By on November 22, 2016

2016 Ford Mustang V6 Convertible interior, Image: © 2016 Bark M./The Truth About Cars

Hey, let’s give this a try again.

Do you hear that sound? It’s the collective silence of every cheerleader in America not giving a single care to the possible death of a V6-powered Mustang. Even though the automatic, drop-top, V6 Mustang is colloquially called the Cheerleader Edition, do you think Sally McJumpyskirt really cares if four or six or eight pistons are doing battle with physics under the hood? Nope.

But we’re different. We care that the V6 offers a more aurally pleasing soundtrack than the cookie-cutter 2.3-liter EcoBoost four-cylinder model. We care that, in the real world, the V6 will likely return fuel economy that’s nearly as good as its smaller, boosted cousin. We care that the tried-and-true 3.7-liter V6 is just that — tried and true.

Yet, I can’t help but not care about its death.

As soon as the new Mustang launched globally, the writing was on the wall for the V6-powered model. Ford of Europe said, “Nein,” to the 3.7-liter ‘Stang, only importing the EcoBoost and Coyote to the land of M and AMG.

Even before that, in America, Ford was busy culling the aging 3.7-liter motor from the lineups of its other vehicles without barely a whimper uttered from automotive enthusiasts — though, let’s be real, it’s difficult to be enthusiastic about the previous Edge Sport … or the new one for that matter.

Now the six-pot lump’s duties are limited to five vehicles under the FoMoCo umbrella: the Ford Police Interceptor, Ford Transit, Lincoln MKT (which is probably not long for this world considering the fate of its platform-mate, the Ford Flex), Lincoln MKX, and the Lincoln Continental. The Lincoln MKZ will drop the engine in 2017, before the Mustang has a chance to jettison its V6 into the Huron.

I truly believe, and I think the majority of you will agree, what the V6 lacks in performance it more than makes up for in character compared to the now-somehow-premium four-cylinder. No stereo is needed to enjoy the six’s mild-mannered exhaust note, unlike the four-pot that relies on Bose to enhance the experience. Also, turbocharging isn’t a luxury anymore, especially as automakers continue to force smaller and smaller escargots down our throats, with not even the decency to season the force-feeding with garlic butter or cheese. Yet smooth-jazz NA engines are becoming rarer and rarer by the year — and we will lose another.

And yet, I still don’t care, because there still exists eight reasons for me not to care. And when that day comes, the day when Ford has the gall to build a Mustang without a throaty V8, I’ll pick up my pitchfork, walk to Detroit barefoot, and demand that Bill Ford man up.

The six? Auf Wiedersehen.

Do you care about the end of the six-cylinder Mustang? Sound off in the comments and let us know.

[Image: © 2016 Bark M./The Truth About Cars]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

106 Comments on “QOTD: Will You Miss the V6 Mustang?...”


  • avatar
    analoggrotto

    I care because it is one less fine naturally aspirated powertrain even if the equipment options associated to the V6 were already stacked against it compared to the egoboost4.

  • avatar
    thunderjet

    Well my wife bought a 2012 V6 brand new. She has no plans on giving it up any time soon. So I won’t miss the 3.7 V6 as I can walk out to the garage and drive one any time I want.

  • avatar
    bikegoesbaa

    I just like living in a world where an affordable 310 horsepower boosted 4-cylinder can be casually called “cookie-cutter”.

  • avatar
    DeadWeight

    Never!

    My next new vehicle will have a 0.7 liter, inline 2 1/2 cylinder, triple-turbocharged motor, with an engine block that can fit in a shoebox, and I will learn to LOVE IT!

  • avatar
    Lack Thereof

    I care, because it significantly increases the sticker price of the base mustang, which is/was a perfectly adequate machine.

  • avatar
    OldManPants

    Sure would be interesting to see how an EV Mustang would sell.

