By on September 20, 2019

2020 Ford Mustang EcoBoost High Performance Package

During Ford’s product presentation, held just north of the famed Golden Gate bridge on a chilly Bay Area morning in September, one of the men who worked on the 2020 Ford Mustang EcoBoost High Performance Package trotted out a not unexpected comparison.

He brought up the old LX trim available on Fox-body Mustangs of yore, and compared today’s four-cylinder Mustang to that model.

It’s not the world’s worst comparison, although the LX back then was available with the same renowned 5.0-liter (yes, I know it that it’s really a 4.9) V8 that was under the hood of the GT. The LX’s claim to fame was that it was lighter, cheaper, and perhaps less expensive to insure, while still offering V8 power and a five-speed stick. That’s why your author bought a used ’89 example in the late 1990s.

As someone who owned that LX Fox body for five years, I sniggered a bit, since the Mustang parked in front of us had just half the cylinder count, but of course today’s turbocharged four-banger could smoke the V8 of yore. I understood where Ford was going with this, though – the EcoBoost Mustang High Performance Package is meant to be the value performance buy, and not just a rental-fleet darling or the car for Mustang shoppers who care more about show than go.

Of course, when I relayed this spiel to the ne’er do wells in the TTAC Slack channel, contributor Chris Tonn shot back “SVO”, typed out repeatedly, a la Nicholson’s manuscript in The Shining.

Regardless of which comparison works best, there’s no denying that this ‘Stang offers a lot of what the GT does for less money. Not to mention while passing more fuel pumps.

(Full disclosure: Ford flew me to San Francisco, put me in a nice hotel, and fed me, so that I could drive this Mustang.)

This Mustang started out as a bit of side project, after Ford engineers, perhaps feeling a bit cheeky, did some experiments involving putting the Ford Focus RS motor in the Mustang. This lead to the development of a new version of the RS’ 2.3-liter turbo four, meant specifically for Mustang.

The final result? Three-hundred thirty-two horsepower and 350 lb-ft of torque when running premium fuel.

2020 Ford Mustang EcoBoost High Performance Package

Other performance goodies include a larger twin-scroll turbo and radiator. Ford brings over chassis and aero bits from the Mustang GT’s available performance package. There’s an alloy strut tower brace, and the four-piston calipers are larger. The front brake rotors are the GT’s 13.9-inch units. A front sway bar is at 32 millimeters, and the rear at 21.7.

[Get new and used Mustang pricing here!]

The car’s electric power steering is tuned for performance, Ford says, as is the ABS, stability control, and drive modes. There’s a 3.55:1 limited-slip rear axle, and the 19-inch aluminum wheels host 255/40R summer rubber.

A large black front splitter and belly pan are on hand to make the car look more aggressive, along with the GT’s brake-cooling ramps. The latter isn’t just for looks, they actually do cool the brakes and work to reduce front-end lift.

You’ll know the High Performance Package by its side badges, raised rear spoiler, gray hood stripe, gray side mirrors, serialized dash plaque, and blacked-out grille.

2020 Ford Mustang EcoBoost High Performance Package

An available handling package includes semi-metallic brakes, MagneRide dampers, and a Torsen 3.55:1 limited-slip rear axle. The wheels are half an inch wider and shod with 265/40R Pirelli P Zero Corsa4 summer tires. The rear sway bar is 24 millimeters, instead of 21.7.

Handling package or no, you have a choice in transmissions – a six-speed manual or 10-speed automatic.

Ford tossed my drive partner and I the keys and pointed us north towards Bodega Bay on California Highway 1. It was an out-and-back route over a highway that offers both tight, twisty corners and straightaways that allow you to open up the throttle, provided the CHP isn’t lurking nearby. Elevation changes abound.

I spent my first leg in a manual, finding this pony to be stable and planted in cornering, and relatively nimble, given that it weighs over 3,500 pounds. The coupe is heavier than a Camaro LS or LT coupe, either with the turbo four or the V6, although Chevy does not break out the weight for the 1LE package cars, which would be the most directly comparable, in its spec sheets.

I’d love to compare the 1LE to this Mustang, but alas, the last time I drove one was over half a decade ago.

2020 Ford Mustang EcoBoost High Performance Package

Stable with nicely weighted and tight steering that manages to tamp down any artificial feeling. That’s in normal mode – I was a dope and forgot to toggle over into Sport mode, or even to flick the steering into Sport feel (which can be done without selecting the full Sport drive mode). When I remembered to engage Sport feel and Sport mode later, in the automatic, the feel tightened up even more.

