By on November 6, 2012

It’s hard for some people to accept change, regardless of the facts on the ground. The revised Mustang V6 with the 3.7L engine had been out for almost two years before I drove it; I avoided it only out of stupidity and prejudice, the reason that most “car guys” write off perfectly good vehicles that don’t fit their pre-conceived notion of what makes a good car or fits their image. What a terrible mistake I made.

The current Mustang V6 has as much in common with the secretary-spec ‘Stangs of the past as a Big Mac does with a filet from Morton’s.   We all know the specs by now; 305 horsepower, 280 lb-ft of torque. A 6-speed manual and a 0-60 time just the wrong side of 5 seconds. This one has the LSD rear end and Recaro seats, but sadly, no Brembos. That’s about as quick as a 2005-era Mustang GT with the 4.6L V8.

The 3.7L V6 isn’t melodious or soul stirring (and really, what V6 is?) – and the soundtrack is a little more 370Z than 302 – but there’s plenty of power available for everyday situations. The glorified boat anchor known as the 4.0L would never be considered a joyful experience in any galaxy, and certainly didn’t have the muscle to hustle the previous V6 ‘Stangs with the kind of pace possessed by the new one.

The real joy isn’t so much power or character of the engine, but what it allows the rest of the car to achieve. Set fairly far back in the engine bay, the lighter V6 gives the car a nimbleness not see in other Mustangs. One drive reveals a lighter nose, and a more “flickable” nature that makes the Mustang V6 a joy in its own right when it comes to corners. No, it will never be a lithe little rollerskate like a Toyobaru, but the conventional wisdom that the V6 ‘Stang is a plodding troglodyte is patently false.

On the other hand, the V6 is not the $19,995 cure-for-all-ills that its relentless advocates make it out to be. For one, the model you see above, which still lacks the Brembos needed for track work, comes in at about $27,000. The interior, without the touch-screen version of SYNC, is decidedly spartan. Someone who has grown up with Japanese cars, such as myself, with find the kinesthetics of the car to be strange; it doesn’t steer or ‘feel’ like what we’re used to, and the view out the hood, with the long, wide, snout will seem utterly alien.

Of course, there was a great big question mark when it came to the matter of exhaust noise. How can something so trivial and intangible matter so much? For myself and many others, the V8 rumble is integral to the Mustang experience. As sharp and aggressive as the six sounds the whole “I coulda had a V8!” notion lingers in the air like the world’s most unfortunate compromise. It is petty and capricious to say so, but a V6, while acceptable and welcome in something like a Hyundai Genesis Coupe, will never satisfy me in a pony car.

With that said, it would be unfair to knock the V6 Mustang for not making the right noise. Everything else; the power, the handling and certainly the price, is on point. It looks, feels and performs every bit like a real Mustang, even it doesn’t quite sound right. It’s absurd to think that such a capable car is being relegated to rental car lots across the country.

If the base V6 Mustang is this good, it’s hard to imagine what the future holds; this car with an Ecoboost would be formidable, like a Grand National with the wrong badge. It may not make the right rumble, but as a product of the import tuner heydey, wastegates and spooling noises do it for me all the same.

 

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

81 Comments on “Capsule Review: 2012 Ford Mustang V6...”


  • avatar
    CoastieLenn

    With impressive power and performance combined with its impressive MPG rating, its hard NOT to consider this as a viable choice for your sporting needs.

    I’m a diehard fan of the Ford V8 exhaust note. In my opinion, there’s not an American V8, or I’d event venture to say that most Italian V12′s- that sound anywhere near as good as an old 1991-1993 Ford 5.0L Mustang with a basic flowmaster install (the 4.6L Mustang is a close second). Pure audio pornography… even if the car’s actual performance isn’t up to par with others that it sounds MUCH better than.

    That said, I don’t think that the higher pitched, hollow, non-raspy sounds of the new V6′s (Camaro 3.6L, Ford 3.7L, Nissan 3.7L, etc.) sound great for NOT having a V8 burble.

    I’m not really sure of where I’m going with my comments… but maybe its just a “+1″ to everything said in the article.