  • avatar
    MrIcky

    No I don’t care. And the day they announced the Ford backed tuning for the 4 and the 8, it got rid of any reason to try to have a 3rd engine option.

  • avatar
    dukeisduke

    What that dash needs is more buttons!

  • avatar
    Mandalorian

    I always saw the Mustang as V8 or nothing. For many years people championed the V6 for its “fuel economy” to me this was the same argument as ordering a triple supersized quarter-pounder and XXXL fries with a diet coke “to be healthier”.

    • 0 avatar
      JimZ

      for many years the V6 was either the wheezy Essex 3.8 or the boat anchor 4.0 SOHC. it’s only since 2011 that the V6 Mustang had legitimate performance cred.

      • 0 avatar
        bunkie

        The 3.7 is a fine engine with a solid hit of torque, quick throttle response and a decent top end. It makes nice noises and is quiet at idle (not being DI). I’ve learned to ignore horsepower numbers, they rarely give any indication of an engine’s actual character. It’s important here because the Mustang isn’t basic transportation, it’s supposed to make you feel. The 3.7 is a very good fit for those who don’t need the Coyote to get that feeling. The EB doesn’t seem as willing as the 3.7 in real-world, partial-throttle situations.

        The big issue with the 3.7 in the Mustang is that it’s tied to the base model. The only display available would look right at home on a Palm Pilot.

        To answer the question, yes I will miss it.

        • 0 avatar
          notwhoithink

          “I’ve learned to ignore horsepower numbers, they rarely give any indication of an engine’s actual character.”

          That’s the truth. The HP and torque numbers that are advertised are peak numbers, so unless you’re accustomed to revving your engine pretty high you won’t get to them. I know I talk down on the TDIs, but that’s one thing that I loved about them. They hit peak HP and torque around 2K RPMs, so you were almost always right on top of the power curve without having to rev the crap out of the engine. Moving to a car that has +100HP and +40 ft/lbs of torque over my TDI left me scratching my head about why the car felt so slow, and it’s all about where you have to live in the power band, and most cars aren’t hitting peak until you’re at 4000+ RPM.

  • avatar
    mikey

    I don’t care. Absolutely , beyond a doubt , I would much prefer a V6 in my Mustang . Truth be known a V8 would make me much happier. However, Ford marketing/ pricing doesn’t lend itself to my whims, and or wants.. I come out of an era where one could order whatever engine, transmission , optional equipment you wanted. Those days are over. So in 2016 we make compromises .
    My Eco Boost Mustang serves my needs, and wants, for now.. If ..when my warranty runs out , I start encountering issues , that require me to part with large amounts of cash, my very pretty , meticulously maintained Mustang will be sitting on a used car lot..
    After being out for 8 years…. My GM blood is thinning out . Give me another 4 years and my UAW/CAW blood may also water down. Who knows ? Let’s hope we can still buy a V6 Accord .
    One of the few upsides of getting old, is that after awhile ya just don’t give a …….

  • avatar
    AK

    The V6 is better than the Ecoboost 4 in the Mustang.

    • 0 avatar
      brn

      Overall, yes. The turbo 4 has nothing real over the V6, other than to cost more to purchase, fuel, maintain, and repair.

      When I bought my car, I could have had the 2.0 ecoboost instead of the 3.5NA. Years later and I’m very glad I made the decision I did.

  • avatar
    pragmatic

    With sales of cars falling the number of choices will drop. Ford is going back to the 90’s when low sales of Mustangs meant only four drive trains (4 cylinder AT; 4 cylinder MT; V8 AT and V8 MT) like Accord limiting colors it simplifies life for their customers (the dealer).

  • avatar
    Lou_BC

    I’d rather see the V6 option remain even in the pickup.

  • avatar
    Big Al from Oz

    Why would you miss a V6 Mustang, or for that matter the V8?

    There are more than enough alternatives, like the vast array of pickup choices in the US.