Ride isn’t much of a consideration in this class, but the ‘Stang was never unduly stiff on pristine California byways. Some tire noise crept in here and there, usually on the less well-kept patches of pavement.

The stick is satisfying to row through the gears, snicking into place quickly with no slop. The heavy clutch has good feel but a slightly wonky engagement, and both my drive partner and I kept making the car bounce as if we were in driver’s ed on the 1-2 upshift. To be fair, it had been a month or so since I’d last piloted a manual, and neither one of us stalled it.

2020 Ford Mustang EcoBoost High Performance Package

There’s enough torque on hand in the first four gears to make you forget about the V8 Mustang GT. But if you’re cruising in fifth or sixth and forced to slow down, you’ll need to downshift. At one point, I had to back out of the throttle to avoid a Lance Armstrong wannabe and when I dug back into the throttle the car acted like a teenager being forced out of bed for school. Just no motivation whatsoever. Drop to fourth, pop clutch, problem solved.

The more challenging parts of California 1 are best navigated in third gear, with occasional forays into second and fourth, at least if you’re interested in doing anything more than lazy cruising. The Mustang seemed happy in the middle of the rev range.

Proponents of the V8 will remind you that a four-banger just doesn’t sound as good, and they are correct. The exhaust sounded decent enough in the stick, but it was downright annoying in the automatic, for whatever reason. It does get louder in sport mode, so perhaps increasing the volume decreased the sound quality. Whatever – that and the lack of low-end torque might be enough to entice buyers into the V8.

The automatic offered up crisp shifts that bordered on harsh, and it holds on to gears longer in Sport mode, unsurprisingly. That’s your job, should choose the manual.

Unfortunately, neither car I drove had the handling package.

2020 Ford Mustang EcoBoost High Performance Package

As is usual with Mustangs, the dash is expansive, as is the use of hard plastics. The back seat is almost useless (I feel like my Fox body had more room back there) unless you’re transporting young children, pets, or parcels. The interior still has the mix of retro and airplane-cockpit themes.

Available features include dual exhaust, LED headlamps, keyless entry and starting, Sync infotainment, track apps, dual USB ports, satellite radio, rear-sensing system, dual-zone climate control, fog lamps, in-car Wi-Fi, Apple CarPlay, and Android Auto.

I’ve had build-quality concerns with Mustangs of recent vintage, but the two cars I drove exhibited little in the way of cowl shake, nor did they feel as loosely screwed together as previous ponies. This seems to be the new trend – a Bullitt I drove this summer similarly felt solidly built, as did the last GT I sampled.

EPA estimated fuel-economy is listed at 20 mpg city/27 mpg highway/23 mpg for the coupe with a manual, 19/26/22 for the convertible with a stick-shift, 20/28/23 for the coupe with a slushbox, and 20/27/23 for the convertible with the 10-speed auto.

We didn’t measure fuel economy, but in the manual I was seeing around 22 mpg via the computer and with the automatic, about 19 mpg.

2020 Ford Mustang EcoBoost High Performance Package

One needn’t buy a Premium-trim EcoBoost to get the High Performance Package, but depending on how you build it, the EcoBoost HPP can get close in price to a GT. I drove a fairly base car that started at $26,670 and came to $35,250 with options and $1,095 destination fee, and later the well-equipped automatic that started at $31,685 and tested out at $39,370, including the $1,095 destination fee.

Ford provided us with price sheets for each car that was on the drive, and some were pricing out at close to $45,000 dollars. While the EcoBoost is likely cheaper to insure than the GT (it was for me, I ran a fake quote via Progressive, using my real info and including my most recent speeding ticket, and the EcoBoost was a little cheaper), if you’re going to be coming that close to GT money, why not just get the V8? Heck, one can spec a GT out for less, if one shows restraint when it comes to options.

If you can keep your EcoBoost HPP in the mid-$30K range, you’ll find yourself with a fun four-cylinder Mustang that handles well and is no slouch in a straight line. You won’t get a V8 soundtrack, though.

The HPP EcoBoost is a pretty good performance buy, and there are logical reasons to opt for it over its big bro. If you don’t need a V8 to be happy, this Mustang will do quite nicely.

