery of my 15 it was January right in the middle of the worst winter in Boston's history and I spent from when I took delivery until the weather broken in April snow mode with regular and immediately tuned it a switched to 93 so I never got a chance to experience the stock engine operating with 87 in good weather. When I took delivery of my 17 last June I had told the salesman to fill with 93 or if he can't then don't fill it at all. When i arrived at the dealership he was quick to report that he infact put Shell 93 in it instead of 87 Speedway next door. I tuned it before 1000 and have never put anything but 93 in it.

Dave
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
858 Posts
Those have an ecoboost ... tuned, they will smoke your ass for breakfast.
My wife's Escape has a 2.0L Ecoboost. She has a lead foot and it hauls butt for what it is.
 
1 - 20 of 106 Posts
Top