    • 0 avatar
      raph

      Sigh… the glory years of the Mustang V8 sound went away with the fox based chassis. Those mufflers nestled right under the rear seats are what helped to produce that awesome sound. The current car in order to comply with federal standards moved the fuel tank ahead of the axle and under the seats relegating the mufflers to behind the axle.

      Its a worthwhile trade and the current cars do sound good, just not as good as a fox car or sn95/new edge with a set of flows or muffler of your choice ( my favorite being a set of Dynomax race bullets).

      And on the subject of brakes, yeah it would have been great to get a set of Brembos on the V6, IMO it would have been a popular option.

      Supposedly, the prognosticators for the next Gen car claim that lesser Mustangs ( in this case anything that isn’t a Shelby or something similar to the Boss) will have access to the 4 pot Brembos with the higher performance versions getting the 6 pot brakes on the current Shelby.

      Hopefully in both cases with the live axle gone and no more c-clip retained axle shafts the pitiful TRW single piston rears will vanish as well along with the dreadful winding piston design.

      • 0 avatar
        DC Bruce

        You are absolutely correct regarding the sound of the old Fox GT. The cabin of my ’87 GT absolutely throbbed at triple digit speeds. I haven’t ridden in/driven the new 5.0, so I don’t have a point of comparison.

        As far as the sound of V-6s go, the only one I don’t like is the moaning of the Nissan V-6. Having driven the new Mustang V6 for a week as a vacation rental, I found the sound of the engine quite satisfactory . . . along with the motivation it provided.

        The Yamaha V-6 on my ’92 SHO had an absolutely wicked sound, especially once I replaced the stock exhaust system behind the catalyst.

        The only gripe I have against the current Mustang — with either engine — is that it is a large car and drives like a large car.

      • 0 avatar
        racer-esq.

        It will be sad to see the live axle go, it’s steam punk.

      • 0 avatar
        dolorean

        The Fox-body wasn’t the only and the last. My ’95 Cobra Hardtop Convertible, 5.0L with Off-Road X-Pipe from Jegs installed through the original Flowmaster 50s, produces a exceedingly melodious scream as it approaches its redline. The reason the ’91-’93 Fox-bodies and ’94-’95 SN-95s with the 5.0L produce such a lustrous cacophony is the true dual-exhaust from the small block. The 4.6L removed that.

      • 0 avatar
        NMGOM

        racer-esq….

        I agree. Just as it always has been “sit-down-with-the salesman” to configure the rear axle ratios in your new pick-up truck, why can’t a choice of live axle or IRS be a configuration option for Mustangs? Yes, yes, I know: the IRS corners better on washboards surfaces in off-camber right-hand corners, etc… But seems to me that the current live-axle Mustang is doing quite well anyway, and for flat-street acceleration, does IRS really matter? (Especially in this era of traction control and dymnamic stabilit control?). Just some thoughts….

        ——————-

    • 0 avatar
      Silent Ricochet

      I have to say, riding in quite a few mustangs in my high school days were always a fun experience. Nothing beats the sound of a roaring V8 in my book. I’m not typically a Ford guy, but the Mustang has always sort of impressed me, especially the 5.0′s exhaust note as you mentioned above. But it being the BEST sounding American V8? Hmm. I’d have to disagree a little. Having been around a few LS9′s and many youtube videos watched online, the absolutely furious roaring of that V8 echoing down the street just takes the cake.

      V6′s on the other hand, I completely agree. In fact I can’t really think of a V6 that ever really particularly sounded that good. I’d go as far as to say that my I4 in my Cavalier Z24 sounds better than some of the V6′s I’ve experienced. I’m not even that particular to the over-hyped 370Z exhaust note that everyone adores. None of them really have that deep grumble that I like.

      K I’m done now, I forgot what my initial point to typing this was.

      • 0 avatar
        racebeer

        I’m with you, SR. The LS series of GM engines have a wonderful sound. The LS1 in my T/A, running through Magnaflow pipes, sounds just stunning. The only problem is you can’t sneak up on anyone with it …. everyone knows you are there.

        Relative to V6 sounds, I also have a 3800 V6 Firebird, and have put a factory WS6 exhaust on it. You would be surprised at the number of folks that think it has a V8 in it. That simple modification of the 3800 made a huge difference in the resonance of the exhaust.