    • 0 avatar
      raph

      Anybody who cross shops a pickup with a Mustang based purely on engine choices needs to head down the street and buy a Nissan Leaf.

      Mustangs are about the experience despite being some blue collar sporty car they aren’t just some mode of transportation.

      Anybody who buys one just to shuttle thier soulless husk from point A to B is wasting thier money and the engine is just as much a part of that experience as is the appearance and perdormancy.

      • 0 avatar
        Trucky McTruckface

        And anybody who faults people for cross shopping Mustangs with pickups needs to stop voicing their opinions on the internet…

        I really wish you had consulted me before I bought a Mustang primarily to make my commute less dreary. I could have saved so much money buying a car I didn’t like instead!

      • 0 avatar
        Big Al from Oz

        Raph,
        There was not a hint of cross shopping.

      • 0 avatar
        dwford

        I actually went to a Chevy dealer to drive a Camaro, and ended up leaving with a Silverado . It does happen. How you ask? Well, I was looking for a second vehicle that would only get driven occasionally. As I sat in the dealership I thought “this Camaro is rarely going to get driven, but why would I ever need it? Joy rides? It’s basically a useless vehicle. If I’m going to have a second vehicle, it might as well be useful for the times I need it.” So I got the Silverado.

  • avatar
    Jagboi

    I wonder what Morgan will use in the Roadster in place of the V6 when it’s killed off?

  • avatar
    noorct

    One of my biggest pet peeves is the forced choice on this generation mustang. They finally updated the v6 to be competitive a few years ago… and then shoehorn it into a model you can’t upgrade in any way with this generation. One of the only reasons to prefer the camaro at this point.

    The way they treated the v6 reminds me a bit of the cyclical argument that people don’t want manuals… when they are only offered one way (base model) outside of a very few marques.

    • 0 avatar
      dwford

      So true. Ford is notorious for making their lower trims look as crappy as possible to encourage you to step up. Look at that base trim dash of the Mustang in the photo. Or look at the base seats in a Focus ST. With the Mustang they made the base V6 a mediocre performer, then limited its options as well to push you towards the Ecoboost. Even the GT V8 is sandbagged, lacking DI which would easily boost performance.

      I give kudos to GM for at least offering the full range of options on the Camaro regardless of the engine. Too bad they just made an unusable car to package it all in.

      • 0 avatar
        noorct

        Camaro is hamstrung by trying to look too much like last gen. I got claustrophobic driving it.

        Couldn’t agree more on ford. Apples to apples I bet the v6 would have matched or beat the ecoboost share in the us if they could be configured the same way. I assume the ecoboost is being pushed more for overseas sales which I think are capped by engine size. The 2011 plus v6 is a better engine than the ecoboost – and it looks like on fuelly it also matches the fuel economy of the ecoboost.

    • 0 avatar
      HotPotato

      Yep. There is zero over the shoulder visibility in a Mustang coupe, to the point it is legit dangerous to attempt a lane change, and so the one and only option you’d need to make your V6 ‘Stang a safe and delightful place to spend time is the blind spot monitor. But oops, you can only get that by stepping “up” to the EcoBust. Weelll, maybe a nicer stereo too. Nope, gotta step “up” to the EcoOrBoost. It’s not just the price difference though; the V6 woofles well enough and hauls fast enough that you don’t really miss a V8, but the EcoPoop sounds TERRIBLE…not just to you, but to the people who you’re passing on the sidewalk, and let’s face it, you’re getting a Mustang instead of a FiST because you care what people on the sidewalk think.