[Images © 2019 Tim Healey/TTAC]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

55 Comments on “2020 Ford Mustang Ecoboost High Performance Package First Drive – Skunkworks ‘Stang...”


  • avatar
    Verbal

    I assume the car can be optioned with a three inch lift and black wheel well cladding. Otherwise the car would never have gotten the green light from Ford upper management.

  • avatar
    TrailerTrash

    I looked and can’t find the performance pack as convertible in the mid 30s.
    seems 38K is what your stuck with.
    is it worth that, or wait for it used?

    plus other reviews today are saying the convertible is noticeably more unsettled.

    • 0 avatar
      PrincipalDan

      Convertibles are heavier and usually exhibit more cowl shake along with reduced back seat room and trunk space.

      Why would you want to performance pack that? (Genuinely curious.)

      • 0 avatar
        TrailerTrash

        why?
        because it comes with things i like such as heavier cooling, breaks and others.
        that why. and i just have to have a rag top.
        the v8 is to much weight on the front wheels.

        • 0 avatar
          ponchoman49

          My Mustang buddy has had several 2015 Mustang ragtops, one with the 3.7 and the current 2.3 EB. I like both setups but am very concerned with longterm body integrity with these as both of his cars are very rattle ridden with 100K miles on each . The 2.3 car has also has numerous suspension issues including wheels bearings, ball joints, sway bar links and now there is a vibration going 30-40 MPH that the dealer says is emanating from the driveline- U-joints perhaps?

    • 0 avatar
      Tim Healey

      Only drove the coupe.

  • avatar
    PrincipalDan

    I know I’m probably in a minority but I like it.

    I’d get the High Performance package, 6 speed manual, and almost 0 options to keep the price more reasonable, although I have heard the active exhaust on the Ecoboost and it’s pretty nice.

    • 0 avatar
      FreedMike

      I like it too, but the price doesn’t make sense to me.

      • 0 avatar
        PrincipalDan

        I like the 2020 LT1 V8 Camaro better but I’ve found Ford dealers generally more willing to deal than Chevy dealers (when it comes to performance machines.)

        I bet that after 2021 production is in full swing there will still be a few of these HO 2.3 Mustangs sitting on lots around the country. Not because its a bad car but because too many Mustang fans will be scratching their heads going: “I don’t get it.”

        • 0 avatar
          FreedMike

          I haven’t driven a Camaro, but I’ve sat in one, which immediately sells me on the Mustang. I’m not buying a car I can’t see out of, you know?

          But at any rate, I think anyone who spends the kind of money Tim’s talking about for this car will regret not spending a couple grand more and getting the V-8.

          I just built one of these out in Race Red, with a cool white racing stripe and snazzy 19s – $27,000. THAT is a smart way to go. Ten grand more makes no sense.

      • 0 avatar
        slavuta

        I will not say I like it or not. What I say [to myself], if you buy a car like Mustang then get v8, the real thing. Because to me, this is either full experience or forget it. This is why I will not buy Volvo xc90 – big car, supposedly luxury car, small engine.. Or like that E-class I saw at the mall – 75K and 4cyl? seriously? no way.

        • 0 avatar
          FreedMike

          Agreed. I tried out a S60 with the turbocharged/supercharged four last weekend, and I was not terribly impressed. The engine makes plenty of power but doesn’t seem to be having much fun making it. For the same money ($58,000) I’d opt for an S4.

          • 0 avatar
            PrincipalDan

            What if the Mustang was called “SVO” and came with reproduction of the cheesey vinyl graphics and the biplane spoiler? ;-)

  • avatar
    R Henry

    With fuel consumption in the low 20s as mentioned here, the case for a boosted 4-pot is weak.

    • 0 avatar
      Art Vandelay

      I have flogged a car on this same route (sadly, a rental VW Tiguan). This isn’t interstate driving.

    • 0 avatar
      raph

      On boost its going to get crappy mileage since BSFC tends to run fairly rich. Not as bad as a port injected engine but still rich none the less as they use fuel to keep the engine from running lean and melting down.

      While I tend to keep the spirited driving to minimum in the public space these days – on track at least fuel consumption on the V8 drops to single digit numbers. If the EB car is still knocking down double digit economy in similar fashion I would say that isn’t bad at all.

  • avatar
    dukeisduke

    I still see the occasional LS 5.0 notchback around (I saw a cherry one just last week). That’s a bold comparison.

    • 0 avatar
      R Henry

      I owned an ’88 example, with a 5-speed.