      • 0 avatar
        Lynchenstein

        I would put forward the Acura NSX has having a wonderful high-tech exhaust note. I was present at an autocross where a beautiful silver NSX was skillfully piloted through the cones. I have no idea of the modifications done to the motor or exhaust, but it took me back to when I was a high school kid and went to see the Vancouver Indy. The smooth, precise scream of the VTec v6 as it rapidly crescendoed … oh man, I just got chills thinking about it.

      • 0 avatar
        krhodes1

        Most V6s sound like utter garbage, but to quote Jeremy Clarkson the Alfa Romeo V6 sounds “like having your soul licked by angels” and having been priviledged to own one, I quite agree. sorry, but to me American V8s just sound cheap.

        Having driven a few, the V6 Mustang is a pretty neat car, one of the few American cars I would own. Make mine a six-speed Convertible.

    • 0 avatar
      DeadWeight

      Aside from purely nostalgic reasons, why would any logical person prefer that “muscle cars” be physically large in terms of exterior width and length, which in many if not most cases has not translated into more interior space, and also serves to create more weight, worse visibility, and sloppier handling than if this weren’t the case?

      I’ve never understood this aspect of the muscle car market.

      Presumably, a muscle car is not a muscle car if it isn’t quite long, quite wide and quite heavy relative to shorter, narrower and lighter cars that in some cases also have rear wheel drive and manage to have equally roomy or even roomier interiors.

      We no longer live in a world where a motor has to be massive in size, requiring a long hood (that affects other styling cues & proportions of the exterior), in order to produce muscle car power or noise.

      • 0 avatar
        racer-esq.

        The empty space in the engine bays of the V6 versions is surreal. It is shocking to see so much of the ground through the engine bay of a modern car. Plus, as Derek mentions, the long engine bay allows the V6 versions to be pushed way back, almost front-mid engine.

      • 0 avatar
        racebeer

        On that point, on my V6 Firebird I can almost step into the engine bay between the radiator and the pulleys. The front of the engine is actually right on the front axle line, so it is really more of a front mid-engined setup. However, don’t try to get to the real plugs on your own!!!!

      • 0 avatar
        jz78817

        cars have gotten “thicker,” for lack of a better term. In my mind I picture the current Mustang to be a leviathan compared to the ’66, but in reality the ’13 is only a couple of inches longer and wider. But the thicker doors and pillars, with the higher belt line make the ’13 look a lot bulkier. And of course it is heavier.

      • 0 avatar
        Lynchenstein

        @jz78817 – yeah, thicker and heavier(-looking). The pedestrian protection rules that force a certain distance between the engine and hood makes the front of most cars resemble trucks. Gone are the stupidly-low belt lines of, for example, the 1990 Civic hatchback. We have poofy cars now. Safer with better fuel economy and handling and performance, but not nearly as attractive to me.

      • 0 avatar
        DenverMike

        “Presumably, a muscle car is not a muscle car if it isn’t quite long, quite wide and quite heavy relative to shorter, narrower and lighter cars that in some cases also have rear wheel drive and manage to have equally roomy or even roomier interiors.”

        It’s not that a V8 justifies or requires big proportions, but once you’re talking Miata dimensions, A V8′s mass and weight no longer works with the chassis or its balance. But then a low to mid 400 HP V8 Toyobaru would be lethal combination and one I’d love to get my hands on.

        A muscle/pony car still has to look the part so a roomy back seat and lots of head room would look funny.

  • avatar
    racingmaniac

    Random question….where is that pic in the title taken? Stock photo or something? It looks like the interior of a UofT building…

  • avatar
    Zackman

    Not bad, not bad, but I’d still take the Camaro over the Mustang any day of the week, as I’m still a Chevy guy at heart.

    That being said however, my son owned a 1997 Mustang with the V6 and it was no slouch at all, in fact a nice car.

    As much as I enjoy the raw power of a V8, I haven’t owned a V8 for 39 years, the 283 in my 1964 Chevy. Nowadays I wouldn’t want one, as my 300 hp 3.6L V6 takes more fuel to feed than I would like, but when I mash the gas, all is (temporarily) forgiven!