  • avatar
    tjh8402

    I’d like to say I cared, but the reality is, I’d never buy one so it’s kinda hollow for me to make that claim. It’s sound was certainly far more inspiring than the disappointing 2.3. With the move towards downsizing and turbos, perhaps Ford could find a spot for the 2.7tt V-6 to slot between the 2.3 and 5.0. There’s a nice gap between the 310 hp 2.3 EB and the 435 hp V8. If they could boost it up to 350-365 hp that would fit nicely. Then again, the 3.5 is already there so perhaps that is the choice. Either way, it looks like the Mustang could still use the six. That would give it a direct competitor to the Challenger R/T with its 370 hp 5.7 and put it comfortably ahead of the Camaro. There’s a near $8k gap in base price between the 335 hp V6 Camaro and the 455 hp V8 SS and the Mustang already undercuts it. There’s a $6k gap between similar trimilines of the 2.3 and V8 on the Mustang leaving a nice $3k spot for a TT V6. It would be priced only slightly above the Camaro 3.6 while being substantially quicker.

  • avatar
    mattwc1

    I never understood Ford’s reluctance to include the V6 model in the performance catalog. I know that they were pumping up their EcoBoost 2.3 as the tuner option but the 3.7 was/is a damn fine engine (with hp numbers that and old guy like myself would only dream about in the 1980’s/early 90s) Chevy on the other hand will make a performance spec version of their V6 and offer performance options on their turbo 4 as well.

    • 0 avatar
      LS1Fan

      Dollars.

      GM has two sports cars in Chevys brand stable. The Corvette is high tier performance, and the Camaro is performance for Joe Sixpack . Distinct market buckets mean GM has greater flexibility for performance packages. Someone shopping for a V6 1LE Camaro isn’t crossing off a Z06 for it.

      Ford only has one : the Mustang. The GT being a special order hypercar means it doesn’t count here. If Ford dropped a 3.7L 1LE fighter they’d be cannibalizing their own higher trim options. Which may also explain the disappearance of the V6 Mustang in the near future……

  • avatar
    Fordson

    “I truly believe, and I think the majority of you will agree, what the V6 lacks in performance it more than makes up for in character compared to the now-somehow-premium four-cylinder.”

    You really know your audience, I’ll give you that. As we now know, it’s called “reinforcement bias.”

  • avatar
    28-Cars-Later

    I think its a mistake, especially in light of the fact the Mustang is a better overall value than its competition (until now with much less stupid by volume). Buyers will vote with their wallets.

    • 0 avatar
      MBella

      I want to agree with you, but I think anyone that likes the characteristics of the NA V6 over the turbo 4 is buying a V8 anyway. The V6 really has no buyers that seek it out specifically. As Mark put it, the cheerleader/hairdresser/rental car provider will not care whether it has a 4 or 6. The enthusiast is buying a V8. Ford is just simplifying their production process.

  • avatar
    bumpy ii

    “I truly believe, and I think the majority of you will agree, what the V6 lacks in performance it more than makes up for in character compared to the now-somehow-premium four-cylinder.”

    Character doesn’t sell to the masses. If it did, the IS and 3-series would still have six cylinders in their base models.

  • avatar
    Rochester

    I genuinely and honestly don’t care about the Mustang at all. It’s a crude and cheap feeling car. Every few years, I get the itch to own American muscle, and all it takes to get rid of that curiosity is a test drive in a Mustang or a Camaro.

    They’re just crappy cars, man. If that’s your thing, good for you.

  • avatar
    NoGoYo

    I’ve never felt any desire to own a Mustang, Camaro, or Challenger with anything less than a V8.

  • avatar
    golden2husky

    Yeah, I’d miss it because it is nice to have choice. That said, I’d miss the option for a stick more. One good decision made by management was the availability of a stick on the six and the eight. I hope it is still that way. GM was smart in that not only can you get a six or eight with a stick, you can get the top dog suspension with the six as well. Rochester, what car do you consider to be vastly better for the same money and mission?

  • avatar
    here4aSammich

    Like others, in a perfect world, I’d want the V8. But I buy my cars to keep, and fuel economy is a concern. Long term reliability and cost of ownership is another. I drive about 22k a year. Mostly highway miles all. I’m not interested in replacing a turbo. Heck, I prefer a timing chain over a timing belt. It’s getting harder and harder, I may have to buy a replacement sooner than I want because before long its going to be impossible to find something without a Turbo or a CVT. Let alone a timing chain.

