While we're still flapping in the breeze waiting on Ford to release specifications on all three of the S550 engine choices, there are a few tidbits floating around that we can use to try and connect the dots.
Firstly the Lincoln MKC utilizing the same 2.3L Ecoboost engine was rated for fuel economy this week. In the MKC the 2.3L Ecoboost engine will pull down 18 mpg in the city and 26 mpg on the highway, 21 mpg combined.
However do keep in mind that the engine has been detuned in the MKC to 285 bhp and 305 ft-lbs of torque, we know the Mustang will have north of 305 bhp, expect torque figures to stay the same.
Also keep in mind that the MKC is a heavier vehicle, initial speculations have the Mustang tipping the scales some 300-400 lbs lighter than the MKC. So now a little bit of fun with numbers. The EPA says that for every 100 lbs of weight shaved off fuel economy will increase 2.1%
. This is backed up by research from the Aluminium Association who claim that reducing weight by five percent leads to an increase in fuel economy of 2.1%. Reducing weight by 10% shows a 4.1 percent mileage boost and a 20% reduction improved fuel economy by 8.4%.
The Aluminium Associations figures are difficult to work with because they rated for a small car with a 1.6L I4 engine with a weight target of 2875 lbs, as well as offering similar figures for mid size vehicles with V6's and a weight target of 3625. Because the Mustang is a combination of both those figures it makes working with them a bit hairy and subjective. Perhaps its best if we focus on the EPA benchmark.
So in 2.3L flavour the MKC clocks in at 3,989 lbs, do keep in mind that the 2.3L is restricted to AWD drive models so that not only adds extra heft but also increases parasitic drive line loss. If the Mustang is actually 300-400 lbs lighter than the MKC we'll be looking at weight reduction of 7.5-10% certainly not insignificant.
Remember the EPA says that every 100 lbs lost translates to a 2.1% increase in fuel economy. That gives us a range of 6.3-8.4% fuel savings as per the EPA. Ok so now how does that relate back to the MKC's posted figures
City: 18 mpg
Highway: 26 mpg
Combined: 21 mpg
Plugging in the estimated 6.3-8.4% increase in MPG for the Mustang
City: 19.13 mpg
Highway: 27.63 mpg
Combined: 22.32 mpg
City: 19.51 mpg
Highway: 28.18 mpg
Combined: 22.76 mpg
2.3L EcoBoost Mustang Estimated Fuel Economy
City: 19-20 mpg
Highway: 27-28 mpg
Combined: 22-23 mpg
Thought? Everyone is welcome to add their estimates or conversions