While Not Yet Official, Fuel Economy's on the Rise in the Ford Mustang Stable

Steph Willems
by Steph Willems

Those Ford Mustang owners. Obsessed with just one thing — a feverish, burning desire to consume as little gasoline as possible.

No, that can’t be right. Mustang buyers know what they want when purchasing the original pony car, and it usually involves the velocity of wind through one’s hair. Ford Motor Company, however, doesn’t have the luxury of such simple-mindedness. For a number of reasons, the largest of them being regulatory, the automaker requires its newest vehicles to burn less fuel than the previous generation.

The 2018 Mustang is no different. For the coming model year, the massaged and freshened Mustang promises owners less time spent at the gas pump.

While Ford’s just-released fuel economy figures aren’t yet confirmed by the Environmental Protection Agency, but estimates aren’t likely to stray far from the mark, if at all.

For 2018, both four-cylinder EcoBoost models and traditional V8 powertrains receive Ford’s 10-speed automatic, instantly upping the number of gears by 40 percent. Further economy enhancements come in the form of aero improvements. Active grille shutters, a smoother underside, and a controversial squishing of the model’s face all conspire to boost the ‘Stang’s slipperiness.

What does that mean for fuel economy? Compared to last year’s model, a 2018 EcoBoost model with six-speed manual is estimated at 21 mpg in the city, 31 on the highway, and 25 mpg combined. That’s a 1 mpg improvement for the highway and combined ratings.

Springing for the 10-speed brings about larger gains. So equipped, the EcoBoost now boasts a 32 mpg highway figure, 21 mpg in the city, and 25 mpg combined. That’s a 2 mpg increase on the highway, and a 1 mpg overall gain.

The 3.7-liter V6 doesn’t apply in this comparison, as the former base engine disappears from the model in 2018. The 5.0-liter V8, with a manual tranny, returns an estimated 15 mpg city, 25 mpg highway, and 18 mpg combined. In other words, the absolutely no change for stick-shift V8s. Adding four more cogs to the Mustang GT’s automatic does bring about a change, however, and it’s the largest of the lineup. City, highway, and combined fuel economy all rise by 1 mpg in the automatic-equipped V8 model, for an estimated rating of 16/25/19.

We’ll have confirmation of the gains once the EPA gets around to posting official numbers on fuel economy.gov.

As for the hottest Mustang variants, don’t expect anything new for 2018. The GT350 and GT350R soldier on unchanged in output, economy, and appearance. With the elimination of the base V6 engine, the Mustang’s entry prices rises, but not by a lot. Getting into a lesser ‘Stang now means paying more for a V8, and less for a four-cylinder.

[Image: Ford Motor Company]

Steph Willems
Steph Willems

More by Steph Willems

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 40 comments
  • TMA1 TMA1 on Oct 12, 2017

    Might as well share my mileage numbers, since I just drove from Ohio to DC in a '16 GT with the old 6-speed auto. For the first 50 miles of the trip, on the flat NE Ohio turnipike, I was at 29.1 mpg, driving about 75. Flooring it to get around some moron while leaving the tool booth instantly dropped me to 28.4. After 264 miles, into hilly PA, I was at 27.7 mpg. Average speed of 68 mph. Not sure how I was driving so slow, since I was touching 80 at times, but that's what I calculated from my trip computer. Ran into road construction with stopped traffic at 321 miles. Down to 27.4 mpg by the time I started again. Another bout of construction stalling had me down to 27.1 by the time I got off the interstate. Just my experience, numbers are based off the trip computer. Not bad for a heavy car with 430 hp. My '09 Mazda3 hatch didn't do any better on that trip.

  • Tele Vision Tele Vision on Oct 12, 2017

    My '07 V gets some kinda mileage, I'm sure, but I don't really give a care what it is. It's in a fine state of tune with good tires, which is about all I can do for a 10-year-old sports sedan with the aerodynamics of a house. It pulls hard when prodded and happily lopes along when not. I'm pretty sure I spend more money on coffee per day than gasoline. Job done.

  • Redapple2 Love the wheels
  • Redapple2 Good luck to them. They used to make great cars. 510. 240Z, Sentra SE-R. Maxima. Frontier.
  • Joe65688619 Under Ghosn they went through the same short-term bottom-line thinking that GM did in the 80s/90s, and they have not recovered say, to their heyday in the 50s and 60s in terms of market share and innovation. Poor design decisions (a CVT in their front-wheel drive "4-Door Sports Car", model overlap in a poorly performing segment (they never needed the Altima AND the Maxima...what they needed was one vehicle with different drivetrain, including hybrid, to compete with the Accord/Camry, and decontenting their vehicles: My 2012 QX56 (I know, not a Nissan, but the same holds for the Armada) had power rear windows in the cargo area that could vent, a glass hatch on the back door that could be opened separate from the whole liftgate (in such a tall vehicle, kinda essential if you have it in a garage and want to load the trunk without having to open the garage door to make room for the lift gate), a nice driver's side folding armrest, and a few other quality-of-life details absent from my 2018 QX80. In a competitive market this attention to detai is can be the differentiator that sell cars. Now they are caught in the middle of the market, competing more with Hyundai and Kia and selling discounted vehicles near the same price points, but losing money on them. They invested also invested a lot in niche platforms. The Leaf was one of the first full EVs, but never really evolved. They misjudged the market - luxury EVs are selling, small budget models not so much. Variable compression engines offering little in terms of real-world power or tech, let a lot of complexity that is leading to higher failure rates. Aside from the Z and GT-R (low volume models), not much forced induction (whether your a fan or not, look at what Honda did with the CR-V and Acura RDX - same chassis, slap a turbo on it, make it nicer inside, and now you can sell it as a semi-premium brand with higher markup). That said, I do believe they retain the technical and engineering capability to do far better. About time management realized they need to make smarter investments and understand their markets better.
  • Kwik_Shift_Pro4X Off-road fluff on vehicles that should not be off road needs to die.
  • Kwik_Shift_Pro4X Saw this posted on social media; “Just bought a 2023 Tundra with the 14" screen. Let my son borrow it for the afternoon, he connected his phone to listen to his iTunes.The next day my insurance company raised my rates and added my son to my policy. The email said that a private company showed that my son drove the vehicle. He already had his own vehicle that he was insuring.My insurance company demanded he give all his insurance info and some private info for proof. He declined for privacy reasons and my insurance cancelled my policy.These new vehicles with their tech are on condition that we give up our privacy to enter their world. It's not worth it people.”
Next