    • 0 avatar
      Quentin

      I haven’t owned a car with a timing belt since my 2001 Subaru Impreza. The last 8 cars I’ve purchased have had timing chains. I believe most of the industry has moved to chains.

  • avatar
    r129

    Given the choice between a turbo 4 and a V6 of equal performance, I would always choose the V6. In my mind, when it comes to subjective factors like engine sound and smoothness, there is a larger gap between a 4 cylinder and a V6 than there is between a V6 and a V8. I may be part of an ever shrinking minority, but I find a 4 cylinder engine to be out of place in a pony car, or luxury car for that matter. It’s not at all about performance. If it were, the V8 would be the only way to go. There’s just something about the sound of a 4 cylinder engine that doesn’t do it for me.

  • avatar

    “the automatic, drop-top, V6 Mustang is colloquially called the Cheerleader Edition”

    I’m thinking of getting an old-ish V6 Mustang just for the hell of it. One of the ads I read said “selling for my daughter, who wants a Jeep”. And there we have the problem; even the target demographic have re-aligned their aspirations to the cancer-like CUV market.

  • avatar
    Zackman

    No, I won’t miss a Mustang V6, simply because I’m not a Mustang fan. I do respect the Mustang and the rich history it has over the last 50+ years, but I seldom care what engine any car has, with the exception of a Chevy 283. Of course, that’s ancient history, but that’s the era I grew up in.

  • avatar
    JaySeis

    Our Edge Sport has a nice subtle 6 cylinder moan when you roll into it.

  • avatar
    Compaq Deskpro

    I love love love the Pentastar in my Challenger, it is a very worthy successor to the old small V8’s like the 289. I don’t have the dough for V8 anything, and 2.0T can go under the hood of a family hauler or a sport compact. So yes, this significantly reduces the likelihood of a new Mustang in my future.

    I’m just happy the Challenger will soldier on uninterrupted until 2020, plenty of time to pickup another before they become little cramped harsh riding hampster motor Alfas.

    • 0 avatar
      Wheeljack

      Another V6 Pentastar Challenger owner here – love it as well. I also love the fact that you can get the nicer interior/higher equipment levels and the “Super Track Pak” option on the V6 car, which apparently Ford does not let you do if you want a V6.

      I know some people don’t see the point of a V6 pony car, but I’m perfectly happy with the way it performs. 65 HP was not worth the roughly $4000 price difference when considering base price and different incentives on V6 vs. V8 cars at the time I bought mine, and most objective road tests don’t peg the 5.7L as that much faster 0-60 than the Pentastar equipped models. Add Super Track Pak to a V6 car and it handles just as well as a 5.7L R/T, perhaps even better with the lighter front end.

  • avatar
    raph

    I’ll miss the Sixxer, it’s always been my opinion that Ford railroaded people into the EB Mustang since thats where Ford has placed all its ducks. They aren’t in the business of selling naturally aspirated engines anymore.

    I’m sure the powers that be sneer at the NA V6 and V8 crowd as cousin humping slack jawed troglodytes with little more than a lumpy stump at the end of a spinal cord for processing power! ( alright I mainly typed out that screed to amuse myself but it sure as hell feels that way since I’ve also read that Ford may reduce displacement on the 5.0 to 4.8 liters )

    Personally I liked the 3.7 for both its lack of a turbocharger and direct injection. The former is nice but it’s an expensive piece still prone to failure and the latter I still don’t trust the long term abilits to resist coking.

    It’s too bad Ford didn’t offer the same level of options on the Sixxer S550, perhaps if they did sales wouldn’t have skewed toward the EB Mustang which didn’t offer any real world advantages to anybody just wanting a stock Mustang and the sales story would have been different.