    As to the rumble of a Ford V8, I just don’t find it as sweet as the rumble of a Chevy V8. I suppose that’s just me with my Chevy preference. To me – and I have said this before – all Ford V8s sound like they’re burbling underwater, but I know many disagree. Perhaps it’s just the exhaust system used, but I think a fundamental difference is in the valve train, but I’m talking pushrods, not OHC.

    I’m sure I’ll be enlightened and/or corrected on this, so I anxiously await any education due me, whether I accept it or not!

    • 0 avatar
      el scotto

      Shocked, deeply shocked I tell ya, to find out you’re a Chevy guy ;). I’m just kidding, I’ve read many posts about your beloved Impala; enjoying driving it.

    • 0 avatar
      CobraJet

      Some say exhaust note has to do with the firing order. My 69 Mustang 428 with factory duals has a distinct sound, different than small block Fords. The firing order of the FE big blocks is different than other Fords.

  • avatar
    jaje

    I simply don’t like driving a “sporty” car you can’t see over the hood (and I’m over 6′) due to a huge front end / long hood. I want to see where the car turns and get a good close up the corner I’m apexing.

    I do applaud the effort that Ford has done in creating a world class v6 engine and finally making the non GT Mustang no longer a joke and a performance bargain (making a muscle car more sporty). Unfortunately it will never be on my radar – but the Focus ST was more my liking but wound up buying a BRZ a coupe weeks ago instead (Focus ST weighs 3200lbs!)

    • 0 avatar
      dolorean

      “I simply don’t like driving a “sporty” car you can’t see over the hood (and I’m over 6′) due to a huge front end / long hood. I want to see where the car turns and get a good close up the corner I’m apexing.”

      Exactly what describes a ‘Pony Car’, not a ‘Sports Car’. The oringal intention of the Pony is for cheap, straight line fun. The loooonnnnnggggg hood is for the modification and adaption of larger engines giving the Pony its stoplight to stoplight creds. A canyon carver is a recent addition.

  • avatar
    akatsuki

    If all of these cars didn’t make me feel crazy claustrophobic in them, they would be serious contenders.

  • avatar
    PrincipalDan

    What cars are in this comparo of 4? I am frankly shocked by the V6 ‘Stang being in 4th place unless the other compeditors have V8s. As long as they’ve solved the manual trans issue I’d love a V6 model with the track pack and NO OTHER options. I could see myself having a blast with that car.

    • 0 avatar
      Zackman

      Camaro or Challenger are nos. 1 & 2, in no particular order?

    • 0 avatar
      Boff

      I’m guessing this is a comparo of all Mustang variants currently available.

      • 0 avatar
        racer-esq.

        You have to be correct. I can see the Genesis Coupe being ranked higher than the Mustang V6, but not the Camaro or Challenger (although the Challenger is a great cruising car). Even with Derek Kreindler’s Canadian bias I can’t see him placing the Camaro or Challenger above the Mustang.

    • 0 avatar
      st1100boy

      Having lusted after a Mustang to various degrees since the mid-’80s, a year ago yesterday I bought a V6, 6-speed w/ the performance package and no other options (aside from candy red paint).

      It’s been an interesting experience, especially for me coming out of a succession of front drivers.

      I like the power of the growling 3.7, it’s got loads of grip, actually rides pretty well for a car on 40-series tires, and looks good. It’s sort of fun to slide the rear end around too. Some have written that the engine is too soft at low rpm, and there might be something to that, but I kind of like how it comes up onto the cams with a good hit at about 3500rpm. Very motorcycle-like, it just needs a few revs.

      I don’t care for the gauges, the shifter is not exactly slick and the rear seat is semi-worthless (even for my 3 year old daughter). Additionally, it took investing in an SCT tuner and an aftermarket driveshaft for me to get rid of the ridiculous governor (I since ran it up to 150mph at an undisclosed location…that’s more like it), feel comfortable doing a track day at Putnam Park and actually drive it hard without worrying about the driveshaft coming apart.

