• The site migration is complete! Hopefully everything transferred properly from the multiple decades old software we were using before. If you notice any issues please let me know, thanks! Also, I'm still working on things like chatbox, etc so hopefully those will be working in the next week or two.

11 second turbo 4 cylinder Mustang



would rock it! great results with a small engine is always cool to me no matter if its a turbo 4 cylinder mustang or a turbo 4 cylinder honda. i can honestly say i appreciate these types of builds no matter the badge on the front.
 
I may try to persuade my wife this is the Mustang she wants. it wouldn't surprise me if the turbo 4 cylinder mustang was the cheapest mustang ford makes, and if that is the case, building an 11 second car is awesome.

Edit: on further review, the base model mustang is cheaper at 23,800 while the ecoboost standard comes with the 2.3 liter ecoboost and starts at 25,300. pretty cheap for an 11 sec car
 
Ford racing needs to come out with a tune for the f150's like they did with the mustangs, so I don't void my warranty.
 
I just priced out a base 6 speed with basically just the sport options (Ecoboost sport package and the Recaro seats.) For under $30k you can get a package that could be quick into the 11's and get ~30mpg...that's pretty damn cool.
 


Sven The Sexman said:
I just priced out a base 6 speed with basically just the sport options (Ecoboost sport package and the Recaro seats.) For under $30k you can get a package that could be quick into the 11's and get ~30mpg...that's pretty damn cool.
Click to expand...

I did the same thing. the only real option I would want is the ecoboost perf package for another 2000.

my father in law is a huge camaro lover and would be mad as hell if his 454 powered 69 camaro lost to a 4 cylinder mustang.
 
SgtMarshal said:
I did the same thing. the only real option I would want is the ecoboost perf package for another 2000.

my father in law is a huge camaro lover and would be mad as hell if his 454 powered 69 camaro lost to a 4 cylinder mustang.
Click to expand...

With slicks, I'm low 11's in my LT1. With a tune, slicks, and minor weight reduction, that Ecoboost is high 11's. My engine cost damn near $6k to build plus about $1500 into the direct port setup. You see why I'm surprised at what this little Ecoboost is doing. I'd rock one if I had the money.

EDIT: With spray I'm low 10's...previous statement was all motor.
 
power to weight ratio people power to weight...... LOL

from what ive seen by the renderings of the 2016 camaro its going to be a disappointment. nearly the exact same body just on a lighter alpha platform. and even so GMs got a huge task if they plan to put out a 4 cylinder camaro anywhere remotely competitive to the ecoboost.
 
ohh and if you think this is alot of performance for the buck go search 3.7 turbo v6 mustangs...... used those can be had for 15k all day and still leaves what about 10k for the turbo kit and mods.

best line ive read on a mustang board was some dude that had a turbo 3.7 mustang and did it simply because it causes so much butt hurt by the people that get beat.
 


98NormalNameVet said:
power to weight ratio people power to weight...... LOL

from what ive seen by the renderings of the 2016 camaro its going to be a disappointment. nearly the exact same body just on a lighter alpha platform. and even so GMs got a huge task if they plan to put out a 4 cylinder camaro anywhere remotely competitive to the ecoboost.
Click to expand...

It weighs in just over 100lbs heavier than my car. I push ~410whp all motor...so what do they have that Ecoboost pushing with the tune and whatnot?
 
All in all, for speed, the most cost effective package is staying with my 3800... Lmao, what I'll save in insurance alone (per year) will pay for a TEP tranny as compared to maxing out a Stang... Lol. I'll keep my milk getter for now! : )
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top