Dunno, if I bought a 2015 Mustang. It would be a v6 over b00st

Find more money get the GT? I've seen them a little lower than $28,000 for a base GT on autotrader.

Frankly, I think the 11-14 V6 models will be the steal of the century in another year or two. Maybe even now for the 11's. Had one for a rental back in January. Much as I hate to admit it, it was at least as fast as my old LT1 (V8) Firebird Formula, way more comfortable and knocked down 28-29 mpg hwy to boot. Find one with the performance pack and the manual and troll for BRZ/Genesis/G35-37/Z car et all. If you want V8 thrills, grab a used C6. Just my .02

Andy Neuman wrote: Find more money get the GT? I've seen them a little lower than $28,000 for a base GT on autotrader.

Sorry, no matter how much I water it, my money tree still hasn't grown. A really nice V6 Premium w/Performance package can be found for under $16k easily. You can even get a 'vert around that price...yeah, I know most people here don't like 'verts, but I do. A similarly equipped GT is at least $5-$7k more. If money weren't an issue, sure the GT is the way to go. But for me, between the budget and the fact that I drive an incredible number of miles every year, the lower purchase price and higher mpg of the V6 are strong positives. If I were to go with a sports coupe or 'vert (hatches like the FoST are still strongly in play), the V6 Mustang falls in price with a '09-'11 328i or 128i and makes for interesting comparisons.

I'll just leave this here: 2011 V6 coupe If I hadn't already bought two cars this year (long story) I could see myself getting into this. EDIT, since i found the window sticker online that confirms this is not a performance package car I changed the description on the CL ad

OH hey, I'm in FLA for the week.. must resist..

06HHR wrote: Find one with the performance pack and the manual and troll for BRZ/Genesis/G35-37/Z car et all.

BRZ - sure

G35 - sure

350z - possibly

G37 - maybe, would be a good race

370z - not likely troll. More likely "get rolled"

One thing I can't stand about the Mustang in any form is the utterly useless back seat. I have a family of 4. The kids are not full grown, but we can cruise in the G coupe comfortably. Good leg room, and enough head room for the kids. I looked at a few Mustangs. Rear leg room is non-existant. At least you get a SOOOPER long hood to make up for it, because that really helps...

I was thinking now the 2015 v6s might be an easy buy in two-three years or so. Wait until when everyone is still happy with their performance and mpg on the ecoboost, but not enough time to pass when they all start needing a turbo rebuild. When the V6 with the steeper gears and LSD is on the lot getting passed over.

In reply to doc_speeder: Agree about the 370, it's got power/weight over the Mustang and more rubber on the road to boot. As far as the back seat, it's not bad as long as you have small kids and don't have to deal with a rear-facing child seat. Once the kids hit puberty it's back to the minivan (sedan or suv). For the money though, it's a good deal.

06HHR wrote: I'll just leave this here: V6 w/perf pkg If I hadn't already bought two cars this year (long story) I could see myself getting into this.

Now this is what's confusing the hell out of me. How do you identify a V6 with the performance package? I thought it was only available with the Premium package, which had leather seats, etc... I also thought it required the 19" rims. I've seen some with strut tower braces, but that seems to be a convertible only thing, so that doesn't clue me in. I'm stumped...

I haven't gotten into a BRZ, but I can't see it having any more rear leg room than a Mustang.

Found a site where you can pull the window sticker 2011 V6Coupe, my Google fu is strong today. This one is not a performance package car, at least the sticker doesn't say it is. If the forums are correct, the option code for the performance package is 67F but I can't tell if it's available with the V6 or not.. NINJA EDIT no info on the 67F but I did find this suspension kit through Ford Racing FR3 suspension kit

In reply to Coldsnap:

What's with you thinking turbos are extremely fragile and need rebuilds every couple years? On my old 1990 Volvo the turbo didn't need a rebuild for 24 years/250,000 miles. I recall you starting a genisis coupe thread asking how long until it blows up or something.

I don't think you can compare the turbo on a 25 year old Volvo to a modern turbo engine. Not that I think new turbos will blow up in six months, but I do have concerns about putting a lot of miles on a turbo DI motor.

Yea, it's the DI part that gets me really. I take lots of 10 minutes drives.

Klayfish wrote:

06HHR wrote: I'll just leave this here: V6 w/perf pkg If I hadn't already bought two cars this year (long story) I could see myself getting into this.

Now this is what's confusing the hell out of me. How do you identify a V6 with the performance package? I thought it was only available with the Premium package, which had leather seats, etc... I also thought it required the 19" rims. I've seen some with strut tower braces, but that seems to be a convertible only thing, so that doesn't clue me in. I'm stumped... I haven't gotten into a BRZ, but I can't see it having any more rear leg room than a Mustang.

The easiest way that I know of/ have found is that the performance pack cars (that I have seen) have a factory strut tower brace. The non performance pack cars do not

Some other details are listed here:

https://grassrootsmotorsports.com/forum/grm/how-do-i-spot-a-v6-performance-pack-mustang-in-the-wild/48496/page1/

Specifically relating to 11-14 V6 cars: Base has silver slotted 5 spoke 17's, seen above. Premium has gray/machined slotted 5 spoke 17's. Pony Package has chrome 'multi-spoke' 18's. Mustang Club of America Edition has gray 'multi-spoke' 18's and 'billet' style grill. Performance Package V6 has black/machined 'multi-spoke' 19's. Strut tower brace used on Performance Package and convertibles. Performance Package not available on convertibles.

Coldsnap wrote: I was thinking now the 2015 v6s might be an easy buy in two-three years or so. Wait until when everyone is still happy with their performance and mpg on the ecoboost, but not enough time to pass when they all start needing a turbo rebuild. When the V6 with the steeper gears and LSD is on the lot getting passed over.

At that point, you're still getting a v6 car that gets worse fuel economy, weighs more, has less power and will be more expensive than the 2011-2014 v6 cars.

Coldsnap wrote: I was thinking now the 2015 v6s might be an easy buy in two-three years or so. Wait until when everyone is still happy with their performance and mpg on the ecoboost, but not enough time to pass when they all start needing a turbo rebuild. When the V6 with the steeper gears and LSD is on the lot getting passed over.

It's been 5 years now that the 2010 Ecoboosts were introduced. How many of them have you heard required turbo rebuilds?

If you want one that requires a rebuild- you probably will wait longer than 2-3 years.

Klayfish wrote: I don't think you can compare the turbo on a 25 year old Volvo to a modern turbo engine. Not that I think new turbos will blow up in six months, but I do have concerns about putting a lot of miles on a turbo DI motor.

So here's a different way to look at it- the turbo is a key part of the exhaust, so it's basically an emissions device. Which means that the federal requirement to not hurt emissions lasts out to 120-150k (depending on the cert). So the turbos are at least good out to that. Probably much more.

This is applicable to any turbos made these days, not just the ones from F.

alfadriver wrote:

Klayfish wrote: I don't think you can compare the turbo on a 25 year old Volvo to a modern turbo engine. Not that I think new turbos will blow up in six months, but I do have concerns about putting a lot of miles on a turbo DI motor.

So here's a different way to look at it- the turbo is a key part of the exhaust, so it's basically an emissions device. Which means that the federal requirement to not hurt emissions lasts out to 120-150k (depending on the cert). So the turbos are *at least* good out to that. Probably much more. This is applicable to any turbos made these days, not just the ones from F.

That's an interesting perspective. Hadn't thought about it like that really.

You could also consider that direct injection and turbos are used in diesels that regularly drive a few hundred thousand miles without needing major service.

STM317 wrote:

alfadriver wrote:

Klayfish wrote: I don't think you can compare the turbo on a 25 year old Volvo to a modern turbo engine. Not that I think new turbos will blow up in six months, but I do have concerns about putting a lot of miles on a turbo DI motor.

So here's a different way to look at it- the turbo is a key part of the exhaust, so it's basically an emissions device. Which means that the federal requirement to not hurt emissions lasts out to 120-150k (depending on the cert). So the turbos are *at least* good out to that. Probably much more. This is applicable to any turbos made these days, not just the ones from F.