      Fuel consumption has been OK, but not great. Mixed commuting gets me 23 or 24 and pure highway driving comes in between 26 and 28. Pretty respectable if not staggeringly good. At least it’s happy on 87 octane.

      There’s been a few minor quality issues as well. More annoyances than anything. An intermittent buzz in the dashboard. An idiot light saying the trunk lid is ajar. That kind of thing. The gearbox strikes me as not having 200k miles in it.

      Bottom line: I like the car, but I probably should’ve just bought a used ’10 GT and enjoyed the V8 for a couple years before picking up a new Focus ST in 2013 or 2014. As it stands now, I’ll probably sell the car about the time the warranty expires. That new Focus ST looks good. And it’s got a backseat and readable gauges.

      • 0 avatar
        st1100boy

        I can’t believe I forgot to mention perhaps my biggest gripe w/ my Mustang: It’s just too big (and heavy)!

        My ’98 Grand Prix had very similar exterior dimensions, but an interior and trunk that feel twice the size. Yet another reason to go get a Focus ST in a few years.

        Allegedly the next generation Mustang will be a good bit more compact, at least in part to chase export sales. A good idea if you ask me.

      • 0 avatar
        jz78817

        you must drive rather more “spiritedly” than I do, your mpg numbers are only a couple higher than I get in a 3.55 geared GT.

        and I wouldn’t have bothered with a ’10 GT. I had one and traded up for the ’12; the Tremec box wasn’t any more agreeable than the MT-82 and the performance of the 4.6/5-speed combo was really disappointing (#firstworldproblems)

      • 0 avatar
        nrcote

        > Additionally, it took investing in an SCT tuner and
        > an aftermarket driveshaft

        Could you give me more info on that aftermarket driveshaft? Does it help in eliminating that weird shifter vibration at around 2600 RPMs when coasting? Didn’t have those transmission problems reported by many owners (shifter is a bit notchy in 1st and 2nd when cold, fine after a few minutes) and my 2012 has over 25000 km (yeah, I’m Canadian). Still, that shifter vibration bothers me, even though my dealer said it’s OK. Thanks.

      • 0 avatar
        ajla

        “Additionally, it took investing in an SCT tuner and an aftermarket driveshaft for me to get rid of the ridiculous governor.”

        Great call with that.

        How much did that run you though? It seems like by the time you pay for it, just going for a low-level GT is a better call.

        And, just in general, RWD cars will have worse packaging than FWD stuff.

      • 0 avatar
        st1100boy

        Nrcote: I found a nice one-piece driveshaft from shaftmasters.com. I could’ve installed it myself if I had a helper, but a local shop would do the job for less than $100, so that was money well spent. I think I know the weird vibration thing you described, at least I do if it’s more noticeable on a closed throttle…I want to say it’s more of a flywheel issue than a driveshaft thing. Long story short, I’ve still got the vibration w/ the aftermarket shaft. What I don’t have is the “clunk” common at lower speeds/rpm that I had w/ the stock two-piece shaft. The car may accelerate a little better in the lower gears too since the aftermarket unit is quite a bit lighter. Also, like you, I noticed how the shifter is pretty stiff at first in low temps, and that’s in mild southern Illinois winters; if I still lived in North Dakota, I’d definitely look into a different lube option.

        Ajla: I want to say the tuner was about $380 and the driveshaft less than $700 installed. Call it $1100 total. Still a fair bit cheaper than a low end GT, not to mention saving on fuel and insurance. By the way, insurance is surprisingly cheap: within just a few bucks of my old ’07 Focus ST. I understand the packaging issues w/ a rear drive car, but what bugs me is the ratio between outside dimensions and interior room, there’s just no reason for a car so big outside to be so small inside.

      • 0 avatar
        nrcote

        @st1100boy

        Many thanks for your answers!

      • 0 avatar
        smokingclutch

        I’m still not feeling like the V6 offers that much of a fuel economy advantage. I average 21-22 mpg and can manage over 25 mpg on the highway in my Challenger R/T, which not only has the V8 but is also a heavier car.

    • 0 avatar

      It was going to be a comparo of the Mustang variants, but I decided against going that route. The title did not change as part of my revisions unfortunately. And for the record, I prefer the Mustang to any of the pony cars.