    Then again who knows? People are so easily dazzled by catchy technology thato maybe in the end the Sixxer was doomed even if it was a fundamentally better car.

    • 0 avatar
      Wheeljack

      The lack of DI and turbochargers is one of the reasons why I went with a V6 Challenger. I too am not convinced about the long term reliability of these technologies.

      The only way I’d buy a DI engine is if it had a low pressure fuel rail (a-la Toyota and a few others) to deal with valve and port deposits, but that adds cost, so most companies don’t do it.

  • avatar
    eggsalad

    If the 3.7 dies, what becomes the base engine for the F-150?

    2.7 EcoBoost?? I don’t think fleet buyers want the complexity of a turbo/GDI engine.

    • 0 avatar
      ajla

      The F-series actually switched from the 3.7L to the 3.5L like two years ago.

      My guess is that they’ll keep the 3.5L around for base truck/CUV duty. Volume on the low trim Explorer and F-150 is probably enough to justify its existence.

  • avatar
    baggins

    I think for most cars, two engine choices is enough. Trucks, and super hi powered variants of luxury cars would be the exception. (AMG, Mx from BMW,Sx from Audi)

    I dont think there is enough differentiation between the V-6 and Turbo 4 in the Mustang to warrant offering both. Agree that connoisseurs would care, but there arent that many of them out there. Over represented on this site.

  • avatar
    krhodes1

    I spent a week last month with the stereotypical white V6 Mustang Convertible in FL. On vacation, of course. The V6 sounds OK, but it sure doesn’t feel like it has 300hp. The big issue being, of course, torque down low or lack thereof. The turbo 4 is just massively better, and more hp is just a chiptune away should you need it. The gas mileage was unimpressive in the V6. I wouldn’t miss the V6 in the slightest.

    Of course, what would be REALLY fun is the Turbo 3.5 V6 in the Mustang, I find V8s to be completely pointless.

    • 0 avatar
      DeadWeight

      Even the GT doesn’t feel as fast as it should given its specs, especially compared to the 6.2 liter torque-monster in the Cannot so equipped.

      I don’t understand why Ford has not revised the rear end gearing on the 5 liter Mustang from the factory.

      It made a YUUUUGE difference in feel out of the hole back in he late 80s and early 90s.

      If there’s a good engineering reason why, I would love to know it.

      • 0 avatar
        DeadWeight

        Supposed to read “in the Camaro so equipped” above.

        Can’t edit it for whatever WordPress mobile reason.

      • 0 avatar
        JimZ

        Highway rpm. A lower (greater numerical) gear ratio means the engine will be spinning faster for a given road speed, increasing pumping losses and reducing efficiency.

        The 3.55:1 rear seems to be the “sweet spot” for the 5.0. I had a 2010 GT with the 3.31 and it was an absolute dog. The 4.6 *needed* the 3.73 rear for any semblance of performance (and guess which rear all of the press cars had.)

        • 0 avatar
          DeadWeight

          I think my 1990 5.0 LX (lighter than GT due to absence of body kit) speed manual had the 3.73 rear gearing.

          It was ordered that way by the Ford employee I purchased it used from.

          It felt faster than a buddy’s GT out of the hole.

          Lido Iaccobelli did some voodoo to it for me on the cheap & really roared.

  • avatar
    Trucky McTruckface

    Don’t care about the V6 at all. I’m very pleased with my EcoBoost Performance Pack. It’s no reborn SVO, but it’s not supposed to be. I actually like that it has a different sound and character from the NA motors; That thrashy V6 exhaust note just screams “I didn’t spring for the V8” every time you put your foot in it.

    And if I had really been that concerned about the sound or splitting hairs about performance numbers, I would have said f**k it and spent the extra $7k on the GT.