That's an interesting perspective. Hadn't thought about it like that really. You could also consider that direct injection and turbos are used in diesels that regularly drive a few hundred thousand miles without needing major service.

You can, but the usage is so different that all of the durability had to be redone. Turbos run at a much higher temp most of the time, and gas isn't all that close to diesel....

But one can be sure that customers do NOT like regular required major surgery. So things are done to extend the life of every component.

alfadriver wrote: You can, but the usage is so different that all of the durability had to be redone. Turbos run at a much higher temp most of the time, and gas isn't all that close to diesel.... But one can be sure that customers do NOT like regular required major surgery. So things are done to extend the life of every component.

Not a perfect comparison to be sure, I just meant to show that the tech was fairly "mature", and not necessarily failure prone.

06HHR wrote: One thing I can't stand about the Mustang in any form is the utterly useless back seat.

Seemed to work for me.

And as for fuel econ, I found it great with both of ours. We had a 13 then a 14, put over 30K on both of them. Both were V6 auto Verts, not even a manual. I've posted this before.

That's not just a section of freeway, that's our house to Grand Rapids including the surface streets at each end with the top down. Do the maths, that's 29.9mpg (Can I call that 30 mpg please?) at an average of 77.5mph so we were cruising a lot of the time at 75+ (It's Michigan).

Who needs a pick up. Trunk and back seat full of mulch in our Family SPORT utility vehicle. Moved lot's of lumber this way too.

That's some decent economy, i'm averaging 28mpg in a 2015 focus...

Wasn't me Adrian_Thompson. I lived with a 4th Gen F-body (Firebird) for 7 years, the 2011 Mustang back seat is cavernous compared to that. I averaged 28.9 with the rental 2014 V6 coupe I had earlier this year. It's doc_speeder who can't stand the back seat.

doc_speeder wrote:

06HHR wrote: Find one with the performance pack and the manual and troll for BRZ/Genesis/G35-37/Z car et all.

BRZ - sure G35 - sure 350z - possibly G37 - maybe, would be a good race 370z - not likely troll. More likely "get rolled" One thing I can't stand about the Mustang in any form is the utterly useless back seat. I have a family of 4. The kids are not full grown, but we can cruise in the G coupe comfortably. Good leg room, and enough head room for the kids. I looked at a few Mustangs. Rear leg room is non-existant. At least you get a SOOOPER long hood to make up for it, because that really helps...

STM317 wrote:

Coldsnap wrote: I was thinking now the 2015 v6s might be an easy buy in two-three years or so. Wait until when everyone is still happy with their performance and mpg on the ecoboost, but not enough time to pass when they all start needing a turbo rebuild. When the V6 with the steeper gears and LSD is on the lot getting passed over.

At that point, you're still getting a v6 car that gets nominally worse fuel economy, weighs slightly more, has insignificantly less power, handles better, rides better, has a nicer exterior, has a nicer interior, and will be more expensive and valuable than the 2011-2014 v6 cars.

FTFY. Don't forget that most of the EPA fuel exonomy rating drop for the 15+ cars is due to the shorter gearing vs the standard geared 11-14 cars, which correspondingly improves acceleration. Well, that and marketeering probably pushing to err on the low side with the fuel economy (and power) ratings to make the EB more attractive of an upgrade on paper, even if naturally aspirated cars typically perform better relative to their EPA ratings than turbo cars...Which likely negates much of the advertised EB advantage anyways.

Of course people also like to conveniently forget that the 11-14 Performance Package gearing is even shorter yet, and will have that much more of a fuel economy hit vs the EPA ratings that are based on the tallest geared variants...Not that most people getting the Performance Package are likely to notice or care.

In my humble opinion, the 3.7L V6 is still underappreciated in the Mustang...Even by Ford now. I too would actually prefer a V6 over a V8, in either (11-14 or 15+) body style, for how I would use the car...And in the 15+ cats would also have a hard time not picking the V6 over the EB, pretty much for the sound alone