Joey D
Premium
- 47,512
- Lakes of the North, MI
- GTP_Joey
- GTP Joey
2015 Ford Mustang - General Discussion
- Thread starter CodeRedR51
- 6,247 comments
- 422,267 views
.
- 21,286
- GR-MI-USA
- YSSMAN
- YSSMAN
In marketing news, those folks at Ford decided it was better to call the new 2.3L turbocharged Mustang the "EcoBoost" instead of the ST, Turbo, 2.3T, SVO, or anything else that would have made sense. These ad wizards need to go back to school...
- 12,389
- Betelgeuse
- Beeblebrox_237
Mustang is a great, great car name. Mustang Ecoboost is not.
- 5,303
- Riverside, Ca
- GTP_Leonidae_MFT
Replace Ecoboost badge with SVO badge. Job jobbed.
- 21,286
- GR-MI-USA
- YSSMAN
- YSSMAN
I'd have thought that branding like "ST" would have some clout with Ford. Having the Fiesta ST, the Focus ST, and the Mustang ST - there is clearly a performance lineage, and a ladder that you can move up between vehicles. Although the EcoBoost branding has a motorsport connection (see: TUDOR, NASCAR and so on), it doesn't exactly roll off the tongue, and at best, only makes a connection between the "regular" vehicles that carry EcoBoost branding (Fusion, Taurus, Escape, F-150).
- 11,906
- Marin County
I don't think ST works because that has always (RS aside) denoted the top model in the hierarchy. Mustang has GT, Boss (potentially) and Cobra above what would be the ST, and that's assuming Bullitt, Mach 1, and others don't make a comeback.
SVO wouldn't really work, IMO, because SVO was replaced by SVT (Special Vehicles Operations -> Special Vehicles Team) and calling it an SVT just wouldn't be true.
"SHO" runs into the same problem of being outgunned by higher tier offerings and therefore relegating 'super high output' to mean very little, if it were called that.
It's a difficult thing, because it isn't really a 'special' model, but more of a configuration option. In all honesty, ecoboost sort of works, though I really dislike the name. Mustang T-4 would be interesting. For a few years, Ford couldn't sell the Mustang in Germany with it's original name due to a copyright conflict, so it was sold as simply the T-5. The precedent isn't really analogous, but the name isn't bad.
I say, though, bring back an old name that was never given to the Mustang, but would indeed have resonance in Europe. XR4. Mustang XR4. Sounds good to me.
SVO wouldn't really work, IMO, because SVO was replaced by SVT (Special Vehicles Operations -> Special Vehicles Team) and calling it an SVT just wouldn't be true.
"SHO" runs into the same problem of being outgunned by higher tier offerings and therefore relegating 'super high output' to mean very little, if it were called that.
It's a difficult thing, because it isn't really a 'special' model, but more of a configuration option. In all honesty, ecoboost sort of works, though I really dislike the name. Mustang T-4 would be interesting. For a few years, Ford couldn't sell the Mustang in Germany with it's original name due to a copyright conflict, so it was sold as simply the T-5. The precedent isn't really analogous, but the name isn't bad.
I say, though, bring back an old name that was never given to the Mustang, but would indeed have resonance in Europe. XR4. Mustang XR4. Sounds good to me.
- 34,949
- Indian Falls, NY
- slashfan7964
SVO would kind of work as it's something nostalgic but otherwise I agree.
_____________
Options list revealed.
http://www.stangtv.com/news/2015-mustang-options-list-revelaed-by-mustang6g/
_____________
Options list revealed.
http://www.stangtv.com/news/2015-mustang-options-list-revelaed-by-mustang6g/
Last edited:
- 2,112
- xNEVER-ONEx
Just call it Mustang Turbo4.
- 1,742
- Olympia, WA
- GTP_BrokenVow, zmikedz
I think it should be called EcoBoost. Marketing towards baby boomers is a bad idea seeing as how they're dying off and there are more millenials now. The SVO might have been around for some gen Xers but not when they were really old enough to buy them. And enthusiasts are going to buy them anyway. Marketing is about attracting new customers in a different market segment, mainly the biggest segment. The first Mustang was marketed to the same equivalent segment that exists today that prefers style, technology, and a green image, hip image, whatever. IPads and muscle cars don't go together. IPads and Eco sport coupes do. We may not like it, but seeing as how we're discussing details about a car that isn't out yet, and have been for months, and that we know more than the people at Ford dealerships, we are clearly not a target audience for a massive advertising campaign.
- 2,112
- xNEVER-ONEx
They could just call it Mustang ST, ala Focus/Fiesta ST. If They ever decide to do a Hi-Po V6 (which they should), they could call it the Mustang RS. This would likely work well in Europe where people are familiar with ST/RS monikers more so than traditional Mustang labels.
Base V6, ST (Ecoboost 1-4), RS (Ecoboost V6), GT, GT350, Boss 302 etc.
Base V6, ST (Ecoboost 1-4), RS (Ecoboost V6), GT, GT350, Boss 302 etc.
- 9,884
- Carthage, TN
- race_emhard
Just do that.
- 34,949
- Indian Falls, NY
- slashfan7964
- 24,002
- It/It
- GTP_TheCracker
Mustang RS Cossie.
CodeRedR51
Premium
- 55,319
- United States
- 2,112
- xNEVER-ONEx
Preview for the Ecoboost
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes/1405_2015_ford_mustang_ecoboost_first_ride/
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes/1405_2015_ford_mustang_ecoboost_first_ride/
- 11,906
- Marin County
I still don't really see the point of having the Turbo 4 & V6. I feel like the performance (despite the difference in torque) will be basically identical, with the only difference being perhaps having to work the V6 *slightly* harder to cover the gap in low end torque. Even then, I reckon the 6 will be lighter than the 4 with better weight distribution (it should be lower and further back due to the V configuration and being 1 cylinder shorter) and should deliver better at high RPM, while sounding better to boot. I have a suspicion that one of the engines won't last long, and I have a feeling it's the 4 cylinder.
/baseless speculation
/baseless speculation
- 40,876
Ford will push the 4 cylinder irrelevant of whether it is actually any better because it fits in with their recent marketing strategy better; and it will be tuned to totally game the EPA tests so they can parade the purely theoretical numbers around TV spots. If the I4 truly doesn't weigh much less than the V6, it's going to be fairly pointless to actually buy, though.
- 11,906
- Marin County
I think you are right. I'm actually surprised they aren't completely gimping the V6 by making it only available with a 2.73 rear axle ratio or something silly like that. I should add to my original post that the 4 will obviously return better fuel economy than the V6, but as with the weight and performance, I doubt it will be significantly better. I think Ford really wants to simply not offer the V6, but they can already see the pitchforks coming over the horizon.
- 11,906
- Marin County