  • avatar
    Astigmatism

    What an overpriced, underpowered POS. You could have bought a V6 Mustang for that price! [Ducks]

  • avatar
    racer-esq.

    $19,995? F*ck, I overpaid by $5.

  • avatar
    Spartan

    “No, it will never be a lithe little rollerskate like a Toyobaru, but the conventional wisdom that the V6 ‘Stang is a plodding troglodyte is patently false.”

    I’m not going to pretend like I know what a plodding troglodyte is, and I refuse to google it because frankly, I shouldn’t have to.

    I swear we’re going to look back at automotive writing 20 years from now and say what the hell where they writing!

  • avatar
    vaujot

    “The 3.7L V6 isn’t melodious or soul stirring (and really, what V6 is?)”
    I can think of a few:
    - Alfa Romeo V6
    - Ferrari Dino

  • avatar
    let_that_pony_gallop

    I noticed that no one else has mentioned this yet, but the head line say ’12 stang but the pic is of a ’13 stang. As an owner of a 2012 GT I can say that I never regret my desicion to purchase that car. I do have some minor complaints about things that I think could have been better but overall it is a wonderfull car!

    • 0 avatar
      racer-esq.

      Well, it is the same car except for the bumper covers, lights, hood and painted plastic rocker panels.

      I like the HID headlights and smoked LED taillights on the 2013 (put not the gloss black plastic unibrow panel between the taillights), but I like the bumper covers, hood and grey rocker panels on the 2012 more (I don’t love matte plastic, but the Mustang looks really bloated with the body color rocker panels).

    • 0 avatar
      mnm4ever

      Since he said his car had Recaros, I think he tested a 2013, the Recaros were not available in 2012 except in the Boss.

      Probably the headline is a typo. The seat option was the one thing that kept me from pulling the trigger on the 2012s when the discounts hit $6k!

  • avatar

    The V6 may be great and a good value, but the Coyote V8 is amazing and very reasonably priced for the amount of go. That comparison is what would/does drive me away from the hairdresser spec car. If the V6 existed solo, without the thundering-tire-shredding-machomobile-GT hovering over it, it would be a different story.

    • 0 avatar
      el scotto

      300 HP is not exactly a hairdresser spec car, the 2005 Mustang GT had 300 HP. 25k for a V6 with a track pack or a GT that starts at 30K?

    • 0 avatar
      dolorean

      @JEC, you’re correct in assuming the Coyote 8 is the better choice, but forgot to think of the buyer and their needs. The genius to the V6 is lower upfront cost, lower Insurance rates, lower weight costs, lower maintenance costs and higher gas mileage. The V8 is for those who can afford to step up, who want the extra cache of the 5.0 badge, who can afford higher insurance, gas, and maintenance costs and want that sweet, sweet V8 punch and throaty exhaust grumble.

  • avatar
    JMII

    Sure its not a V8 but the numbers on this V6 ‘Stang are perfectly fine for a sporty car. 0-60 in 5.X on regular fuel in car that only cost $25k? Seems like a excellent deal to me. As others mentioned an aftermarket exhaust would do wonders I bet. An Ecoboost version of this engine would be awesome, but I’m sure the V8 Mustang faithful would cry foul.

    The 3.5l V6 in my ’03 350Z sounds good to me and I’m pleased with its torque. Coming from running turbos for years I though I would miss the low-end grunt but the Nissan V6 pulls fine. I get 24 mpg in mixed driving, but it requires premium fuel. Its a smaller, more nimble car with a user friendly hatch design so I’m happy with my choice. However I wouldn’t fault anyone for grabbing a V6 ‘Stang given its specs.

  • avatar
    86SN2001

    “In my opinion, there’s not an American V8, or I’d event venture to say that most Italian V12′s- that sound anywhere near as good as an old 1991-1993 Ford 5.0L Mustang with a basic flowmaster install”

    Mid-eighties Ski Nautiques do. Absolutely heavenly noise form their 5.8L, 351 V8. Ask anyone that knows anything about boats and they will tell you that noise is something special:

    http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=m-OjT5hPqcc

    No fancy aftermarket items here, my boat (yes, I proudly own a Ford powered vehicle) is completely stock.