      Looked just like this: https://funkyimg.com/i/2XduE.jpg

      Former law enforcement, all black with factory blacked out alloy wheels. A great car…but sold it to buy a diamond for my (now) wife’s engagement ring. A worthy sacrifice…but I still miss the Mustang!

  • avatar
    thejohnnycanuck

    I get the need for 4 cylinder Mustangs.

    Not every corporate secretary wants to drive a BMW 3-Series.

    • 0 avatar
      FreedMike

      A corporate secretary does 0-60 in a tick over five seconds in one of these, so unless you’re bringing something quicker to the party, she might be the one throwing shade at you.

      • 0 avatar
        Art Vandelay

        He drives a Corolla hatchback so pretty much everything on the road is throwing shade on him.

        • 0 avatar
          thejohnnycanuck

          No, my wife drives the Corolla. We also have 8 other vehicles to choose from Art, including a Mustang GT.

          I don’t care how quick they can make a 4-banger Mustang. If the sound and feel of a V8 isn’t there then it simply isn’t for me.

          • 0 avatar
            FreedMike

            That’s your preference, then, and God bless you. I’m with you on the V-8, but I see no reason to throw shade on people who might prefer the Ecoboost – it’s a LONG way from being boring or slow.

          • 0 avatar
            Art Vandelay

            Meh, I like to turn. Don’t really care about sound and all that subjective stuff. If I want to go fast straight I’ll wait until the wife’s Tesla gets here.

          • 0 avatar
            sayahh

            I really wish there was a updated Toyota Celica with Toyota reliability that can compete with the Mustang/Camaro/Challenger in horsepower. A relatively affordable model wouldn’t hurt, either, just none of that badge engineering with Mazda, Subaru and BMW please.

            I wonder what a 2020 notchback Mustang would look like.

  • avatar
    redapple

    TTAC MANAGEMENT.

    I D LIKE TO PAY YOU CASH TO AVOID WATCHING THE ED COLE’S GRANDSON ON THOSE EVIL ANNOYING AUTOGUIDE ADVERTS.

    I REALLY REALLY HATE THEM. I M OVER AT THE OTHER SITE A LOT MORE.

    HOW MUCH $ DO YOU WANT.????

  • avatar
    FreedMike

    Skip this, and opt for the base 2.3T. Going this way takes away a few hp (which you probably won’t miss, as the thing’s darn quick to begin with), but nets you a sticker price well under thirty grand, even with some upgrades (stripes, nicer wheels/tires, etc).

    At that price point, this car becomes a very solid performance bargain. But six grand more for marginally higher performance, and no V-8? I’d pass.

    • 0 avatar
      slavuta

      Or get 1 year GT under 30K

    • 0 avatar
      Tim Healey

      It’s a bit confusing, but I believe you need HPP to get the handling package.

      • 0 avatar
        FreedMike

        The configurator let me order the handling package separately. But that comes bundled with a bunch of other stuff that brings the price up pretty considerably (low $30s). At that point, for a couple grand more, the 5.0 begins to look VERY attractive.

        I’ve always thought the only way the Ecoboost Mustang (or the comparable Camaro) really works is as cheap speed, and adding options just distracts from the mission.

        The base 2.3 is only down 20 hp (and zero torque) compared to the one you drove, and it’ll do 0-60 in 5.1 seconds. That’s pretty darn quick, and the base suspension is plenty capable on real-world roads without upgrades. I’d opt for the nice-looking 19s, and a paint stripe, and nothing else, and would be looking at twenty-seven grand before dickering. As a speed-for-your-buck proposition, I think that’s borderline brilliant – seriously, name me a new car that looks better and goes faster for that money. Good luck!

        • 0 avatar
          PartsUnknown

          FreedMike, I agree 100%. I never would have considered a Mustang with anything but the 5.0. Oddly enough, it was a week with a rental Mustang 2.3 that changed my mind. Ultimately, money no object, I’d still prefer the 5.0, but a 2.3 hardtop with the 19″ wheel package and 6 speed manual for $27K before negotiation represents a truly incredible performance bargain. The 2.3 is smooth and strong – kinda brings me back to my Saab days.

  • avatar
    slavuta

    This reminds me of Russel Peters’s Indian tech support/customer:

    s: what is your forest name
    c: ?
    s: sir, what is your forest name
    c: say, what; can you ask slow?
    s: o-k, si-i-ir, wha-a-a-at i-i-i-i-is you-u-u-ur {really fast} forest name
    c: no, no, no – this is #@cking same thing!