    Besides, not that I seriously recommend picking a car based on what Joe Blow thinks, but the first thing everyone asks you after they find out you have a Mustang is if it’s a V8. I’ve found over nearly a year of ownership that most folks are mildly impressed when I tell them it’s a turbo four. To the non-enthusiast, “turbo” still equals “fast” and “cool.” Those same non-enthusiasts also think “Mustang V6” means “joke,” and all the horsepower in the world isn’t going to shake that perception.

  • avatar
    EBFlex

    High strung 4 banger, V6, or V8, the mustang is a joke. So dropping a reliable engine and effectively replacing it with a high strung 4-cylinder won’t really change anything. Ford is only doing it so they can take more money from people.

    The bigger story is with Ford absolutely hating anything V8 or naturally aspirated, why are they so hypocritical and still offering the V8? That engine needs to go asap.

    • 0 avatar
      krhodes1

      “High strung”? How is a motor that makes max torque just off idle high strung? If anything, the torqueless V6 is high strung, you have to rev the nuts off the thing to make progress!

      I have my Luddite tendencies, but many years of turbo Saab ownership have shown me the one right way. Four cylinders plus a turbo is all the engine most anything needs if you want performance and efficiency.

  • avatar
    dougjp

    It doesn’t matter what we think because manufacturers don’t care as long as they can market what they want. The bogus-in-real-life fuel economy numbers are their first priority, closely followed by the need to create more dealer service work down the road. The V6 is too simple to be unreliable, and too simple to have to be repaired by a dealership.

  • avatar
    dwford

    Perhaps with the V6 going away For will offer the 2.0T as the base motor. They could easily have the 2.0T at 275hp, the 2.3T at 350hp, and the GT at 450hp.

  • avatar
    Higheriq

    I strongly suspect the the V6 will remain only for fleet orders, which means that used ones will be available on used car lots.

    • 0 avatar
      PrincipalDan

      My parents visited last April flying into Phoenix, renting a car and driving the 500 or so miles (largely interstate) up to us. Dad made all the arrangements and didn’t tell mom what they were renting.

      He got a Mustang convertible. I’d wager that between the 1967 model that he owned and his circle of friends he’s gotten to ride in or drive at least one Mustang of every generation. He drove the 2015 model for a week and had no idea what engine was in it.

      Finally I helped him pop the hood and find the emissions sticker so we could figure out what was in it. Ecoboost 4.

      My point? Fleets are ordering the Ecoboost ‘Stang and an old school muscle car guy (had his license for 12 years before he bought something without a V8) couldn’t tell he was driving a boosted 4.

  • avatar
    Dan

    At face value this doesn’t matter. People who care get the V8. I certainly would. But CAFE is only getting worse. How long until Ford has to do what Chevy already has and makes the GT a $40,000 car? A $50,000 car?

    I’d settle for a V6 but I’d buy used before I bought a 4 cylinder anything.

  • avatar
    kogashiwa

    I have actually been semi-seriously considering a Mustang for next year. I would probably have gone for the V6, so this is disappointing. The EcoBoost is a fine engine but it just sounds bad. Not just boring, actively bad.

    • 0 avatar
      DenverMike

      Just get the base GT and upshift at 200 hp and below, if it makes you feel better. You’ll be glad you did and won’t be stuck with a car that’ll bore you to tears in 6 months. It won’t take long for your GT to be worth twice as much.

  • avatar
    ToddAtlasF1

    I’d be curious to know what percentage of recent Mustangs were sold with V6s. Where I live now, it seems like about 95% of the ones I see are V6 powered. They’re pretty evenly split between rentals and secretaries, so that might be part of it. Maybe this is the first step to killing off the Mustang.

  • avatar
    SCE to AUX

    I don’t even care about the Mustang, let alone what engine(s) it has.

  • avatar
    kefkafloyd

    Harping on the V6 seems a bit rich when the vast majority of people I’ve met have the attitude that if you don’t have a V8, your pony car is automatically worthless.

