LexFather

Can you please add some thoughts instead of just a link and a smart comment.

For example in this ONE test it got 29 MPG average. What makes this any more legit than complaining about another test?

As a fan of the car I will wait until we hear from owners over "time" so we can measure it up.

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

that's some convoluted logic right there. what lexus/toyota products of 5 years ago compare to this 19/31 mustang with 300hp?

name other cars that are special or exceptional.

Mister Two

That's why I noted in the parentheses that it was a hypothesis that IF Toyota/Lexus had dropped that 3.5L V6 in a lighter car (Supra?) 5 years ago they would've been able to achieve 19/31 then already. So in that sense 19/31 on a 300+hp 3350lbs car isn't special today technology-wise, but kudos to Ford of course for actually making one.

RX300-BV

Ok, I see your hypothesis, but why say Ford finally caught up to Lexus when Lexus/Toyota never had a 300 hp+ car with 30+ mpg highway?

Mister Two

I mean catching up in terms of technology.. Oh well, I guess you're right. Ford breaks the 30mpg barrier first. Gratz to them.

mmarshall

Yes, you're correct. Good catch. That was an obvious typo on my part.....an unintended one. I meant, like you noted, the other way around.

I should have caught that one, as I used to write about auto fuel-economy techniques.

A rich mixture does more than just lower average fuel mileage. All else equal, It lowers combustion temperature in the cylinder, lessens the likehood of spark knock/detonation, and allows the use of lower-octane fuel, but also increases the load on the catalytic converter, produces sulfur smell in the exhaust, and increases the likehood of carbon deposits on the spark plugs and valves.

IS-SV

I knew that, no need to be sorry, I was just noting it for accuracy and keeping CL quality up.

LexFather

Yes to CL quality!!!

I think it's just a great job by Ford again. This is what is needed class leading. I fear GM kind of got that memo and Chrysler never got it.

Huge selling point for this car.

mmarshall

You can correct me if I'm wrong, but Ford, though, to my knowledge, has (yet) to produce a variable-displacement, cylinder-shutdown system like Chrysler did with the non-SRT Hemi.

IS-SV

Eeeeeeeeessssswww, Chrysler variable-displacement application is on an outdated pushrod iron block antiquated engine, why bother. Hardly a noteworth accomplishment compared to Ford's strides in performance and fuel-saving technology. Yep, Chrysler never got the memo.

mmarshall

Seems to be two different approaches to two different engines. The Hemi gets a lot of buyers, though. It has turned out to be an extremely popular engine, antiquated or not, and is offered in a lot of different Dodge/Chrysler/Jeep products.

I suspect, though, that Chrysler will get the memo, sooner or later, and start work on a smaller-displacement turbo powerplant.

SLegacy99

So few companies use a technology that could go along way saving oil. On average, a Honda saves 2 MPGs when shutting down to 3 or 4 cylinders. 2 MPG doesn't seem like much, but when selling thousands of units each year it could really add up.

(Cj)

I think it's funny that the 2 companies that use cylinder deactivation use it because they have outdated engines.

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

yes, but honda's implementation stinks. i drove a pilot with it and it was so obvious when the cylinders deactivated with vibration. honda even has that lame noise cancellation in the cabin so supposedly you don't hear the clatter, but you can feel it anyway.

and this opinion from someone who owned a honda and two acuras way back.

IS-SV

Good observation, of engineering band-aid applications.