Ford is Looking Into Report of Poky EcoBoost Mustangs
Ford Motor Company says it will get to the bottom of a report that purports to show 2.3-liter EcoBoost Mustangs getting slower in acceleration tests over time.
The 0–60 mile per hour times, recorded by Motor Trend during four separate vehicle tests, show a widening acceleration gap that left reviewers puzzled as to the cause.
Ford’s 2.3-liter EcoBoost four-cylinder, with 310 horsepower and 320 pounds-feet of torque running on premium fuel, powered each test vehicle. The first test, a 2015 model with an automatic transmission and Performance Package, recorded a 5.6 second run to 60 mph — the same time as a 2015 manual-transmission model with no Performance Package. (That upgrade adds a 3.55:1 rear axle and 19-inch wheels shod with summer tires).
A test of the 2015 Ecoboost with manual transmission and Performance Package by Motor Trend’s sister publication Automobile saw a 6.0 second 0–60 run, and a similarly equipped 2016 model recorded an acceleration time of 6.3 seconds.
There are a number of culprits that could play a role in the mystery. The publication noted instances of throttle lag during certain upshifts on manual transmission models. As a result, “Getting a perfect run was very difficult and took multiple attempts.”
A Ford representative said the first Mustang tested was a pre-production model, adding (with no elaboration) that a “different calibration” could explain the quicker acceleration time. A theory that high temperatures hampered later tests didn’t pan out, given the mild temperatures recorded during testing.
In a letter to Jalopnik, Ford said the engine’s output hasn’t changed, and added that the company was now investigating the results of the tests. The automaker stated, “Different drivers in different cars can have different test results, especially when driving manual transmissions.”
Is there anything to this, or is the slowing EcoBoost Mustang mystery just the result of normal testing variability? We’ll wait and see. In the meantime, there’s no shortage of alternate Mustang engines for concerned/paranoid would-be buyers.
[Image: © 2016 Seth Parks/The Truth About Cars]
More by Steph Willems
Comments
Join the conversation
Welcome to the world of turbo engines and stick shift transmissions. As stated there are going to be many variations in 0-60 and 1/4 mile times depending on driver, gas used, temperature etc. Then there is carbon build up which is an inevitable problem with these types of direct injected turbo engines as time goes on. With that said the engine lineup for the 2016 Camaro is better in my eyes than how how stupidly does it with the Mustang.
Don't all of the engines GM installed in the Camaro also feature direct injection? So wouldn't they be just as prone to carbon build up issues?