What To Expect From the 2015 Ecoboost Mustang - 2013 Ford Focus ST Long-Term Road Test
ADVERTISEMENT

2013 Ford Focus ST Long-Term Road Test

2013 Ford Focus ST: What To Expect From the 2015 Ecoboost Mustang

June 28, 2013

2013 Ford Focus ST

It's well-known that the 2015 Ford Mustang will have a turbocharged four-cylinder Ecoboost engine. In fact, I first reported on it back in September of 2011.

Those of you thinking the 2015 Mustang's Ecoboost engine will simply take the 2013 Ford Focus ST's engine, turn it ninety degrees and overbore it are mistaken. Here are some more details on the 'Stang's four-banger ("four-'Stanger?") recently overheard from inside sources.

The 2.3-liter Ecoboost four in the Mustang will generate in the neighborhood of 330 horsepower, plus or minus a few. It will slot above the base V6 and beneath the V8 in the Mustang's pecking order (e.g., price). As its peak power number will not be drastically higher than the V6's current 305 hp, the four-cylinder's worth will likely be in a larger, broader torque output and better fuel economy than the V6.

Interestingly enough, the 2.3 Ecoboost's unique head casting integrates the exhaust manifold into the head, so the turbo simply bolts directly to a flange on the head. Though this type of manifold integration is in production on other cars, this will be the first time it has been accomplished with a twin scroll turbo, which by design groups the exhaust ports of cylinders #1 and #4 together, isolated from those of cylinders #2 and #3. That's one tricky head to cast, I bet!

Jason Kavanagh, Engineering Editor


Comments

  • duck87 duck87 Posts:

    Hyundai already uses the integrated manifold technique for its turbocharged engines. However, this is only the first step- in the future, the turbo turbine housing will probably also end up being part of the casting as well. I can't really get behind the idea of a 4-banger Mustang- I also thought this version was initially slated to be for Europeans only... frankly they can keep it.

  • fordson1 fordson1 Posts:

    I disagree, duck87. With IRS and a four-cylinder with real power, this is the car the FR-S/BRZ could have been. Yes, it will be larger and heavier than the Toyobaru, but with a reputed 200-lb. weight loss across the lineup, better weight distribution with the four than the Coyote, RWD dynamics, a modern IRS and updated front suspension, it will provide a real cross-shopping challenge. And I bet Ford doesn't put half-assed drift tires and wimpy brake pad material on it.

  • wdrauch wdrauch Posts:

    I would be very surprised if the ride and handling of the new Mustang isn't drastically improved. For one, Ford wants to take the car global and customers in Europe will not forgive clumsy chassis dynamics. Also, Ford has shown with the Focus ST that they have engineers within the company that really know how to set up a car to make it truly fun-to-drive. My biggest question with a 4-cyl Ecoboost in a 'Stang is: how would it sound?

  • I'm not sure how I feel about a 4-cylinder in a Mustang, regardless of what kind of specs it's pushing out. It's just not in the Mustang breed. Not only that, but it's a pretty large vehicle. Why not build something that directly competes with the BRZ, a smaller rear wheel drive 4-cylinder sporty car? That seems to make more sense to me than to just throw an engine like that into a Mustang.

  • I'm not sure how I feel about a 4-cylinder in a Mustang, regardless of what kind of specs it's pushing out. It's just not in the Mustang breed. Not only that, but it's a pretty large vehicle. Why not build something that directly competes with the BRZ, a smaller rear wheel drive 4-cylinder sporty car? That seems to make more sense to me than to just throw an engine like that into a Mustang.

  • greenpony greenpony Posts:

    I don't believe I would ever buy a 4 cylinder or 6 cylinder Mustang. It's not that the engines are poor, nor that I'm opposed to driving cars with 4-6 cylinders. The problem is that my mental image of a proper Mustang has a V8 under the hood. Anything less than that, and I may as well drive something else.

  • greenpony greenpony Posts:

    I don't believe I would ever buy a 4 cylinder or 6 cylinder Mustang. It's not that the engines are poor, nor that I'm opposed to driving cars with 4-6 cylinders. The problem is that my mental image of a proper Mustang has a V8 under the hood. Anything less than that, and I may as well drive something else.

  • wdrauch wdrauch Posts:

    fallenheavens, I believe the rumors say the new Mustang will be slightly smaller than the current one, which I think would be a good thing. I agree with the comments about only being interested in a V8 Mustang. I love the 2.0L Ecoboost in my ST, but if I'm buying a 'Stang I want that rumbly exhaust of a V8!