    What am I talking about? – I guess, about 4cyl performance car, especially when there is same car with 8 in count. American muscle on diet.

  • avatar
    cimarron typeR

    I too had a Fox body LX 5.0, but in early 2000s. I regret selling it. On this , I wonder if the f150 ecoboost v6 would fit. A turbo v6 surely could sound more sporty and more appropriate for a car this size. Outside of sti/Miatas/FRS/hot hatches a 4 cyl in this kind of car of this weight is a tough sell. I drove a 4 cyl manual ’18 A5 and I bet this would be similar.
    I’m waiting for track reviews though

    • 0 avatar
      Art Vandelay

      Yes, it is the same dimension wise as the 3.7 v6 this platform had as an option a few years back and successful swaps have been done.

      If Ford actually wanted to build an SVO, it is the Raptor’s ecoboost that should be under the hood, not the 2.3. Remember the SVO was the performance equal spec wise of the GT. Would love to see some flavor of Shelby with the Ford GT motor as well.

      Aaaaand cue all of the triggered “but muh veeeeee 8 sounds better” crowd.

  • avatar
    TMA1

    I can’t believe how expensive the Mustang has gotten. It’s like Ford is actively trying to sell fewer of them.

    I bought a brand new ’16 GT Premium. A little price comparison, four model years apart.

    The manual in this test, with the tiny screen and cloth seats? $35,250. In 2016, $35K would buy you a GT manual with the same screen and seats.

    The automatic? $39,370. My ’16 Premium, with Nav, $39,580 (including destination).

    I understand inflation is a thing, but at the time I bought my car, the jump from 4 to 8 cylinders (at the same trim level) was about $8,000. I just don’t see what Ford has added to the Mustang to justify this cost increase over 4 model years.

    • 0 avatar
      Art Vandelay

      This isn’t the base 2.3 ecoboost. There is a contingent of Mustang owners that actually prefer this motor to the V8. Even with the turbo it is likely a much simpler to work on motor than a twin cam v8 with a timing chain that probably stretches from here to the moon length wise, way more moving parts, and being jammed in there. I like V8’s, but I love the feeling that a horse is kicking me in the chest that a big turbo gives you when the boost comes on. Ford’s ecoboosts are typically excellent at making you forget they are turbos. Hopefully this one feels a bit more like a performance oriented turbocharged motor. I loved the old 2.3 Lima turbo. Granted, modern ones are much easier to live with but it was like “tiny motor….tiny motor…Oh crap”. It got fun when the Windsor 5.0 was running out of breath.

    • 0 avatar
      Maymar

      A ’20 GT Premium with Nav is roughly $42,400, which apparently is pretty much bang on your ’16’s inflation adjusted price. For that matter, a base GT is ~$36k.

  • avatar
    Art Vandelay

    I am going to drive one of these when the Fiesta ST’s lease is coming up for comparison prior to buying. I am sure it will be faster and better in most ways (aside from the back seat strangely enough), but I can’t imagine it will win on smiles per dollar. That and a Fit Sport with the factory performance suspension added are on the list of stuff currently available but unless that thing is 90’s Civic Si good (Why is there not a Fit Si???) I don’t see it unless there is a great tune available that adds like 30 hp without killing the warranty.

    I would shell out for a 3.5 eb mustang.

  • avatar
    sgeffe

    Comparing this to a Fox LX V8 is silly!

    As others have said, one of the two EB 6s would be a better choice, but then you’re up against the GT V8 in price and value proposition.

  • avatar
    DenverMike

    It was just a 5 Liter, but I’m sure the marketing dept found “Five Point Oh!” rolled off the tongue much better. That’s all you had to say and no one questioned what car you were talking about…

    “Ya just can’t catch a 5.0…”

    Except the Coyote 5.0 wouldn’t be so hot if you were to sandbag it with the pathetic gear ratios available in the Fox era, plus Stone Age engine controls, low compression and whatnot.

    In its defense, it did the best it could and still managed 300 lbs ft of TQ, coming on strong right off of idle. I’d smoothly pull way ahead of traffic like it was standing still while shifting at just 2,000 RPM, and not giving it more than 3/4 throttle.

    I was street racing an import/fwd one time an didn’t even know it. I had the stereo up loud, my mind somewhere else, and out of the corner of my eye saw its left fender dropping and rising violently as it struggled to keep up with my leisure pace.