    The V8 snobs don’t realize that you need those base models to sell to keep their platforms afloat. I don’t really care if the base is the turbo or the V6, they both are treated with a healthy dose of misogyny and disdain. I doubt anyone will show up to the V6’s funeral because the enthusiasts don’t care for them and the base market buyers can’t tell much of a difference between it and the turbo 4.

    I really like the latest crop of V6 motors (particularly the Pentastar and GM’s 3.6L DI) from a technical and performance standpoint, but they are orphans in a world where turbo 4s are putting out over 300 HP fairly easily.

  • avatar
    JMII

    The only reason to keep the V6 around was by adding a supercharger it could shame the V8. Given its performance and fuel mileage were about the same as the boosted 4 it makes no sense now. It would have been ironic if Ford offered the twin turbo 6 thus making the V8 pointless but that would cause even more of an uproar.

    • 0 avatar
      sportyaccordy

      There’s more to an engine than what it does on paper. In the real world they get about the same gas mileage and performance, but the V6 is qualitatively better by every measure. The 2.3 in Mustang trim is really bad.

  • avatar

    howsabout one of them there twin turbo v6s of the 2.7 or 3.5L variety to put the V8 to shame?

  • avatar
    turf3

    Needs an inline 6. Hell, most cars need an inline 6.

  • avatar
    skor

    Ford made a big mistake by not bringing the fine Oz Turbo I6 to Murica. The Mustang is still RWD and a long straight 6 would have fit. An I6 would probably also appeal to pick ’em truck buyers.

  • avatar
    ranchodenieve

    I may be prejudiced because I just bought a 2017 V6 Mustang. I bought it because it is really better than the EcoBoost or the GT in so many ways. It’s really a much more balanced car.
    While, you can’t get premium features, who cares. It’s got everything you need and nothing you don’t need. Power seat (Extra weight), touch screen ??, leather (uncomfortable in AZ when it’s 110, rots quickly). The lack of the performance package means that I can do it right myself. Ford never supported the V6 because they knew that you could make it real world faster than the EcoBoost. Sure, you can make the EcoBoost faster in a drag race, but it’s an all or nothing motor that dies at 5.5K. The V6 pulls hard to redline. Put a good suspension and 19″ wheels on it and it will beat the EcoBoost for many more years. Turbos are notorious for packing it in after 100K miles and are costly to maintain. An NA motor will last forever. My 1994 stealth Cobra SVT (Lincoln MkVIII) is still on the road. Yes, the Cobra SVT actually has a Lincoln 32V DOHC motor and its IRS.
    The GT is front end heavy, while the lighter motors have a better front to rear balance that enhances handling. We love drag performance in the USA, but the rest of world looks at road /rally performance as fast. This is where GT or nothing comes from, but the V6 is actually real world quicker. And let’s remember that the V6 is actually quicker than most of the historic Mustangs.
    I actually like the real sound of a good turbo motor, but I don’t like the way that they drive. I have owned them (My daughter’s VW EOS and a 2006 Rabbit with a Stage 2 turbo conversion). Hence, no EcoBoost for me!
    The new V6 Mustang is actually the perfect sports car. I’m sad that it is gone, but I will love mine forever. And it will still be on the road when most of the EcoBoosts are sitting in the boneyard.

Read all comments

Recent Comments

  • Lou_BC: @Sobro – the USA isn’t the only country on the planet. That period of runaway inflation and high...
  • mcs: “and then focus billions of dollars and the minds of the greatest engineers and programers in the world to...
  • mcs: The closest I got to a trip Russia was a visit to the KAMAZ plant in Tatarstan. The invitation was withdrawn at...
  • Gabe Ets-Hokin: Hey! Here’s a wacky idea: let’s all drive our own f-ing cars and then focus billions of...
  • el scotto: “The Preppy Handbook” came out in 1980. “Real Men Don’t Eat Quiche” came out...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber