Jalopnik

from a urpean perspective, it's hilarious to think of a twin turbo V6 as an eco-option!

Just as long as the V8 still makes a monster growl from the tailpipes at hard accelerations.

Similar power to the 4.6L V8? I wouldn't call 100 to 65 horsepower difference similar, but a twin turbo six is rather exciting news.

High-power V6? Good. Twin turbo? Good, good. I do wonder how much better fuel economy a twin-turbo 6 would get than a V8, but why would they call it EcoBoost if it weren't good for the environment?

It will be interesting to see how much weight these new sixes will save over the 4.6. The 4.6 is a comparatively heavy (and huge) engine.

Give me the 300hp version with no turbos, please.

Yay, for Ford. the 4.6L is a good cookie cutter engine, but that sounds great for everyone that wants a GT Mustang. It brings me back to the good 'ol days when you could get a 5.0 with the crazy power. Its just now in a smaller package with a little bit of whir.

no word on the upcoming 6.2 litre boss engine that was written up in Hot Rod Magazine?

I think that would be a sweet option in that car.

@79TA: How about two? Bad idea.

Bring the V6.

Say what you will about CAFE, but anything that lights a fire under Ford's ass must have at least some benefit.

Put a double wing on my ass and call me an SVT!!!

I wonder if this will create as big of an outcry when Ford dropped the famed "5.0" pushrod for the current 4.6 "modular".

@velocecrat:
I'm not promoting it, I'm just curious. Anyway, I've always been fond of turbo V6's.

@Papercutninja: Remember when the SVOs were cleaning the V8's clocks?

@beercheck: Hellz yeah. Drop in a turbo four and lose a few hundred pounds and you've got yerself a new SVO.

Can I get a twin-turbo V8?

The New EcoBoost V6TT from Ford*

*"Eco" only available when not using "Boost"

Know what else?

For $400-$500, you'll be able to chip it and probably achieve HP gains of more than double what the V8 guys get for spending several thousand more. Plus, you get semi-sleeper status without the flowmasters sticking out back and other assorted normally aspirated pseudo-scientific noisemakers.

The only way this is going to be eco anything is if they seriously limit the V8's availability by pricing them high enough. I do agree about the size of the car, it's getting there where it's time for a Mustang II part two.

@ash78: Yes, chipping a twin turbo V6 is a definite gangbang-for-the-buck situation ;)

@ash78:

That all depends on how aggressively tuned it comes from the factory as well as the V6's displacement. With the turbo Buick's, big gains were made by just getting the air/fuel mixture right. That often meant getting better MAF sensors etc. Also, without boost, no exhaust heat whatsoever can be recycled. The term "ecoboost" does make some sense.

let's see if they put their $$ where their mouth is... Ford has a history of psyching up the Mustang and then letting down

@79TA: Points taken...I always take the assumption that an initial turbocharged offering is always detuned initially, which gives the company so much more opportunity to offer "new and improved" versions with just simple remapping. So it may be optimally tuned from the get-go, but that would be bad marketing :D

Finally! Now I want a 7/8th scale camaro weighing not more than 2700 lbs and cranking 450hp out of a 30 valve turbo 6

I' for one am sick of Ford's 1 trick pony. Why waste the golden opportunity to introduce another new retro Mustang? I mean WTF, Ford could introduce the Thunder Road Mustang, then they could call in the dogs and piss on the fire. At least if they go out like the Edsel, it will be gone!

it has "eco" in it's name! the tree-huggers will ecogasm!

@smokeydog001: Nah, we've already seen the Edsel Taurus wagon here. That's hard to top.

From what I have read, they renamed the Boss motors ecoboost. They didn't just start working on this idea, and they probably were making the "Boss" motors more fuel effecient to begin with. Now with the green movement, they just renamed the engine program "ecoboost"

I'm with Smokeydog001 on this one.

A lighter, more economical, higher-power V6 makes a lot of sense, but 415 hp is useless on that antiquated chassis.

Ford: offer an independent suspension or don't even bother.

@DaveTheBrave:
That thing got an Eco-Hemi?

That poor E36! As for the Mustang, I think this would be awesome. This is a much better application of "eco-boosting" than throwing that engine in a FWD Lincoln. I'd like to see how much power they could get out of it with 20psi of eco boost. You know Ford is going to put it out with very conservative tuning.

Isn't the ancient 4.6 V8 one of Wards 10 best engines ?

I dont like the sound of Ford "rushing engine development". That sounds like recalls and breakdowns waiting to happen. Even when they take their time they're not that good.

I might have to stick to the proven V8 for that reason, and the sound we all love.

Question: If the ecoboost V6 has more HP than the V8, will the base mustang have a V8 in it, and the GT have the ecoboost?

@Deezee: Does it matter?

I'm glad they're bringing back the 5.0, Vanilla Ice needs a new car.

just bore out the 4.6 3valve to 5.0l and call it a day.

@Wes Siler:

Uhhm, yeah. The base mustang is always way cheaper. So if it came with the V8 it would be a steal.

@danio3834: or, better yet, don't call it a day. people are all predicting that 35 mpg CAFE will be the end of the gas-guzzling performance car as we know it. so why shouldn't Ford go all out, one last time, and bore it out past 7.0 liters to whatever the hell a 429 is in metric?

@Deezee: surely it's more important what power to weight ratio you get for your money, not how many cylinders which badge configuration brings? I really can't be bothered to care what GT Eddie Bauer Limited SE spec means, I just want a big engine and RWD.

@smokyburnout: great idea. See if you can get the telegram to Dearborn in time.

@Torqahontas: From now on, all things shall carry the prefix "Eco".

You know, for the children.

Sometimes, I get Eco-tired of Eco-posting on this Eco-car blog. But I always come back because theres always some Eco-portant stuff to Eco-read about.

Id venture to guess that the Twin Turbo V6 would way around the same or more than the current 4.6

That is unless they go out of their way to use extensive amounts of ultra light precious metals in the engine bay. Then, price goes up.

Id be willing to bet they could make the car more CAFE friendly by tuning the current V8, as the car already gets pretty decent mileage.

@smokyburnout: It's pretty much 7.0 liters - 7.03, to be more exact

Call it an SVO and I'm down.