  • wdrauch wdrauch Posts:

    fallenheavens, I believe the rumors say the new Mustang will be slightly smaller than the current one, which I think would be a good thing. I agree with the comments about only being interested in a V8 Mustang. I love the 2.0L Ecoboost in my ST, but if I'm buying a 'Stang I want that rumbly exhaust of a V8!

  • hybris hybris Posts:

    The Mustang's current Solid rear axle is posting handling figures approaching a M3 for a fraction of the cost so I don't see why Ford needs to muck with something that is already working well especially with the target market of the Mustang. IE American drivers who want to go fast in a straight line and only on occasion need to make a turn.

  • hybris hybris Posts:

    The Mustang's current Solid rear axle is posting handling figures approaching a M3 for a fraction of the cost so I don't see why Ford needs to muck with something that is already working well especially with the target market of the Mustang. IE American drivers who want to go fast in a straight line and only on occasion need to make a turn.

  • bankerdanny bankerdanny Posts:

    Ford already produced an excellent turbo 4 Mustang, the Fox body SVO of the early 80's. It was never as popular as the 5.0GT, but it is a well regarded car and its existence didn't cause the Earth to fly into the sun. I think styling is going to make or break the next Mustang. It doesn't have to be retro like every version since 1994, but it can't drift into swoopy FR-S styling either. Part of the reason the Mustang has survived without a break (unlike the Camaro) is that it stayed true to itself. If Ford feels the need to compete with the FR-S, don't do it with the Mustang. Re-introduce the Capri name for that if you like. Make the Mustang suspension modern, but make sure the styling is the muscular coupe that is quitessential American.

  • bankerdanny bankerdanny Posts:

    Ford already produced an excellent turbo 4 Mustang, the Fox body SVO of the early 80's. It was never as popular as the 5.0GT, but it is a well regarded car and its existence didn't cause the Earth to fly into the sun. I think styling is going to make or break the next Mustang. It doesn't have to be retro like every version since 1994, but it can't drift into swoopy FR-S styling either. Part of the reason the Mustang has survived without a break (unlike the Camaro) is that it stayed true to itself. If Ford feels the need to compete with the FR-S, don't do it with the Mustang. Re-introduce the Capri name for that if you like. Make the Mustang suspension modern, but make sure the styling is the muscular coupe that is quitessential American.

  • bankerdanny bankerdanny Posts:

    I only hit send once, so I don't see why my comment doubled up. And can we end the amature hour on the comments and allow for paragraphs? Aren't you guys a big time company? Why can't you afford a proper comment system?

  • bankerdanny bankerdanny Posts:

    I only hit send once, so I don't see why my comment doubled up. And can we end the amature hour on the comments and allow for paragraphs? Aren't you guys a big time company? Why can't you afford a proper comment system?

  • legacygt legacygt Posts:

    @fordson1: I don't see this comparison at all. In fact, I'd say the Focus ST will remain a better comparison to the Toyobarus than the Mustang. I would also say there's a better than even chance we see a Toyobaru with a turbo before we see the Mustang wit

  • greenpony greenpony Posts:

    True to the V6 being real world efficient. I rented a 6-cyl Mustang a few months back for a 1,000-mile trip. Three fill-ups were each at or above 30 mpg. Color me impressed.

  • @bankerdanny, I was going to chime-in about the Mustang SVO too. I always thought that car was pretty cool, so obviously it did not destroy the image of Mustang for me. Also agree about the commenting system: I got a ForSee survey after visiting Edmund

  • jkavanagh jkavanagh Posts:

    @duck87, nope. Hyundai integrates the manifold with the turbine housing. With the 2.3 Ecoboost, Ford integrates the manifold into the head.

  • socal_eric socal_eric Posts:

    The 2.0L already has the exhaust manifold integrated into the head which is why turbo upgrades have been so slow to come for the ST as owners wait for an aftermarket company to cast a replacement elbow/turbine housing. If Ford sticks with BorgWarner and goes with something like a larger K04 turbo, getting the passages to mate up with a twin-scroll exhaust housing shouldn’t be extremely difficult but would complicate the casting. Even with a separate cooling path for coolant in the head and the block it might present some durability challenges for cracking. A twin-scroll compatible integral exhaust manifold off the exhaust ports would help aid turbine response but they’d also have to make sure it doesn’t increase overall backpressure dramatically which would drive up exhaust gas temps (EGTs).

Leave a Comment
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

Past Long-Term Road Tests

ADVERTISEMENT
Have a question? We're here to help!
Chat*
Chat online with us
Email
Email us at help@edmunds.com
*Available daily 8AM-5PM Pacific
Phone*
Call us at 855-782-4711
SMS*
Text us at ED411