  • avatar
    MRF 95 T-Bird

    I’ve been shopping Mustangs to replace my 95 Thunderbird LX V8. I have it narrowed down to an 2011-up 3.7 or a 15-16 Ecoboost.

    Just from scrolling through my local dealers sites I see a few available but the lots seem more CUV and truck heavy. I’m also checking out the other car sites and Craigs list.

  • avatar
    statikboy

    “You’ll know the High Performance Package by its … serialized dash plague”

    Sure you don’t mean High Pandemic Package? It seems grammatical mistakes are endemic to TTAC writing. It would be nice if some of the articles were proofread. I expect this from the commenters because we’re a bunch of idiots, but the writers should hold themselves to a better standard.

    That said, I appreciate the work you guys do.

  • avatar
    jdmcomp

    I just do not understand why Ford does not make this the standard 4 for the Mustang. Why not? Ford? any answer? anyone?

  • avatar

    Mustang with zero cylinders will beat Mustang with V8 and ecoboost too and plus no turbo lag, low center of gravity and so on. Call me when Mustang beats Tesla.

  • avatar
    dividebytube

    I belong to a 3.7L Mustang enthusiast site and a lot of them are not fans of the 2.3L engine, calling it coarse. I never have driven the Ecoboost version so I have no opinion but I do wonder how true it is. I believe C&D called it more tractor-like than sports car – ie, like a like of turbo engines of this era it doesn’t like to rev.

    • 0 avatar
      ponchoman49

      I drove my friends 2015 Mustang rag tops back to back numerous times, the white car had the 3.7 and the current black one has the 2.3. I would pick the 3.7 every time if I had the choice. It feels quicker down low, sounds way better and is smoother and easier to live with on a daily basis. The 2.3 sounds like a bad cheese grater in comparison and actually shakes the wheel on cold morning startups. They also got nearly identical mileage in everyday driving. But the 3.7 isn’t considered cool because it doesn’t have a turbo so there you go.

  • avatar
    Fordson

    Lack of low-end torque? Under full boost, it’s making 300 lb/ft at 2,000 rpm. I don’t think the GT is making that much at 2,000 rpm.

    Turbo engines – it’s not all about rpm. 2,000 rpm with the turbo spooling down and 2,000 rpm with the turbo spooling up are two different things. Yeah, if you’re cruising in 5th or 6th anywhere there’s likely to be a cyclist joining the traffic flow (surface streets), and you back out of the throttle in those gears, there’s going to be nobody home if you just dip into it again, at what – 40-45 mph? Don’t we all know that?

    Even in 5th, at 45 mph this thing is at 2,000 rpm…with the turbo spooling down, it’s an atmospheric 2.3 liter engine at 2k rpm – the GT is an atmospheric 5.0 liter engine at 2k rpm – sure the V8 is gonna be better…but with the boost up at 2k rpm, the 2.3 is better.

    If you rev-match by poking the throttle when you downshift, which is what you should be doing in any MT car, that brings up the boost and when you re-engage the clutch, you’re gone.

    When you rev-match downshift in a N/A car, you do it so the engine’s at the right speed to re-engage the clutch…when you do it in a turbo car, you do it so the engine and road speed match upon clutch engagement…AND because you want the engine to be making power.

    • 0 avatar
      PrincipalDan

      Torque curves are why I like turbo engines.

      It’s a shame that Subaru isn’t offering the new 2.4 ltr turbo with a manual trans. That sucker is making 270 lb ft from 2000 – 4800(!) RPM. That’s not a torque curve that’s a torque replica of Ayers Rock.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • ponchoman49: I drove my friends 2015 Mustang rag tops back to back numerous times, the white car had the 3.7 and the...
  • volvo: Looking at the pictures I would worry about engine cooling. The front grill is so small compared to comparable...
  • Hummer: The journey for example is the cheapest way to get 3 rows, it’s cheaper than much crappier products from...
  • stingray65: dal – I guess an alternative is to encourage all Californians to follow Tesla and the homeless by...
  • DenverMike: CA isn’t really a “drive through” state. Dirty commercial diesels cannot...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributors

  • Timothy Cain, Canada
  • Matthew Guy, Canada
  • Ronnie Schreiber, United States
  • Bozi Tatarevic, United States
  • Chris Tonn, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States
  • Mark Baruth, United States
  • Moderators

  • Adam Tonge, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States