  • avatar
    suspekt

    Soul stirring V6… Honestly?

    Honda J32/J35/J37 with a magnificent Honda 6 speed manual transmission.

    2nd through 4th shifting at 7,200rpm never got old. 6 years everyday and the jaunts to redline were often the best part of my day.

    Of course, Comptech headers, a race pipe, and uncorking the intake helped too….

    What a glorious engine series.

  • avatar
    suspekt

    Re: Honda J32A2 Series with mods (a now 11 year old engine)… 245whp

    @ 4,100rpm the secondary runners audibly open via an electronically actuated butterfly valve. Uptick in power felt
    @ 5,000rpm the VTEC changeover audibly occurs and a strong uptick in power felt
    @ 6,600 rpm, with CT headers, another increase in power felt in the final push for redline

    The butter smooth revability of the motor, its linear power delivery, plus it’s unreal aural delivery makes it soul stirring.

  • avatar

    The 3.7L V6 isn’t melodious or soul stirring (and really, what V6 is?)…

    This one. http://youtu.be/CRvBrDGm91E

  • avatar

    As the proud owner of 2012 Mustang V6, which is also white, however mine is a convertible I can say the worse thing about owning it is the battle between stirring my soul and killing my wallet. As I commute a long way the practical part of me is glad how much I am saving on gas whilst having the Mustang experience. The devil in me wants to hear that exhaust note. So the worst part of owning the great V6 is not owning the V8.

    • 0 avatar
      86SN2001

      The “Mustang Experience” does not include the V6 models no matter how much power they produce.

      You will never get the Mustang Expreience from the secretaries model.

      The biggest ingrediant of the Mustang Experience is the adrenaline dumping sound of a proper V8.

      • 0 avatar
        ranwhenparked

        So it’s really just a game of counting cylinders then? Because I’d take a 305 hp V6 over a 260hp V8 any day. Seriously, the current V6 makes nearly all of the previous V8 models look pretty sad.

      • 0 avatar
        DenverMike

        “So it’s really just a game of counting cylinders then? Because I’d take a 305 hp V6 over a 260hp V8 any day. Seriously, the current V6 makes nearly all of the previous V8 models look pretty sad.”

        As good as the 305 hp V6 is, I’ll still rather have a 260 hp 4.6 V8 or even the 225 hp 4.9. Not just for the exhaust burble/rumble, but the low end twist. Also, before 2010, you had to go aftermarket for 3.73 gear sets for your V8 Mustang.

      • 0 avatar

        “the secretaries model” – that was pretty low

  • avatar
    redav

    The Duratec 37 V6 seems to be an awesome engine. I don’t think I’ve heard any negatives about it.

    It would seem to be a great option for a project where space prevents dropping in a V8. However, I can’t say I’ve heard of anyone doing that. I’m not even sure if Ford sells it as a crate engine.

  • avatar
    stottpie

    it’s not even fair to compare the mustang v6 to the toyobaru.

    the mustang is faster, cheaper, nicer interior. it’s quite simply a better car than the toyobaru.

  • avatar
    ranwhenparked

    I really did want to buy a V8 this time around, but simply couldn’t justify it. To get all the other good stuff I wanted, the GT would have been ~$8,000 more. Yes, it sounds better, yes it is noticeably more powerful, but with the V6 so competent nowadays, I just didn’t see how it was worth it.

    Also, even though it’s not by any means the point with these cars, the fuel economy really is amazing. I averaged 30mpg on a mostly highway trip to Turning Stone, and have been running somewhere between 22-25 around town. Not hybrid caliber, certainly, but very good for something with 300+ hp.

  • avatar
    ICARFAN

    I own a 2012 V-6 Mustang and don’t really miss the V-8 at all when I am cruising on the freeway pulling down 31MPG on a regular basis at 70 MPH and still have 300 HP. Paid a real world price of 19,999.00 out the door, which is more than a few thousand cheaper than any deals I could find on the Genesis, Camaro or Challenger. 10,000 miles on the clock and zero maintenance issues either. Hate to sound like a fanboy, but this really is a very good car.

    • 0 avatar

      And I can agree to that. In the real world having a V8 is a complete waste unless you buy if for the exhaust note, unless your the type that wants to have the very rare experience of racing another car or believing that everyone is in awe of you. On my 100 mile commute through the back roads of SC I pass at least two police scanners each way, a ticket would send a V8 insurance through the roof. Plus 200 mile roundtrips on a V8 gets expensive on the gas. Yes, maybe once every couple of months you will have a Challenger or whatever pull up next to you and try and race you, but is it worth all the extra expence to proove your car has bigger balls? 300HP is enough to get out of difficult situations and easily merge onto freeways.

  • avatar
    smokingclutch

    Now see, on this one I will agree with you. I don’t care how much power the V6s make, the soundtrack that comes with a V8 is worth the extra money. My Challenger R/T isn’t much faster than a V6 Mustang, but the way it sounds and drives is a much more authentic muscle car experience, and easily worth the extra cost.

  • avatar
    CelticPete

    R/T Challenger sounds amazing and makes close to 400lbs of torque. You can’t beat torque and the sound of the V8 rumble. That’s what a muscle car is all about. 280ft/lbs at what 5000rpm. Bleck.

    The Challenger is very roomy (I am 6’4″ – the guy that claimed he hit the headliner must have not adjusted the seat – they go down). I wouldn’t get a mustang because of the lack of a telescoping wheel. You get used to the size of a Challenger. But you should never buy a car you can’t get comfortable in.

    Call me crazy but a v-6 doesn’t sound much better then a 4 cylinder and the GM V-6 isn the srx actually sounds worse. Honestly most of the time I’d rather have a turbo – 4 over a V-6. Modern turbo will make peak torque at 1500rpm – which while not like a V-8 will feel faster then a high reving V-6.

  • avatar
    FJ60LandCruiser

    Some things are American icons.

    The 1911, the muscle car, the pickup truck, Tennessee whiskey, Kentucky bourboun…

    A Mustang needs a V8. It doesn’t matter how good the V6 is.

    It’s like going to a strip club and looking for a dancer with a great personality. It’s like getting a participation trophy and being proud of it.

    Just like Max Rockatansky drove the fabled “last of the V8s” into the wasteland, such is the fate of the current mustang–set to be killed off by Ford’s global vision of blobular 4 cylinder Euro city cars for all.

    To have a Mustang with anything but a V8 makes you a communist and an enemy of freedom.

  • avatar
    Advo

    Some guy on youtube took the sound-transmitting tube from a V8 Mustang, drilled a hole in his V6′s air intake box, and epoxied it on. There’s still the place on the V6 model to attach the other end of the tube to the firewall.

    I can see this being good for someone who wants more engine sound on a budget.

  • avatar
    jim brewer

    This blathering about engine note is not just juvenile, its infantile. We like the sound associated with our engines because of what the engines do. My last car was a 12 cyl BMW. Yes, I liked the (muted) ripping fabric sound but I liked about a dozen other things better. The 3.7 puts out almost as much power, 305 to 327. Put in a little no ethanol high test, and its even closer. I’ve decided I like the (muted) angry hornet sound just fine.

    The 3.7 Ford puts out more HP than Steve McQueen’s Mustang in ‘Bullit’ and gets 30 mpg city. It revs easily to 7,000 rpm. What’s not to like?

    That hesitation on quick acceleration seemed to go away with break-in. Possibly transmission learning your style, but I don’t think so. Dial up the Pure Gas website and treat your ‘Stang to high-test no-ethanol. There’s a distinct improvement in both mileage and performance and Ford is frank about admitting that the car likes high test quality gas.

  • avatar
    jim brewer

    I mean “30 mpg highway” of course.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Subscribe without commenting

Recent Comments

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Authors

  • Brendan McAleer, Canada
  • Marcelo De Vasconcellos, Brazil
  • Matthias Gasnier, Australia
  • J & J Sutherland, Canada
  • Tycho de Feyter, China
  • W. Christian 'Mental' Ward, Abu Dhabi
  • Mark Stevenson, Canada
  • Faisal Ali Khan, India